Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/10/1967MEETING of the COMMITTEE .OF ADJUSTMENT for the T017TTSHIP OF CLARKE Monday, April 10, 1967 at 8;00 p.m. Council Chamber, Orono. Present: E.R. Lovekin, Chairman K. Schoenmaker, Member Mrs. Ellen M. Yeo, Secretary -Treasurer Minutes of meeting of the Committee held March 22, 1967 were approved as read on motion by K. Schoenmaker, seconded by E.R. Lovekin. Carried. The Secretary presented a Pamphlet received from the Depart- ment of Municipal Affairs being Bill 169, The Planning Amendment Act, 1966. The provisions contained therein were noted by the Committee and changes in procedure were considered to more accurately and succintly comply with Statutory requirements. Application File No. 45-66 W. Kay Lycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario. Mrs. Bertha Little, Owner, 770 Hortop Street, Oshawa, Ontario. for part of Lot -7 Con. STI, of the Township of Clarke. Submission No. As business arising from minutes of the last meeting, this application was considered. Mrs. Bertha' Little,, the Applicant, and W. Kay Lycett B.A., Agent for the said Applicant, appeared in. support of this application. No' other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application. The Chairman, Mr. Lovekin, explained the broad policies of the Committee and their`application to the problem now before the Committee. Oral evidence made it clear that this is an application by a parent to transfer less than 10 acres to a daughter and son-in-law. The owner stated she owned about 34 acres in the whole parcel. There was oral evidence of intention. to convey the land to the child before the By -Law came into effect, but there was no agreement for sale, survey or other documentation which would afford independent Proof of this intention. No allegation was made that the severance was for agricultural reasons or was in conjunction with an agricultural use of the land. The Committee visited the land on Sunday April 9, 1967. It was fairly heavily wooded land and picturesque for a summer retreat. No topographical or other special reasons appeared to exist as far as the Committee could see, that would justify a severance of a smaller parcel than 10 acres. Properties nearby were a minimum of 10 acres or a fractional variance thereof only. In accordance with the Committee's general policy as set out in the decision in the Carscadden case, the Committee could not see any special reason for abandoning their general rule that land in a rural area / should not be transferred in less than 10 acre parcels, unless the l applicants can bring themselves within some special exception to the general 10 acre rule. If, for some valid reason, a minor variance would facilitate an orderly and regularly shaped sub-division,such a minor variance could be given further consideration. This application was refused on motion by E.R. Lovekin, seconded by K. Schoenmaker. Classification "D" Page 2 Meeting of Committee of Adjustment, April 10, 1967 Application File No. 47-66 Claude D. Fitzgibbon, Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, 2 Baldwin Street, Port Hone, Ontario, Catherine Fitzgibbon, Owner, 2 Baldwin Street, Port Hope, Ontario. for parts of Lots 6 & 7, Con vI, Township of Clarke, Submission No,"B" 47-66-47 As business arising from minutes of the last meeting, the Committee considered this application. The Secretary -Treasurer presented the following letter to the Committee: (1) Bonneville & Fitzgibbon, Barristers & Solicitors, P.O. Box 188, Port Hope, Ontario, dated march 22, 1967. This application was for a fractional variance in acreage only. It was noted that if an unopened road allowance could be calculated as part of the property no consent of the Committee would be necessary. Consent to the severance granted, on the clear understanding that such consent is not to be interpreted to mean that access to the property is guaranteed and that no guarantee is given that a building permit will be issued if a purchaser wishes to build on the property, neither matter falling under the direct control of this Committee. Application granted on motion by K. Schoenmaker, seconded by E.R. Lovekin. Carried. Classification "C" Application File No. 48-66 W. Kay Lycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario. Mr. & Mrs. Leslie -G. Hopper, Owners, R.R. #1, Orono, Optario, for part of Lot 29, Con. IV, Township of Clarke, Submission No. As business arising from minutes of the last meeting this application was considered. The Chairman asked if any further oral argument was to be submitted. Mr. W. Kay Lycett, B.A.,;Agent, appeared on behalf of the Applicants and requested the Committee to table this application until further representation can be prepared for presentation to this Committee. This application_, therefore, was accordingly tabled for further consideration at the next meeting of this Committee, the Chair- man indicating that obvious topographical problems existed. Classification "A" Application File No. 49-66 W. Kay -Lycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, Mr. Robert H. Rienstra, Owner, Orono, Ontario, for part of Lot 25, Con, VI, Township of Clarke. Submission No. "B"-49-66-48 As business arising from minutes of the last meeting this application was considered. The Committee revisited the site on Sunday, April 9•, 1967 in company with the Applicant. The matter came on for oral argument on April 10, 1967 in the presence of W. K. Lycett B.A., Agent for the Applicant. Page 3 Meeting of Committee of Adjustment, April 10, 1967 The Committee based their decision on the following facts: (1) Roeds and access were excellent; (2) Drainage was excellent; ` (3) A pre-existing survey dated 24th December, 