DYSART ET AL Committee of Adjustment July 9, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. Council Chambers, Haliburton, Ontario

DYSART ET AL Committee of Adjustment July 9, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. Council Chambers, Haliburton, Ontario Page 3-7 1. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 2. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 8-13 14-19 20-36 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS D13-MV-14-009 Good Kashagawigamog Lake - Wonderland Road Dysart Township Agent: Greg Bishop D13-MV-14-010 Turner Straggle Lake - Sumcot Road Harcourt Township Agent: Jason Lake D13-MV-14-011 Corker Farquhar Lake Harcourt Township Agent: N/A 37-45 D13-MV-14-012 Olexiuk And McInerney Spruce Lake - Chandler Road Dysart Township Agent: Harold McInerney 4. ADJOURNMENT Page 1 of 45

Page Page 2 of 45

Dysart et al Committee of Adjustment Minutes Wednesday, June 11, 2014 The Committee of Adjustment of the Corporation of Dysart et al convened a meeting on Wednesday, June 11, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. in the Dysart et al Council Chambers with the following in attendance: Members: Staff: Public Present: Don Popple, Chairman Derek Knowles Councillor Dennis Casey Councillor Walt McKechnie Jeff Iles Pat Martin Dan Sayers Mike Hughes Jorge Malgueiro Bob Chambers Heather Smith-Chambers Secretary Treasurer Director of Planning & Development Chief Building Official ADOPTION OF MINUTES Motion No. 14-13 Moved by: Derek Knowles Seconded by: Dennis Casey CARRIED Be it resolved that the minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2014 be adopted as circulated. Page 3 of 45

ADOPTION OF REPORT OF SITE VISIT Motion No. 14-14 Moved by: Dennis Casey Seconded by: Derek Knowles CARRIED Be it resolved that the report of May 14, 2014 site visit of the Committee of Adjustment be approved as presented. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST There were no pecuniary interests declared. PUBLIC HEARINGS The Chairman introduced the Committee and advised those in attendance of the procedure that would be followed. D13-MV-14-005 - RETURNING FILE Smith-Chambers Pine Avenue Dysart Township Agent: Robert Chambers The Chairman declared this portion of the meeting to be a public hearing with respect to the above noted application. Mrs. Smith-Chambers and Mr. Chambers attended to discuss the application. The Chairman reviewed the status of this file, noting that the matter was discussed first at the meeting of May 14th, 2014. It was deferred at that meeting for a site inspection. The Committee met at the site on May 14th, 2014. The Chairman asked the Secretary if there was any correspondence on the application. The Secretary answered that there was not. The Secretary then read out the proposed conditions. There was a brief conversation about the conditions and some amendments were made. The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in attendance who wanted to comment on the application. Page 4 of 45

There was no response. After a brief discussion the Committee passed the following resolution: Motion No. 14-15 Moved by: Walt McKechnie Seconded by: Derek Knowles CARRIED Be it resolved that the Committee's decision with respect to file D13-MV- 14-005 (Smith-Chambers) be recorded as follows: a) A decrease to the provisions of Section 5.2 to permit a private garage to have a minimum exterior side lot line setback of 4.8 metres (16 feet) as opposed to required minimum of 7.5 metres (24.61 feet) is granted b) A decrease to the provisions of Section 3.30(a) to permit a private garage to have a minimum street setback from George Street of 12.8 metres (42 feet) as opposed to required minimum of 17.5 metres (57.41 feet) is granted c) An increase to the provisions of Section 5.2 to permit a lot in the R1 zone to have a lot coverage maximum of 27% as opposed to required maximum of 20% is granted (ref. Roll No. 012-31800) D13-MV-14-008 Hughes Kennisis Lake-West Shore Road Dysart Township Agent: N/A The Chairman declared this portion of the meeting to be a public hearing with respect to the above noted application. Mr. Hughes and his architect, Mr. Malgueiro attended to discuss the application. The Committee reviewed the planning report dated June 10th, 2014 and discussed the application. Page 5 of 45

