|
8. aPPEAL - COMMITTEE OF aDJUSTMENT DECISION - 4450 EIGHTH LINE ROAD APPEL - DÉCISION DU COMITÉ DE DÉROGATION - 4450,
CHEMIN EIGHTH LINE |
Committee
RecommendationS as amended
That Council approve that:
1. The
City Clerk and Solicitor be directed to withdraw the appeal regarding 4450
Eighth Line Road, and;
2. Despite
the Infrastructure Master Plan, one connection to the Carlsbad system be
permitted.
RecommandationS modifiées DU Comité
Que le Conseil approuve :
1. que le greffier municipal et chef du contentieux
reçoivent instruction de retirer l’appel concernant le 4450, chemin Eighth
Line, et ;
2. qu’en dépit du Plan directeur de l’infrastructure, un
raccordement au réseau de Carlsbad soit autorisé.
Documentation
1. Deputy City Manager’s Report,
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability dated 16 August 2010
(ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0161).
2. Extract of Draft Minute, 26 August,
2010.
Report to/Rapport au :
Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee
Comité
d'agriculture et des affaires rurales
and Council / et au Conseil
16 August 2010
/ le 16 août 2010
Submitted by/Soumis par :
Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice
municipale adjointe, Infrastructure Services
and Community Sustainability/Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité des
collectivités
Contact
Person/Personne-ressource : Derrick Moodie, Manager/Gestionnaire, Development
Review-Rural Services/Examen des projets d'aménagement-Services ruraux,
Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance
(613)
580-2424, 15134 Derrick.Moodie@ottawa.ca
|
SUBJECT: |
APPEAL - COMMITTEE
OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION – 4450 EIGHTH LINE ROAD (FILE NO. D08-01-10
AND D08-01-10/A-00160) |
|
|
|
|
OBJET : |
APPEL – DÉCISION DU
COMITÉ DE DÉROGATION – 4450, CHEMIN EIGHTH
LINE |
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommend
Council confirm the appeal of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment
regarding an application for consent and minor variance at 4450 Eighth Line
Road (D08-01-10 &
D08-01-10/a-00160) on the grounds that the proposed severance and minor variance are not
consistent with the Provincial Policy Statements and do not meet the intent of
the City of Ottawa Official Plan.
RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de l’agriculture et des affaires
rurales recommande au Conseil de confirmer l’appel de la décision du Comité de
dérogation au sujet d’une demande d’autorisation et de dérogation mineure
visant la propriété située au 4450, chemin Eighth Line (D08-01-10 et D08-01-10/a-00160),
parce que le morcellement et la dérogation mineure projetés ne sont pas
conformes aux déclaration de principe provinciale et qu’ils ne respectent pas
l’esprit du Plan officiel de la
Ville d’Ottawa.
BACKGROUND
In June 2, 2010, Mr. Ross Nicholson was granted the Consent of the Committee of Adjustment for a Conveyance in order to subdivide his property at 4450 Eighth Line into two separate parcels of land. The location of the subject property is shown in Document 1.
The severed parcel will have a 51.59-metre frontage on Eighth Line Road and an area of 0.61 hectares. The retained parcel will have a frontage of 93.01 metres on Eighth Line Road and an area of 18.4 hectares. The property owner was also granted a Minor Variance to permit a lot area for the severed parcel to be 0.61 hectares, whereas the Official Plan and Zoning By‑law require a minimum lot area of 0.8 hectares. Due to the unreliable supply of water in the area, the Committee approved the severance on the condition that the owner demonstrate that the site can either a) be serviced by a private well or b) obtain a connection to the Carlsbad Trickle Feed System.
The Planning and Growth Management Department recommended that the severance application be denied due to the lot size requirement as well as the limited supply of water services in the area. Following the decision made by the Committee of Adjustment, Planning and Legal staff filed an appeal of the Committee of Adjustment decision to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). This report is to advise and obtain Council concurence to the staff initiative to appeal the Committee’s decision.
DISCUSSION
Carlsbad Trickle Feed System
The property is located in a Public Service Area which
is serviced by the Carlsbad Trickle Feed System. The System was
commissioned in 1996 to supply safe potable water to existing dwellings in
proximity to the Village of Carlsbad Springs and the surrounding area. The
Infrastructure Master Plan does not permit newly created lots to be serviced by
the Carlsbad Trickle Feed System as the original purpose of the Trickle Feed
System was to respond to a public health related issue and provide safe
drinking water to existing lots of record only.