1964, in the opinion of the Committee, provided independent and conclusive evidence that the transaction was undertaken but not completed before the By -Law was passed. Such evidence was independent and corroborative in nature as opposed to self serving oral testimony. The Committee now take it as established, that where independent documentary evidence establishes that a proposed specific transaction pre -dates the passing of the By -Law, and this can be established by satisfactory evidence,'and the property is otherwise suitable for housing, the Committee will give special consideration to such applications. Application granted on motion by E.R. Lovekin, seconded by K. Schoenmaker. Carried. Classification "E" Application File No. 54-67 W. Kay Lycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, Thomas John Ambrose Carscadden Mary viola Carscadden, Owners, R.R. forth, Orono, Ontario, for part of Lots 15 & 16, Con VII, Township of Clarke, Submission No. As business arising from minutes of the last meeting the Committee considered this application. Mr. Thomas John Ambrose Carscadden, accompanied by his agent, W. Kay Lycett B.A., Barrister and Solicitor at Orono, appeared in support of this application. No other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application. On Saturday, April 1st, 1967, at 4:00 p.m., the Committee, comprised of K. Schoenmaker and E.R. Lovekin attended at the site in company with Mr. John Carscadden, owner and fir. Ivan Grimchuk, the proposed purchaser. The land proposed to be sold was located on a hill of approximately 2007 elevation affording an excellent view of the surrounding country. To the southwest, the slopes of the Oshawa Ski Club, a recreational area were clearly visible. Nir. John Carscadden, the proposedvendor, in his oral representations to the Committee said the land was marginal agricultural lands and its highest and best possible use would be for a home on a small acreage. Mr. Carscadden lives a little over a quarter of a mile to the southeast from the lot concerned. The Committee walked over the property and found that the land was of a light sandy composition and would provide reasonable pasturage early in the year, but would probably burn in a dry hot summer. The topography was very undulating with small ravines, hummocks and ridges, very few stones were seen. There were practically no trees on the property to be sold, other than the odd tree in.an existing or former fence line, indicating that, at an earlier date with low cost labour the land had been worked as a marginal agricultural operation, but it would not be suitable for modern heavy agricultural machinery because of the steep gradients, and labour costs would be too high to work it with older feasible methods such as horses, except on a hobby basis. 2'he applicants' contention that the land was marginal for agricultural use and suitable for a house on a small lot, therefore, contained a great deal of merit. Drainage would be good. No wells were in the immediate area. Page 4 Meeting of Committee of ?adjustment, April 10, 1967 To the west could be seen a small house, said to be owned by one William Abray, sitting on approximately 22 acres of land. An old ruined farmhouse, apparently not regularly lived in since about 1918 lay to the southwest and was now in ruinous condition. 'It could not be inhabited, but apparently has not been formally condemned. The entrance to the land to be sold was off the road between the 7th and 8th concession which road is in good condition. The entrance to the lot was on the ridge and vision would naturally be limited from the other side of the hill, but adequate turn off area existed in sandy well drained soil and such an entrance, although the line of vision was necessarily limited by the ridge should not present a serious traffic hazard to any vehicle approach- ing at a reasonable speed. To the north, (i.e. on the north side of the 8th line) one :Peck owns a rectangular shaped summer residence with drilled well, septic tank,with hydro service, sitting on approximately 19 acres. The applicants own 125 acres in"the immediate area in one continuous piece and own 46 acres on the 6th line and have never applied for any previous severance. The proposed purchaser owns a small holding nearb to the west and is seeking to purchase'this additional lot. The fundamental character of the whole area, which is part of the headwaters of the Ganaraska Watershed, is marginal agricultural, scenically beautiful rolling, hilly land extremely well suited to summer dwellings. The views are magnificent and the elevation is such that breathing is easier and the air pure. The decision of the Committee in this case has been more carefully considered, because of all the favourable factors and since this decision will be a clear precedent for many similar situations. The following facts appear pertinent: (1)` The contentions of the applicants that the particular land concerned is suitable for a "summer retreat" type of home are accepted as correct; (2) The property is bounded by a Rood road; (3) There are holdings under ten acres not too far distant, but the immediate neighbouring property is approximately 19 acres in. size; (4) The applicants, who own well over 100 acres, have applied for a size of lot`which`cannot be justified by any natural or artificial boundaries. It is not an area cut off by a new road or highway nor isolated as the top of an escarpment or other natural geographical formation. Because of the particular facts of this case, which are all favourable to the construction of a summer retreat, the Committee might consider a'fractional variation from the 10 acre minimum, ifanewly created boundary, such as a new highway, cut off