The Chairman noted that the Committee site inspected the property on May 14th, 2014. The Chairman than asked the Secretary if there was any correspondence on the application. The Secretary answered that a letter of support was received from one neighbour. He also noted that a letter of concern was received from the other neighbour. However, prior to the meeting, Mr. Hughes agreed to plant a 3 metre vegetative buffer between the two buildings to provide screening and privacy. The concerned neighbour replied that they had no more concerns with the requested variance. The Secretary also clarified a clerical error on the newspaper advertisement. The Secretary clarified that the advertisement noted that the subject lands were described as Lot 66, Plan 588 instead of Lot 63, Plan 588. The Chairman noted that the proposed construction met all setback and lot coverage requirements. He noted the property was large and that the building would be screened from Kennisis Lake and the neighbouring properties. The Secretary read out the proposed conditions and Mr. Hughes agreed to all. The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in attendance who wanted to comment on the application. There was no response. After a brief discussion the Committee passed the following resolution: Motion No. 14-16 Moved by: Dennis Casey Seconded by: Walt McKechnie CARRIED Be it resolved that the Committee's decision with respect to file D13-MV- 14-008 (Hughes) be recorded as follows: a) An increase to the provisions of Section 5.2 to permit a seasonal dwelling in the WR4 zone to have a main building, maximum gross floor area of any storey of 492 square metres (5300 square feet) as opposed to required maximum of 280 square metres (3014 square feet) is granted (ref. Roll No. 060-00320) Page 6 of 45

ADJOURNMENT Motion No. 14-17 Moved by: Walt McKechnie Seconded by: Dennis Casey CARRIED Certified Correct Be it resolved that the meeting be adjourned at 11:20 AM. Chair Secretary Page 7 of 45

PLANNING REPORT July 8 th, 2014 REPORT AUTHOR: APPLICATION NO: REGISTERED OWNER: AGENT'S NAME: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Jeff Iles D13-MV-2014-009 Jeffrey and Jacqueline Good Greg Bishop 1302 Wonderland Road Part Lot 7, Concession 8 Lots 3 & 4, Plan 138 Township of Dysart ROLL NO.: 011-000-52200 FOUR TESTS: To grant a requested variance, the Committee of Adjustment must determine that the application satisfies each of the four tests as outlined by the Planning Act as follows: 1. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Official Plan; 2. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Zoning By-law; 3. The requested variance(s) must be considered minor in nature; and 4. The requested variance(s) must be desirable for the development of the land. (1) BACKGROUND: The owners would like to construct a two storey private garage/private cabin on their property on Kashagawigamog Lake. The proposed private garage/private cabin will have a rear lot line setback from a street line of 3.5 metres (11.5 feet) which does not comply with the required minimum of 7.5 metres (24.7 feet). The proposed private garage/private cabin will comply with all other setbacks. Due to the size of the property, there are limited building areas when all setbacks are in place. The applicant has already obtained a demolition permit and building permit to reconstruct the seasonal dwelling. The existing building has legal non-complying status and the new building will comply with Section 3.19(a) Alterations to Legal Non-Complying Structures and on Legal Non- Complying Lots. There are 3 existing accessory buildings on the property. The applicants intend to remove them all prior to construction. A decision for this variance should be based on comments received from the Municipality of Dysart Roads Department. A minor variance is required to permit construction of the private garage on a lot located in the RU1 zone. File D13-MV-2014-009 Good Page 1 of 4 Page 8 of 45

(2) REQUESTED VARIANCES: The following variance is requested to permit the construction of a private garage/private cabin in the Suburban Residential (RS) zone: a) a decrease to the provisions Section 5.2 to permit a private garage/private cabin to have a minimum rear lot line setback of 3.5 metres (11.48 feet) as opposed to the required minimum of 7.5 metres (24.7 feet). (3) SITE DESCRIPTION: Staff from the Building Department visited this site on a previous occasion for the purpose of photographs. a) Lot Dimensions: Frontage: 61.57 metres (202 feet) Area: 2023 sq. m (0.5 acres) b) Existing Development: - a seasonal dwelling (1960) - a shed: 8.4 x 8.4 = 70.5 sq feet - a shed: 9.8 x 8.7 = 85.26 sq. feet - a privy: 5 x 5 = 25 sq. feet c) Proposed Development: - a single family dwelling - a private garage/private cabin: 20' x 24' = 480 sq. feet d) Frontage: Kashagawigamog Lake. e) Access: Wonderland Road f) Servicing: Municipal sewers and private water system. g) Shoreline Road Allowance: The applicants are in the process of purchasing the shore road allowance in front of their property. (4) PROVINCIAL POLICY (a) Conformity: Generally, Yes. (b) Applicable Policies: Policy 1.1.3 Policy 1.6.4 Policy 2.1 Policy 2.2 Settlement Areas Sewage and Water Services Natural Heritage Water (c) Comment: Kashagawogamog Lake is classified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a lake trout lake and the Ministry of the Environment has determined that it is at capacity with respect to development. Although the property is able to connect to municipal sewers, the Province encourages all new structural development to be located well back from the high water mark to protect water quality and fish habitat. Specifically, a 20 metre water setback is applied to new and existing development. Vegetation buffers are important to the long term health of the lake. The proposed private garage/private cabin appears to comply with the water setback. (5) OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Suburban Residential Areas (a) Conformity: Generally, Yes. (b) Applicable Policies: Section 2.1.2 Importance of the Natural Environment File D13-MV-2014-009 Good Page 2 of 4 Page 9 of 45