Carlsbad Springs is an area that has historically been affected by water supply and contamination issues. The yield and chemical properties of water often differ substantially in the deep aquifer with the crossing of fault boundaries. This is due to several factors including fault block displacement, the presence of calcite and related mineralization which can create barriers to groundwater flow. The quality of water in the Carlsbad aquifer is therefore generally poor with mineral content in excess of accepted levels.
In the past, potable groundwater has only been found in small, permeable surface reservoirs that are unreliable as a supply and are easily contaminated. Septic system effluent has proven to be a problem also as it was either trapped on the surface by underlying clay soil where sand is not found or, in sandy soils, traveled quickly to places where water was being withdrawn, taking with it both the nutrient load and untreated contaminants from old, poorly maintained or inadequate systems.
The provision of a low flow system by the former Region was given Provincial support to address the local health issues that could not be remedied by other means. The last phase of the system was operational in 2002. Additional capacity was allocated to lots where development interests had been previously expressed to the local municipality (former City of Gloucester). Since that time, all additional connections have been denied.
Provincial Policy Statement
The Provincial Policy Statement requires that municipalities utilize infrastructure and services in a sustainable manner and provides clear direction on the use of partial services. Section 1.6.4.5 of the Policy states as follows:
“Partial
services shall only be permitted in the following circumstances:
a) Where they are necessary to
address failed individual on-site sewerage service and individual on site water
services in existing development; and
b) Within settlement areas, to
allow for infilling and rounding out of existing development on partial
services provided that:
1. The development is within
the reserve sewage system capacity and reserve water system capacity; and
2. Site conditions are
suitable for the long-term provision of such services.”
The area serviced by the Carlsbad Trickle Feed System (west of Carlsbad Springs) is not a settlement area per the Provincial Policy Statement. The Provincial Policy Statement is clear that the extension of existing partial services in the rural area shall only be considered where needed to address failed individual systems and not to provide an opportunity for new development as the Committee of Adjustment decision has done.
Official Plan
The subject site is designated as “General Rural” for the land along Eighth Line Road (approximately ¼ of the parcel). The remainder of the property is designated as “Rural Natural Feature”. Section 3.7.2 of the Official Plan requires that the minimum lot size requirement for severed lots in the General Rural Area to be 0.8 hectares. The property is zoned RU “Rural Countryside”.
The minimum lot size of 0.8 hectares is established in the Rural Area for a number of reasons, many of which are associated with servicing. Potential development in the Rural Area must be evaluated based on sufficient quantity of groundwater so that a well can be constructed on a newly created lot without being impacted by potential sources of groundwater contamination. In addition, the operation of on-site wastewater systems must not adversely impact wells on neighbouring properties. It does not appear that the subject property is constrained in any way due to lot size and therefore it is unclear why a lot size of 0.61ha was requested and whether a lot of that size can support a conventional septic system over the long term.
Section 2.3.2.5 (e) of the Official Plan states that “the City will discourage future growth on the basis of partial services, particularly where City water is provided to resolve a groundwater contamination issue”. Official Plan Amendment No 76 (Section 2.3.2, Policy 8) included the following new policies in the Official Plan:
“Partial Services shall
only be considered in the following circumstances:
a. Where they are necessary to address failed
individual on-site sewage services and individual on-site water services in
existing development; or
b. Within the urban area and in villages where
development on partial services already exists and the proposal constitutes
minor infill.”
This policy came into full force and effect as of August 4, 2010. Pursuant to the Municipal Act, the City is not obliged to provide a connection to the Carlsbad Trickle Feed System where the connection contravenes Official Plan policy. The Committee’s decision therefore established an unfair expectation that the City will provide a connection. Further, the Committee’s decision created an expectation that lots may be severed which do not conform to the minimum requirements of the Official Plan and that the City will consider new development proposals requesting connection into the trickle system.