a small`acreage. There have been no such features brought to our attention. This is a straight request from a man owning a parcel in excess of 100 acres to sell a parcel of land of less than 10 acres whose only geographical differentiation appears to be that it is the crest of a ridge of land abutting a Township road in an area of poor agricultural land; (5) The Committee note that there is no allegation on the part of the applicants that this severance is sought to provide a home for a member of the applicants? family; (6) The Committee note that there is no allegation that the severance is sought for an agricultural purpose or for a purpose associated with agricultural pursuits. Page 5 Meeting of Committee of Adjustment, April 10, 1967 (7) The Committee note the fact that a 10 acre parcel is available to anyone desiring to build a structure in this area. While the applicants may not wish to sell a 10 acre parcel, there is no physical reason why they cannot. (8) The Committee note that the land in question is -- nowhere near a settlement area, but quite to the contrary is an area where public recreation at the nearby Oshawa Ski Club is encouraged by the availability of large .tracts of land.. - The Ganarska watershed and the Durham Forest along with the new Lands and Forests Department project near Kendal all characterize the area as Greenbelt and Parkland in character, a general trend that is not.readily ,compatible with small individual holdings. The By -Law prohibits transfers of less than 10 acres. This is an arbitrary figure set by Statute. Unless .the Committee can determine that the particular application falls under an exception to the Statutory rule, they feel they should observe the Statutory minimum acreage rule. The Committee have not been presented with any argument, nor can they by personal observation see any reason that justifies an exception,to the rule in this case. We understand that it has been the practice of some Committees of Adjustment to allow one owner one severance automatically. This is not the policy of this Committee. We are prepared to consider any number of applications from any person if they can be supported by logical arguments which constitute valid grounds upon which an exception to the general rule, based on particular and local circumstances, can be made.. For the reasons set out herein, this application for severance is refused on motion by K. Schoenmaker, seconded by E.R. Lovekin. Carried. Classification "D" Applica tion File No. 57-67 Garnet B. Rickard, Owner, R.R. #4, Bowmanville, Ontario, for part of Lot 35, Con. II,��' Township of Clarke, Submission No.° Application was made for exemption or partial exemption from provisions of Subdivision Control By -Law 1494 so as to permit the separation of a parcel of land approximately 100► x 220? being approximately 2,200 square feet in area from the applicant's land. The Secretary reported that 23 notices of the said hearing had been mailed in accordance with Item 4 of the Rules of Procedure. Mr. Garnet B. Rickard appeared in support of this application. No other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application. Mr. Rickard advanced the following submissions: (3) - - (5) The area proposed is in harmony with the building lots already in the area; The subject lands would be sold according to Darlington standards concerning residential building sizes; and not Clarke Township requirements; Land should be zoned agricultural if it is already agricultural, then re -zoned when the requirement arises; This corner, the subject land, is more suitable for this purpose than agricultural purposes; As a prospective purchaser is now deceased, it is proposed to convey the said subject lands to Mrs. Rickard; Page 6 Meeting of Committee of Adjustment., April 10, 1967 (6) He wishes to retain certain abutting lands for tile drainage purposes and to provide access to his farm lands from the east. The Committee indicated they would view the property and with the consent of the applicant, the matter was adjourned to May 8, 1967. Classification "C" Application File No. 58.67 W.. Kay �ycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, Clifford Newton Winter Elva Lavinua Winter Owners, Orono, Ontario, for part of Lot 28, Con. V, Township of Clarke, Submission No. "B" 58-67-49 Application was made for exemption or partial exemption from provisions of Subdivision Control By -Law No. 1306 so as to permit the separation of a parcel of land approximately 100• x 4731 being approximately 1.089 acres in area from the applicants? land. The.Secretary reported that 16 notices of the said hearing had been mailed in accordance with Item 4 of The Rules of Procedure. Mr. W. Kay Lycett B.A., Barrister & Solicitor at Orono appeared in support of this application. No other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application.. The Secretary -Treasurer presented the following letter to the meeting: , . (1) W. Kay Lycett B.A., Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, dated March 9, 1967. _i It`was noted.that a new severance was not being created but rather that an existing small holding was being enlarged. The enlarging of the existing lot by the addition of the subject land would have a tendency of preventing the said subject land from becoming landlocked.. Furthermore, it was indicated that title to the subject land will be taken in the same manner as the title of the existing property so that it is an enlargement of an existing property and not the creation of a new property. It was noted the lands are in a settlement area. This application was granted unanimously with the sole restriction that the deed be registered in the names of the present owners under instrument