Section 2.2.1 Section 3.3.2 Section 4.6 Section 5.1.2 Section 5.2 Section 7.1.3 Protection and Enhancement of the Environment Haliburton Village Service Area Site Conditions - Lot Shape and Size Lakes and Rivers Lake Capacity Suburban Residential (c) Comment: See comment under Provincial Policy. (6) PRESENT ZONING: Suburban Residential (RS) (a) Compliance: The lot complies with the lot frontage and area requirements of the "RS" zone. The proposed private garage/private cabin complies with all setback provisions except for the rear lot line setback (which is the reason for the variance). The requested variance is necessary if the Committee decides to permit construction of the proposed private garage/private cabin. (7) NOTICE AND CIRCULATION: Notice of the minor variance was circulated to all persons and agencies required by regulation on June 24 th, 2014. The required advertisement was placed in the local newspaper. Staff received some general enquiries via phone. The Municipality of Dysart Roads Department notes that the proposed building will comply with the required street setback and therefore will not affect road maintenance. (8) STAFF COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION: The requested variances generally conform to Provincial Policy and to the provisions of the Official Plan. The comments of the Municipality of Dysart Roads Department will apply to the requested variance. Should the Committee decide to grant the requested variances, the following conditions would be appropriate: 1. These variances applies to proposed a proposed private garage/private cabin as shown generally on the Property Sketch dated May 27 th, 2014 and attached to the Decision. Any encroachment beyond the variances granted herein will require a further application for a minor variance. 2. The County of Haliburton Shoreline Tree Preservation By-law 3505 applies. The injuring or destruction of trees within 30 metres of the high water mark is not permitted. The exemptions noted in Section 3 of By-law 3535 apply. Furthermore, additional native shoreline planting is encouraged to screen the buildings, naturalize the shoreline and address environmental concerns. 3. That during construction, proper site preparation and construction methods be used to prevent sedimentation of the adjacent lake. Sediment fencing is to be installed down gradient of the construction site. The site is to be properly stabilized following construction to prevent erosion and sedimentation. File D13-MV-2014-009 Good Page 3 of 4 Page 10 of 45

4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the 3 accessory buildings on the property are to be removed. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the private garage/private cabin, the owner shall obtain survey measurements confirming the rear lot line setback. File D13-MV-2014-009 Good Page 4 of 4 Page 11 of 45

Page 12 of 45

Page 13 of 45

PLANNING REPORT July 8 th, 2014 REPORT AUTHUR: REVIEWED BY: APPLICATION NO: REGISTERED OWNER: AGENT'S NAME: Jeff Iles Patricia Martin, Director of Planning and Development D13-MV-2014-010 Steven Turner Jason Lake PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part Lot 12, Concession 6 Block 54, Big Straggle Lake (Harcourt Park) Township of Harcourt ROLL NO.: 030-37400-0850 FOUR TESTS: To grant a requested variance, the Committee of Adjustment must determine that the application satisfies each of the four tests as outlined by the Planning Act as follows: 1. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Official Plan; 2. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Zoning By-law; 3. The requested variance(s) must be considered minor in nature; and 4. The requested variance(s) must be desirable for the development of the land. (1) BACKGROUND: The owner would like to construct a 14 foot by 16 foot (224 square foot) shed on his property. The proposed shed will have a rear lot line setback of 1.2 metres (4 feet) which does not comply with the required minimum of 7.5 metres (24.61 feet). The seasonal dwelling was first assessed in 1962. There are 3 existing accessory buildings located on the property. A small shed (36 square feet), an illegal structure located on the dock and a small shed (48 square feet) located near the shore line. The applicant plans to remove the illegal structure located on the dock and the shed located near the shoreline, which will bring the number of accessory buildings into compliance with the Zoning By-law. The applicants also plan to move the small shed located 2 feet from the side lot line into compliance with the Zoning By-law. File D13-MV-2014-010: Turner Page 1 of 4 Page 14 of 45