Infrastructure Master Plan
The Trickle Feed System is identified in the City’s Infrastructure Master Plan in order “...to provide the rural area west of Carlsbad Springs with a safe water supply. The small diameter trickle feed system provided a cost effective means to deliver water as a remedy for a health problem...” Section 6.1.2 of the Infrastructure Master Plan states that “the Carlsbad Springs Water Service Area provides a low pressure “trickle feed” to a specified number of lots in a defined service area. System capacities and connection permission are limited to lots of record at the time of implementation of the system”. The total number of dwellings was limited to 775 with no additional connections allowed. The proposed severance is therefore not consistent with the Infrastructure Master Plan and would create a dangerous precedent for other properties in the area.
A technical report, completed in June 2009, identified whether additional capacity was available in the system in order to provide a connection to the Lynwood Mobile Home Park. From a technical standpoint, the report concluded that there is additional capacity in the system, however, City staff is restrained from allowing additional connections for a variety of reasons, some of which are:
- City Council’s policy is enunciated in the Master Infrastructure Plan adopted by Council on June 10, 2009.
- Adding additional units to the system could increase liability should the system fail
- There has been no formal position taken as to how the excess capacity in the system should best be managed.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
The appeal has been launched because development on partial services is not supported unless it is required to address a failed individual on-site system in existing development. The Committee of Adjustment decision, in supporting this application, has allowed for additional development on partial services to occur.
CONSULTATION
N/A
COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)
The Councillor is aware of this report and the recommendations.
LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
If this appeal is confirmed by Committee and Council, this appeal would be conducted by staff within existing resources.
CITY STRATEGIC PLAN
N/A
TECHNICAL IMPLICATIONS
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Direct costs to the City would be comprised of the cost of Legal Services Branch and Planning and Growth Management Department staff preparing for and attending the Ontario Municipal Board hearing to defend the City’s position. As representation is by City staff, the costs are reflected within Departmental budgets.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Location
Map
Document 2 Committee of Adjustment Decision (Consent)
Document 3 Committee of Adjustment Decision (Minor Variance)
DISPOSITION
City Clerk’s to forward Committee report to Council for review and
action. Legal and Planning staff to
prepare for representation at the upcoming Ontario Municipal Board hearing
should Council approve such action.
LOCATION MAP DOCUMENT
1
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION (Consent) DOCUMENT 2
|
|
COMMITTEE
OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE CITY OF OTTAWA
DECISION/DÉCISION
CONSENT/AUTORISATION
(Section 53 of the Planning Act)
(Article 53 de la Loi sur l’aménagement du territoire)
File No./Dossier no: D08-01-10/B-00161
Owner/ Propriétaire: Ross Nicholson
Legal Description//Description officielle: Part Lot 18, Concession 8 (Ottawa Front)
Property Address/Adresse de la propriété : 4450, (4480) Eighth Line Road
Zoning/Zonage: RU
By-Law/Règlement: 2008-250
Ward/ Quartier: 20 - Osgoode
Former Municipality/Ancienne
municipalité: Gloucester
Notice was given and a Public Hearing was held on Wednesday, June 2nd and Wednesday, June 16th, 2010, as required by the Planning Act.
PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION/OBJET DE LA DEMANDE :
The Owner wants to subdivide his property into 2
separate parcels of land in order to create a new residential lot.
CONSENT IS
REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING/AUTORISATION REQUISE:
In order to do this, the Owner requires the Consent of the Committee for a Conveyance. The land to be severed will have a frontage of 51.59 metres on Eighth Line Road to an irregular depth of 115.50 metres and will contain a lot area of 0.61 hectares. This parcel is vacant and will be known municipally as 4480 Eighth Line Road.
The land to be retained will have a frontage of 93.01 metres on Eighth Line Road to an irregular depth of 965.74 metres containing a lot area of 18.4 hectares. There is a dwelling and 3 sheds located on this parcel, known municipally as 4450 Eighth Line Road.
Approval of this Application will have the effect of creating a new parcel of land that will not be in conformity with the requirements of the Zoning By-law. Therefore, an Application for a Minor Variance Application (File D08-02-10/A-00160) has been filed and will be heard concurrently with this Application.
The application indicates that the Property is not the subject of any other current applications under the Planning Act.
At the initial Hearing, the Committee adjourned these applications in order to allow Mr. R. Nicholson, the Owner of the property an opportunity to address the concerns raised by both the City’s Planning & Growth Management Department and South Nation Conservation Authority.