No. N25103. Consent granted on motion by K. Schoenmaker, seconded by E.R. Lovekin. Carried. Classification "A" Application File No. 59-67 W.Kay Lycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, Clifford Newton Winter Elva Lavinua Winter, Owners, Orono, Ontario, for part of Lot 28, Con. V, Township of Clarke, Submission No. "B" 59-67-50 Application was made for exemption or partial exemption from provisions of Subdivision Control By -Law No. 1306 so as to permit the separation of a parcel of land approximately 1001 x 473f being approximately 1.091 acres in area from the applicants) land. Page 7 Meeting of Committee of Adjustment;, April 10, 1967: The Secretary reported that 16 notices of the said hearing had been mailed in accordance with Item 4 of The Rules of Procedure. Mr. W. Kay Lycett B.A., Barrister & Solicitor at Orono appeared in support of this application. No other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application. The Secretary -Treasurer presented the following letter to the meeting: (1) W. Kay Lycett B.A., Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, dated March 9, 1967. It was noted that a new severance was not being created but rather that an.existing small holding was being enlarged. The enlarging of the existing lot by the addition of the subject land would have a tendency of preventing the said subject land from becoming land- locked. Furthermore, it was indicated that title to the subject land will be taken in the same manner as the title of the existing property so that it is an enlargment of an existing property and not the creation of a new property. It was noted the lands are in a settlement area. This application was granted unanimously with the sole restriction that the deed be registered in the names of the present owners under instrument No. N 32090. Consent granted on motion by K. 3choenmaker, seconded by E.R. Lovekin. Carried. Classification "A" Application File No. 6067 W. Kay Lycett B,A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, - Orono, Ontario, Cherie s Edward Stapleton, Everett George Stapleton,Owners R.R. #2, Orono, Ontario for part of Lot 31, Con. Vi, Township of Clarke, Submission No. "B" 60-67-51 Application was made for exemption or partial exemption from provisions of Subdivision Control By -Law No. 1494 so as to permit the separation of a parcel of land approximately 1001 x 501 being approximately 0.115 acres in area from the applicants► land. The Secretary reported that 18 notices of the said hearing had been mailed in accordance with Item 4 of The Rules of Procedure. Messrs. Charles E. Stapleton and Everett G. Stapleton, accompanied by their agent W. Kay Lycett B.A., Solicitor at Orono, appeared in support of this application. No other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application. - The Secretary -Treasurer presented the following letter to the meeting: (1) W. Kay Lycett, B.A., Barrister•& Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, dated March 16, 1967. It was pointed out that a new severance was not being created but rather that an existing small holding was being enlarged. The lands concerned were not in a settlement area, but on an existing small holding. The application was granted unanimously with the sole restriction that the deed be registered in the names of the present owners under instrument No. N25874. Consent granted on motion by E.R. Lovekin, seconded by K. Schoenmaker. Carried. Classification "H" Page 8 Meeting of Committee of Adjustment, April 10, 1967 Application File No. 61-67 W. Kay Lycett B.A., Agent, Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, George k1 fred Hawke William Ralston Hawke, Owners R.R. #2, Orono, Ontario, for part Lot 34, Con vi, Township of Clarke, Submission No. "B" 6167-52 Application was made for.exemption or partial exemption ffom Provisions of Subdivision Control By -Law No. 1494 so as to permit the separation of a parcel of land approximately 669►4" x 310? 1 1/8" being approximately,5 acres in area from the applicants? land. The Secretary reported that 11 notices of the said hearing had been mailed in accordance with Item 4 of The,Rules of Procedure. Mr. George Wilfred Hawke, accmmpanied by his agent W. Kay Lycett B.A., Solicitor at Orono appeared in support.of this application. No other person appeared in support of, or in opposition to, this application. The Secretary -Treasurer presented the following letter to the meeting: (1)"W. Kay Lycett B.A., Barrister & Solicitor, Orono, Ontario, dated March 27, 1967; The severance asked for was a 5 acre property which, if granted, leaves a severed small abutting piece of land -approximately 160? x 310?. The smaller piece of land that would be severed by granting this application is presently used as an entrance to a gravel pit that lies to the south of the Township road between the 6th and 7th Concessions and to the east of the lands consented to. The purpose of the application then in effect is to sever a lot and existing house from an easement which provides a northerly entrance to the gravel pit from the public road. The lands used as an easement and left as a remainder in the Hawke deed are not to be used as a building lot but are to be sold to an abutting owner to be used as an easement and an undertaking by the Agent and Owner,.who was present, to this effect was deemed sufficient for the Committee's purposes. Under these special circumstances this application was so granted on motion by K. Schoenmaker and seconded by E,R. Lovekin. Carried. Classification "C" General Business - The Committee.added the following key index classification for all applications: "H" Addition to Present Holdings. Meeting adjourned at 1:30 a.m. Secretary-Treasu�re r �C_ airm