A decision for the rear lot line setback variance should take into consideration comments from the person in charge of maintenance of Sumcot Road. A minor variance is required to permit construction of a shed on a lot located in the WR4L-1 zone. (2) REQUESTED VARIANCES: The following variance is requested to permit construction of a shed on a lot located in the WR4L- 1 zone: a) A decrease to the provisions of Section 5.2 to permit a shed to have a minimum rear lot line setback of 1.2 metres (4 feet) as opposed to required minimum of 7.5 metres (24.61 feet). (3) SITE DESCRIPTION: Building Department Staff visited the property for the purpose of photographs. a) Lot Dimensions: Frontage: 58.52 metres (192 feet) Area: 0.2064 hectares (0.51 acres) b) Existing Development: Seasonal dwelling (first assessed in 1962) c) Proposed Development: shed (224 square feet) d) Frontage: Straggle Lake e) Access: Sumcot Road Shed 36 sq ft - (no record of building permit not assessed) Shed 48 sq ft - (no record of building permit not assessed) Structure on dock - (no record of permit not assessed) f) Shoreline Road Allowance: There does not appear to be a shore road allowance in front of these lands. (4) PROVINCIAL POLICY (a) Conformity: Generally, yes. (b) Applicable Policies: Policy 1.1.4 Policy 1.6.4 Policy 2.1 Policy 2 Policy 2.2 Rural Areas in Municipalities Sewage and Water Services Natural Heritage Wise Management and Use of Resources Water (c) Comment: Straggle Lake is not classified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a lake trout lake. Critical fish habitat has not been identified in front of these lands. However, the property has not been inventoried for fish habitat. Where a proposal is to construct new development or to add to existing development, the Municipality applies best management practices to protect aquatic resources. Specifically, a 20 metre water setback is applied to new and existing development to protect sensitive water resources and fish habitat. File D13-MV-2014-010: Turner Page 2 of 4 Page 15 of 45

Vegetation buffers are important to the long term health of the lake. The small shed and structure on the dock do not comply with the water setback. The proposed shed complies with the water setback. The two sheds located within the water setback will be removed. (5) OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Waterfront Areas (a) Conformity: Generally, yes. (b) Applicable Policies: Section 2.2.1 Section 4.6 Section 5.1 Section 9 Protection and Enhancement of the Environment Lot Size and Shape Water Resources Waterfront Areas (c) Comment: See comment under Provincial Policy. (6) PRESENT ZONING: Waterfront Residential Type 4L-1 (WR4L-1) (a) Compliance: The lot has legal non-complying status with regards to the lot area and the lot frontage requirements. The requested variances are necessary if the Committee decides to permit construction of a shed on a lot located in the WR4L-1 zone. (7) NOTICE AND CIRCULATION: Notice of the minor variance was circulated to all persons and agencies required by regulation on June 24 th, 2014. The required advertisement was placed in the local newspaper. Staff received general concerns from Harcourt Park Inc. They were concerned that the proposed building may be located too close to Sumcot Road. Staff clarified that the requested variance was for the rear lot line setback and that the proposed location complied with the required street setback. (8) STAFF COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION: The requested variances generally conform to Provincial Policy and to the provisions of the Official Plan. The comments of the person in charge of road maintenance should apply to the requested variances for the shed. Should the Committee decide to grant the requested variances, the following conditions would be appropriate: 1. This variance applies to a three sheds as shown generally on the Property Sketch dated June 3 rd, 2014 and attached to the Decision. Any encroachment beyond the variance granted herein will require a further application for a minor variance. 2. The County of Haliburton Shoreline Tree Preservation By-law 3505 applies. The injuring or destruction of trees within 30 metres of the high water mark is not permitted. The exemptions noted in Section 3 of By-law 3535 apply. Furthermore, File D13-MV-2014-010: Turner Page 3 of 4 Page 16 of 45

additional native shoreline planting is encouraged to screen the buildings, naturalize the shoreline and address environmental concerns. 3. That during construction, proper site preparation and construction methods be used to prevent sedimentation of the adjacent lake. Sediment fencing is to be installed down gradient of the construction site. The site is to be properly stabilized following construction to prevent erosion and sedimentation. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the shed located near the shoreline is to be removed. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the structure located on the dock is to be removed. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the 36 square foot shed located along the interior side lot line is to be removed or moved into compliance with the provisions of Zoning By-law 2005-120. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant must obtain surveyed measurements from an Ontario Land Surveyor to confirm the rear lot line setback of the shed. This measurement should be staked on the ground. File D13-MV-2014-010: Turner Page 4 of 4 Page 17 of 45