At the renewed Hearing, Mr. Nicholson presented his applications, sited sections of the City’s Official Plan and indicated that in his opinion, an Environmental Impact Statement or an Official Plan Amendment was not necessary. In this connection, Mr. Nicholson informed the Committee that, pursuant to Section 4.9.(d) of the Official Plan, they could impose a condition requiring that he undertakes to provide a “scoped site-impact statement” which in his opinion, would be more appropriate based on the proposed development.
In response to questions from the Committee with respect to whether or not the City would permit the proposed lot to be connected to the existing trickle feed system, Mr. Nicholson stated that, “the City will discourage future growth on the basis of partial services, particularly where water is provided to resolve a groundwater contamination issues”. He also stated that, in his opinion, the application is merely for the creation of a single lot and that the Official Plan does not preclude hook-ups to the trickle system, it simply discourages it. Mr. Nicholson added that in his opinion, connections to the existing infrastructure should be on a first come first served basis. He referenced a 1999 Ontario Municipal Board Decision, whereby Judge Granger stated that it’s unfair to sterilize the use of the existing trickle system in perpetuity not knowing what the future holds.
Mr. D. Page and Ms. T. Scaramozzino of the City’s Planning & Growth Management Department clarified that the City’s Infrastructure Master Plan does not normally allow for the creation of new lots in the area serviced by the Carlsbad Springs Trickle Feed System and that it was designed to service the existing development and did not anticipate new service connections. Mr. Page also pointed out that the trickle system was designed to incorporate lots of record and stated that at a minimum, a Community Design Plan would be required prior to any additional connections being allotted. Ms. Scaramozzino stated that to perpetuate this type of strip development with inadequate services would not be sound planning and that the Committee should be dealing with this application under the current Planning policies.
DECISION AND
REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATIONS
GRANTED
DÉCISION ET MOTIFS DU COMITÉ: DEMANDES
ACCORDÉES
The Committee, having considered the evidence presented and reviewed the correspondence on file and despite the concerns raised by the City’s Planning & Growth Management Department, is of the opinion that the primary issue in whether or not these applications should be approved relates to the requirement to provide water services for the proposed lot.
The Committee heard evidence that the proposed lot is sufficiently well removed from the natural features (creek) on the property, that the land is primarily alders and scrub brush and that this admittedly undersized lot is capable of sustaining a viable on-site sewage treatment system.
Furthermore, the Committee acknowledges the technical study referenced by the Applicant, which concluded that the current Carlsbad Springs Trickle Feed System is more than capable of accommodating the 200 contemplated additional connections for the existing Lynwood Trailer Park and beyond that, an additional 235 connections.
The Committee is satisfied
that their concerns with respect to servicing for the property will be
adequately addressed by imposing a Hydrogeological Evaluation and Terrain
Analysis condition, or alternatively, providing confirmation from the City’s
Infrastructure Department that a water connection to the existing Carlsbad
Springs Trickle Feed System has been obtained.
Therefore based on the
foregoing, the Committee, having had regard to the matters set out in Section
51(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended, is
satisfied that, in this instance, a plan of subdivision is not necessary or
desirable for the proper and orderly development of the Municipality. The Committee therefore grants the provisional
consent, subject to the following conditions, which
must be fulfilled within a one-year period from the date of this Decision:
1. That the Owner(s) provide evidence that cash-in-lieu of parkland of $3500.00 has been paid to the City of Ottawa. Sixty percent of this amount shall be deposited to the applicable ward (Ward 20 Osgoode – order 830309) and forty percent shall be deposited to the City of Ottawa – order 830015). The Applicant shall bear the cost of any appraisal costs incurred by the City.
3. That the Owner(s) prepare, to the
satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review, an Environmental Impact
Statement which demonstrates that there are no negative impacts on the natural
feature or their ecological functions. At the discretion of the Manager of
Development Review, the Owner may be required to enter into a Development
Agreement with the City of Ottawa to address the required outcomes as per the
completed Environmental Impact Statement.
4. That the Owner(s) provide a copy of a
survey plan showing the retained and severed portions, prepared by a Civil
Engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, or by an Ontario Land Surveyor
for review and approval by South Nation Conservation Authority. The survey plan shall show all structures on
the retained and severed portion, along with the private septic system and
distances from the proposed lot lines.