KEY MAP D13-MV-2014-010 Lands of Turner In Front of Lot 12, Concession 16 Block 54 on Big Straggle Lake Straggle Lake - Sumcot Road Township of Harcourt 030-37400-0850 Chickadee Ln Junco Ln Junco Ln Poinsetta Cr LOT 12, CON 7 µ LOT 13, CON 7 Cardinal Ln Little Straggle Lake LOT 10, CON 7 Little Straggle Lake Dr Sumcot Rd LOT 11, CON 7 LOT 12, CON 7 LOT 12, CON 7 Spadix Ln LOT 13, CON 7 Straggle Lake Dr LOT 11, CON 6 Flicker Ln LOT 12, CON 6 LOT 13, CON 6 Subject Lands LOT 10, CON 6 Straggle Lake Curlew Ln Falcon Ln Crossbill Ln Grosbeak Dr Date: 6/3/2014 DISCLAIMER: This map is for planning reference purposes only and is not a survey of properties. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. The Municipality of Dysart et al assumes no responsibility for any loss resulting from such use. This publication may not be reproduced in any form, in part or in whole, without written permission. Spartina Ln LOT 13, CON 6 BASE DATA SOURCE: QUEEN'S PRINTER OF ONTARIO LOT Use 10, of this CON data 6does not constitute an endorsement by MNR or the Ontario Government. 0 25 50 100 150 200 Meters Page 18 of 45

Page 19 of 45

PLANNING REPORT July 8 th, 2014 REPORT AUTHOR: REVIEWED BY: APPLICATION NO: REGISTERED OWNER: AGENT'S NAME: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Jeff Iles Patricia Martin, Director of Planning and Development D13-MV-2014-011 Sandra Corker n/a 11633 Farquhar North WAO Part Lot 5, Concession 3 Part 4, Plan 19R4572 Township of Harcourt ROLL NO.: 030-28400 FOUR TESTS: To grant a requested variance, the Committee of Adjustment must determine that the application satisfies each of the four tests as outlined by the Planning Act as follows: 1. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Official Plan; 2. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Zoning By-law; 3. The requested variance(s) must be considered minor in nature; and 4. The requested variance(s) must be desirable for the development of the land. (1) BACKGROUND: Mrs. Corker owns a water access property on Farquhar Lake. She would like to legalize her shed, which she says is 10 feet x 10 feet (100 square foot). The existing shed is located too close to the high water mark of Farquhar Lake. According to the applicant, it has a water setback of 8 metres (26.25 feet) as opposed to the required minimum of 30 metres (98.43 feet)\ as defined in Section 5.2 of Zoning By-law 2005-120. Mrs. Corker notes that the shed is used to house a fire pump. It is her opinion that the shed is not visible to any neighbours, and only partially visible from the lake due to extensive tree cover. The drinking water is supplied by a dug well. Miles Maughan, Fire Chief and Community Emergency Management Coordinator for the Municipality of Dysart notes that other options exist to the applicant that do not require a shed located within the water setback. File D13-MV-2014-011 Corker Page 1 of 5 Page 20 of 45

There is no record of a building permit for the shed, which was first assessed in 2009 by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (as a 215 square foot shed). There is also a seasonal dwelling and private garage located on the property. In 2004, the applicants were granted a minor variance to the water setback to legalize the location of the existing seasonal dwelling and permitted construction of the private garage. The requested variance for the water setback does not comply with the provisions of the Official Plan (Section 5.1.2). The intent of the Official Plan is to require development to be well set back from lakes for both environmental and aesthetic reasons. Section 2.2.1 encourages all development proposals to..preserve the natural state of the shoreline as much as possible, and where the shoreline has been impaired by past activities, restore the shoreline s natural features including but not limited to native vegetation... Due to ongoing legal matters regarding the Zoning Compliance of the existing shed and staff concerns triggered by a surveyor s sketch (submitted by the applicant) that located the shed on the shore road allowance, the Municipality of Dysart commissioned a survey to confirm land tenure. There are discrepancies between the applicant s measurements and that of the Ontario Land Surveyor. However, the Committee of Adjustment can only make a decision on a variance requested by an applicant. It is important to note that the requested variance will not clear up all of the compliance issues on the property. Our records indicate the following compliance issues: The seasonal dwelling is located 22 metres from the high water mark as opposed to the required minimum of 25 metres (as per minor variance D13-MV-04-023); The private garage is located 16.1 metres from the high water mark as opposed to the required minimum of 20 metres (as per minor variance D13-MV-04-023); The Chief Building Official (CBO), in the course of his investigations, has indicated that the deck and shed structure appear to form one entity (structurally and from a Building Code perspective) and that the dimensions of the shed component as surveyed do no match the dimensions quoted by the applicant. As such it is questionable whether the variance requested would actually legalize the shed/deck structure as it exists. Therefore, according to the Ontario Building Code, the shed is actually located 7.3 metres from the high water mark as opposed to the required minimum of 30 metres; If the shed is removed, leaving all 3 decks, the total area of decks in the setback is 50 square metres as opposed to the permitted maximum of 20 square metres (By-law 20055-120). Should the Committee decide to grant the requested variances, staff recommend that the Committee discuss a condition to implement a shoreline vegetative buffer. The buffer should be constructed to a specific width discussed and agreed to by all parties. File D13-MV-2014-011 Corker Page 2 of 5 Page 21 of 45

The owner has requested a minor variance to legalize the location of a shed dimensioned 10 feet X 10 feet. (2) REQUESTED VARIANCES: The following variance is requested to legalize the location of an existing shed on a property located in the WR5L zone: a) A decrease to the provisions of Section 5.2 to permit a shed to have a minimum water setback of 7.9 metres (26 feet) as opposed to the required 30 metres (98.43 feet). (3) SITE DESCRIPTION: Building Department staff visited this site for the purpose of photographs. a) Lot Dimensions: Frontage: 189 +/- metres (613.5 +/- feet) (per By-law 2005-120 and survey) Area: 2.038 hectares (5 acres) b) Existing Development: - a seasonal dwelling; - a private garage; and - a shed c) Proposed Development: - n/a d) Frontage: Farquhar Lake e) Access: Farquhar North (Water Access Only) f) Shoreline Road Allowance: The applicants do not own shore road allowance. The decking appears to be located on the shoreline road allowance. (4) PROVINCIAL POLICY (a) Consistency: No. (b) Applicable Policies: Policy 1.1.5 Policy 1.6.6 Policy 2.1 Policy 2.2 Rural Areas in Municipalities Sewage and Water Services Natural Heritage Water (c) Comment: Farquhar Lake is classified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a lake trout lake and has identified an area of critical fish habitat iin front of these lands. Where a proposal is to construct new development or to add to existing development, the Municipality applies best management practices to protect aquatic resources. Specifically, a 30 metre water setback is applied to new and existing development to protect sensitive water resources and fish habitat. Vegetation buffers are important to the long term health of the lake. The existing shed does not comply with the water setback. File D13-MV-2014-011 Corker Page 3 of 5 Page 22 of 45

(5) OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Waterfront Areas (a) Conformity: No. (b) Applicable Policies: Section 2.1.2 Importance of the Natural Environment Section 2.2.1 Protection and Enhancement of the Environment Section 4.6: Lot Size and Shape Section 5.1.2 Lakes and Rivers Section 9 Waterfront Areas Schedule B Map 1 Critical Fish Habitat (NRVIS) (c) Comment: Section 5.1.2 specifically states that the shoreline setback for an individual lot is defined in the implementing zoning by-law as the water setback. This setback will be strictly adhered to. The requested water setback variance does not adhere to the applicable water setback. This impedes the ability to implement the primary objective of the Official Plan, which is Section 2.2.1 Protection and Enhancement of the Environment. In particular, the requested water setback variance does not preserve the natural state of the shoreline. The Ministry of Natural Resources has identified an area of critical fish habitat iin front of these lands (Schedule B Map 1). (6) PRESENT ZONING: Waterfront Residential Type 5L (WR5L) (a) Compliance: The lot complies with regards to the lot area and lot frontage requirements. The existing shed does not comply with the required water setback. Staff have identified other zoning compliance issues and have advised the owner accordingly. (7) NOTICE AND CIRCULATION: Notice of the minor variance was circulated to all persons and agencies required by regulation on June 24 th, 2014. The required advertisement was placed in the local newspaper. No comments or concerns have been received as of the date of this report. (8) STAFF COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend granting the requested variance. The intent of the Official Plan is to require development to be well set back from lakes for both environmental and aesthetic reasons. Section 2.2.1 encourages all development proposals to...preserve the natural state of the shoreline as much as possible, and where the shoreline has been impaired by past activities, restore the shoreline s natural features including but not limited to native vegetation... To implement this objective, Section 5.1.2 directs that the shoreline setback for an individual lot is defined in the implementing Zoning By-law as the water setback. This setback will be strictly adhered to... File D13-MV-2014-011 Corker Page 4 of 5 Page 23 of 45

The requested variance for the water setback does not generally comply with the provisions of the Zoning by-law. The direction from the Official Plan is implemented by a strict interpretation of Section 5.2 of the Zoning by-law. However, should the Committee decide to grant the requested variances, the following conditions would be appropriate: 1. This variance applies to shed as shown generally on the Property Sketch dated June 4 th, 2014 and attached to the Decision. Any encroachment beyond the variance granted herein will require a further application for a minor variance. 2. The County of Haliburton Shoreline Tree Preservation By-law 3505 applies. The injuring or destruction of trees within 30 metres of the high water mark is not permitted. The exemptions noted in Section 3 of By-law 3535 apply. Furthermore, additional native shoreline planting is encouraged to screen the buildings, naturalize the shoreline and address environmental concerns. File D13-MV-2014-011 Corker Page 5 of 5 Page 24 of 45