5. That the Owner(s) convey, at no charge, to the City of Ottawa, sufficient frontage across the severed lands to provide for a road right-of-way measuring 20.0 metres from the centerline of Eighth Line Road, should it be determined. The Transfer must be registered by the City’s Legal Services Branch prior to the endorsement of consent on the title transfer documents. The Owner(s) shall provide a Reference Plan for registration that indicates the required widening. If the Owner’s surveyor determines that a widening is not required, it must be indicated on the Reference Plan. (A draft Reference Plan and a copy of the Committee of Adjustment Decision are to be sent directly to the City Surveyor for review prior to deposit.)
6. That the Owner(s) shall provide proof that a grading and drainage plan, prepared by a quality Civil Engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, an Ontario Land Surveyor or a Certified Engineering Technologist, has been submitted to an approved by the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management Department, or his designate. The grading and drainage shall delineate existing and proposed grades for both the severed and retained properties, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management Department, or his designated.
7. That the Owner(s) shall provide evidence, satisfactory to the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management Department, or his designate, that all services municipal or private, i.e., sewers, wells, septic system, etc. are/will be independent and do not cross or are not independent, the Owner(s) will be required to relocate or construct new services at his/her costs.
8. That the Owner(s) shall provide proof that a Hydrogeological Evaluation and Terrain Analysis, prepared by a qualified civil engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, has been submitted to and approved by the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management Department, or his designated (as per Procedure D-54 “Technical Guideline for Individual On-Site Sewage Systems: Water Quality Impact Risk Assessment”). The Assessment shall be required to demonstrate the adequacy of the aquifer with respect to the quality and quantity to support the proposed development, and that the lot areas are sufficient for private sanitary sewage systems. The report shall also assess the potential impact on groundwater caused by the proposed development as required by the City of Ottawa’ Official Plan, and shall meet all City and Ministry of Environment Regulations, Standards, Guidelines and Procedures.
Or alternatively, the Owner(s) may provide confirmation that a water connection to the public water supply has been granted.
9. That the Owner(s) file with the Committee a copy of the registered Reference Plan prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor registered in the Province of Ontario, and signed by the Registrar, confirming the frontage and area of the severed land. The Reference Plan must conform substantially to the sketch filed with the Application for Consent.
10. That upon completion of the conditions as outlined above, and within a one-year period from the date of this Decision, the Owner(s) file with the Committee, the “electronic registration in preparation documents” for the Conveyance for which the Consent is required.
The
Consent(s) lapses one year from the date of this Decision.
Please note that if a major change to a condition or
conditions is requested, you will be entitled to receive Notice of the changes
only if you have made a written request to be notified.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL/AVIS DE DROIT D’APPEL:
To appeal this Decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, a letter, outlining the reasons for appeal, must be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment by the 14th day of July, 2010. The OMB has established a filing fee of $125.00 for an appeal with an additional filing fee of $25.00 for each secondary application. A cheque payable to the Ontario Minister of Finance must accompany the Notice of Appeal. If you have any questions about the appeal process, please contact the Committee of Adjustment office.
Only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal Decisions in respect of applications for Consent to the Ontario Municipal Board. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an unincorporated association or group. However, a Notice of Appeal may be filed in the name of an individual who is a Member of the Association or group on its behalf.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION (Minor Variance) DOCUMENT 3
|
|
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE CITY OF OTTAWA
DECISION
MINOR VARIANCE/PERMISSION
(Section 45 of the Planning Act)
File No./Dossier no: D08-02-10/A-00160
Owner/ Propriétaire: Ross Nicholson
Legal Description//Description officielle: Part Lot 18, Concession 8 (Ottawa Front)
Property Address/Adresse de la propriété : (4480) Eighth Line Road
Zoning/Zonage: RU
By-Law/Règlement: 2008-250
Ward/ Quartier: 20 - Osgoode
Former Municipality/Ancienne
municipalité: Gloucester
Notice was given and a Public Hearing was held on Wednesday, June 2nd and Wednesday, June 16th, 2010, as required by the Planning Act.
PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION/OBJET DE LA DEMANDE:
The Owner has filed Consent Application
(D08-01-10/B-00161), which, if approved will have the effect of creating 2
separate parcels of land, one of which will not be in conformity with the
requirements of the Zoning By-law.
RELIEF REQUIRED/DISPENSE REQUISE:
In order to do this, the Owner requires the Authority of the Committee for a Minor Variance from the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced lot area of 0.61 hectares (severed land), whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 0.8 hectares..
The application indicates that the
Property is the subject of a current Consent Application (File: D08-01-10/B-00161) and will be heard
concurrently along with this application.
At the initial Hearing, the Committee adjourned these applications in order to allow Mr. R. Nicholson, the Owner of the property an opportunity to address the concerns raised by both the City’s Planning & Growth Management Department and South Nation Conservation Authority.
At the renewed Hearing, Mr. Nicholson presented his applications, sited sections of the City’s Official Plan and indicated that in his opinion, an Environmental Impact Statement or an Official Plan Amendment was not necessary. In this connection, Mr. Nicholson informed the Committee that, pursuant to Section 4.9.(d) of the Official Plan, they could impose a condition requiring that he undertakes to provide a “scoped site-impact statement” which in his opinion, would be more appropriate based on the proposed development.
In response to questions from the Committee with respect to whether or not the City would permit the proposed lot to be connected to the existing trickle feed system, Mr. Nicholson stated that, “the City will discourage future growth on the basis of partial services, particularly where water is provided to resolve a groundwater contamination issues”. He also stated that, in his opinion, the application is merely for the creation of a single lot and that the Official Plan does not preclude hook-ups to the trickle system, it simply discourages it. Mr. Nicholson added that in his opinion, connections to the existing infrastructure should be on a first come first served basis. He referenced a 1999 Ontario Municipal Board Decision, whereby Judge Granger stated that it’s unfair to sterilize the use of the existing trickle system in perpetuity not knowing what the future holds.
Mr. D. Page and Ms. T. Scaramozzino of the City’s Planning & Growth Management Department clarified that the City’s Infrastructure Master Plan does not normally allow for the creation of new lots in the area serviced by the Carlsbad Springs Trickle Feed System and that it was designed to service the existing development and did not anticipate new service connections. Mr. Page also pointed out that the trickle system was designed to incorporate lots of record and stated that at a minimum, a Community Design Plan would be required prior to any additional connections being allotted. Ms. Scaramozzino stated that to perpetuate this type of strip development with inadequate services would not be sound planning and that the Committee should be dealing with this application under the current Planning policies.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATION GRANTED
DÉCISION ET MOTIFS DU COMITÉ: DEMANDE
ACCORDÉE
The Committee, having considered the evidence presented and reviewed the correspondence on file and despite the concerns raised by the City’s Planning & Growth Management Department, is of the opinion that the primary issue in whether or not these applications should be approved relates to the requirement to provide water services for the proposed lot.
The Committee heard evidence that the proposed lot is sufficiently well removed from the natural features (creek) on the property, that the land is primarily alders and scrub brush and that this admittedly undersized lot is capable of sustaining a viable on-site sewage treatment system.
Furthermore, the Committee acknowledges the technical study referenced by the Applicant, which concluded that the current Carlsbad Springs Trickle Feed System is more than capable of accommodating the 200 contemplated additional connections for the existing Lynwood Trailer Park and beyond that, an additional 235 connections.
The
Committee is satisfied that their concerns with respect to servicing for the
property will be adequately addressed by imposing a Hydrogeological Evaluation
and Terrain Analysis condition, or alternatively, providing confirmation from
the City’s Infrastructure Department that a water connection to the existing
Carlsbad Springs Trickle Feed System has been obtained.
The Committee is satisfied that the creation of the new lot will not be out of character with lots in the area and takes particular note of the fact that the underlying water connection issue will be adequately addressed by imposing conditions on its Decision. The Committee is therefore satisfied that, in all the circumstances and in this instance, the variance sought is minor, that it is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land and that the general intent of the Zoning By-law and the Official Plan is maintained. This application is granted as filed.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL/AVIS DE DROIT D’APPEL:
To appeal this Decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, a letter, outlining the reasons for appeal, must be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment by the 14th day of July, 2010. The OMB has established a filing fee of $125.00 for an appeal with an additional filing fee of $25.00 for each secondary application. A cheque payable to the Ontario Minister of Finance must accompany the Notice of Appeal. If you have any questions about the appeal process, please contact the Committee of Adjustment office.
Only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal Decisions in respect of applications for Consent to the Ontario Municipal Board. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an unincorporated association or group. However, a Notice of Appeal may be filed in the name of an individual who is a Member of the Association or group on its behalf.