KEY MAP Minor Variance D13-MV-14-011 LOT 4, CON 5 LOT 5, CON 5 Lands of Corker Part Lot 5, Concession 3 Part 4, Plan 19R4572 Farquhar Lake Geographic Township of Harcourt 030-28400 µ LOT 9, CON 4 LOT 8, CON 4 LOT 7, CON 4 LOT 5, CON 4 LOT 6, CON 4 LOT 4, CON 4 LOT 3, CON 4 LOT 5, CON 3 Farquhar - North Shore LOT 4, CON 3 Subject Lands Pine Lake - Fisheries Farquhar Lake Farquhar - South Shore Perry Ln LOT 7, CON 2 Smokeys Tr LOT 3, CON 3 LOT 2, CON 3 Farquhar - South Is LOT 6, CON 2 Date: 5/3/2012 LOT 3, CON 2 DISCLAIMER: This map is for planning reference purposes only and is not a survey of properties. No LOT representation 2, CON is 2made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. The Municipality of Dysart et al assumes no responsibility for any loss resulting from such use. This publication may not be reproduced in any form, in part or in whole, without written permission. Cadillac Tr Art Barton Ln BASE DATA SOURCE: QUEEN'S PRINTER OF ONTARIO Use of this data does not constitute an endorsment by MNR or the Ontario Government. Grace Lake 010 20 40 60 80 Meters LOT 6, CON 1 Page 25 of 45

Page 26 of 45

Page 27 of 45

Page 28 of 45

Page 29 of 45

Page 30 of 45

Page 31 of 45

Page 32 of 45

Page 33 of 45

Page 34 of 45

Page 35 of 45

Page 36 of 45

PLANNING REPORT July 8 th, 2014 REPORT AUTHOR: REVIEWED BY: APPLICATION NO: REGISTERED OWNER: AGENT'S NAME: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Jeff Iles Patricia Martin, Director of Planning and Development D13-MV-2014-012 Nancy Olexiuk and Harold McInerney Harold McInerney 1728 Chandler Road Part Lot 30, Concession 7 Parts 1 to 4, Plan 19R-9194 Township of Dysart ROLL NO.: 011-47500 FOUR TESTS: To grant a requested variance, the Committee of Adjustment must determine that the application satisfies each of the four tests as outlined by the Planning Act as follows: 1. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Official Plan; 2. The requested variance(s) must satisfy the general intent of the Zoning By-law; 3. The requested variance(s) must be considered minor in nature; and 4. The requested variance(s) must be desirable for the development of the land. (1) BACKGROUND: Last year Ms. Olexiuk and Mr. McInerney obtained to a building permit (2013-134) to construct an attached garage and screened porch addition to the seasonal dwelling on their property located on Spruce Lake. The owners would like to change the design to the screened porch addition which connects the seasonal dwelling and the garage. The proposed design will have a water setback of 17.5 metres (58 feet) as opposed to the required minimum of 20 metres (65.62 feet) as defined in Section 5.2 of Zoning By-law 2005-120. In 2009, the applicants obtained a minor variance (D13-MV-2009-010) to legalize the location of the seasonal dwelling which had a water setback of 17.5 metres (58 feet) as opposed to the required minimum of 20 metres (65.62 feet). The Committee granted the variance to clear up an existing compliance issue but included a condition that all future construction was to comply with the Zoning By-law. The condition was File D13-MV-2014-012 Olexiuk and McInerney Page 1 of 4 Page 37 of 45

agreed to by all parties at that time. The proposed addition will not comply with the water setback. The owners note that the existing layout does not allow them to access the garage and screened in porch without going outside of the seasonal dwelling. The proposed changes will line up with the existing seasonal dwelling. Please note that this was discussed with the applicants during the building permit application process. Staff believe other options exist that do not require a water setback variance. The requested variance for the water setback does not comply with the provisions of the Official Plan (Section 5.1.2). The intent of the Official Plan is to require development to be well set back from lakes for both environmental and aesthetic reasons. Section 2.2.1 encourages all development proposals to..preserve the natural state of the shoreline as much as possible, and where the shoreline has been impaired by past activities, restore the shoreline s natural features including but not limited to native vegetation... Should the Committee decide to grant the requested variance, staff recommend that the Committee discuss a condition to implement a shoreline vegetative buffer. The buffer should be constructed to a specific width discussed and agreed to by all parties. The owner has requested a minor variance to permit construction of an addition to the seasonal dwelling located on their property. (2) REQUESTED VARIANCES: The following variance is requested to permit construction of an addition on a property located in the WR4L zone: a) A decrease to the provisions of Section 5.2 to permit an addition to a seasonal dwelling to have a minimum water setback of 17.5 metres (57.5 feet) as opposed to the required 20 metres (65.62 feet). (3) SITE DESCRIPTION: Building Department staff visited this site during the building permit process. a) Lot Dimensions: Frontage: 213 +/- metres (700 +/- feet) Area: 0.7689 hectares (1.9 acres) b) Existing Development: - a seasonal dwelling; c) Proposed Development: - addition/attached garage d) Frontage: Spruce Lake e) Access: Chandler Drive File D13-MV-2014-012 Olexiuk and McInerney Page 2 of 4 Page 38 of 45

f) Shoreline Road Allowance: The applicants purchase the shore line road allowance in front of the property via By-law 2010-112. The addition appears to be located on the shoreline road allowance. (4) PROVINCIAL POLICY (a) Conformity: No. (b) Applicable Policies: Policy 1.1.5 Policy 1.6.6 Policy 2.1 Policy 2.2 Rural Areas in Municipalities Sewage and Water Services Natural Heritage Water (c) Comment: Spruce Lake is classified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a lake trout lake and the Ministry of the Environment has determined that it is at capacity with respect to development. Critical fish habitat has not been identified in front of these lands. However, the property has not been inventoried for fish habitat. Where a proposal is to construct new development or to add to existing development, the Municipality applies best management practices to protect aquatic resources. Specifically, a 20 metre water setback is applied to new and existing development to protect sensitive water resources and fish habitat. Vegetation buffers are important to the long term health of the lake. The proposed addition does not comply with the water setback. (5) OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Waterfront Areas (a) Conformity: Generally, yes, given the past variance granted by the Committee of Adjustment. (b) Applicable Policies: Section 2.1.2 Section 2.2.1 Section 4.6: Section 5.1.2 Section 9 Importance of the Natural Environment Protection and Enhancement of the Environment Lot Size and Shape Lakes and Rivers Waterfront Areas (c) Comment: Section 5.1.2 specifically states that the shoreline setback for an individual lot is defined in the implementing zoning by-law as the water setback. This setback will be strictly adhered to. The requested water setback variance does not adhere to the applicable water setback. This impedes the ability to implement the primary objective of the Official Plan, which is Section 2.2.1 Protection and Enhancement of the Environment. In particular, the requested water setback variance does not preserve the natural state of the shoreline. Minor variance D13-MV-2009-010 permits a water setback of 17.5 metres for the seasonal dwelling. This application clarifies a condition of that application. File D13-MV-2014-012 Olexiuk and McInerney Page 3 of 4 Page 39 of 45

(6) PRESENT ZONING: Waterfront Residential Type 4L (WR4L) (a) Compliance: The lot complies with regards to the lot area and lot frontage requirements. The proposed addition does not comply with the required water setback. (7) NOTICE AND CIRCULATION: Notice of the minor variance was circulated to all persons and agencies required by regulation on June 24 th, 2014. The required advertisement was placed in the local newspaper. Staff received letters from two neighbours supporting the requested variance. (8) STAFF COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION: The intent of the Official Plan is to require development to be well set back from lakes for both environmental and aesthetic reasons. Section 2.2.1 encourages all development proposals to...preserve the natural state of the shoreline as much as possible, and where the shoreline has been impaired by past activities, restore the shoreline s natural features including but not limited to native vegetation... To implement this objective, Section 5.1.2 directs that the shoreline setback for an individual lot is defined in the implementing Zoning By-law as the water setback. This setback will be strictly adhered to... Minor variance D13-MV-2009-010 permits a water setback of 17.5 metres for the seasonal dwelling. This application clarifies a condition of that application. However, should the Committee decide to grant the requested variances, the following conditions would be appropriate: 1. This variance applies to an addition as shown generally on the Property Sketch dated June 13 th, 2014 and attached to the Decision. Any encroachment beyond the variance granted herein will require a further application for a minor variance. 2. The County of Haliburton Shoreline Tree Preservation By-law 3505 applies. The injuring or destruction of trees within 30 metres of the high water mark is not permitted. The exemptions noted in Section 3 of By-law 3535 apply. Furthermore, additional native shoreline planting is encouraged to screen the buildings, naturalize the shoreline and address environmental concerns. 3. During construction, proper site preparation and construction methods are to be used to prevent sedimentation of the adjacent lake. Sediment fencing is to be installed down gradient from the construction site. The site is to be properly stabilized immediately following construction to prevent erosion and sedimentation. File D13-MV-2014-012 Olexiuk and McInerney Page 4 of 4 Page 40 of 45

Page 41 of 45

Page 42 of 45

Page 43 of 45

Page 44 of 45

Page 45 of 45