HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/1968C
Page 11
I-Ieeti: of CommiLLee of _.djusL:nent November 25, 1968:
General Busi.ncss-- A_ io i c_' discussion +:a :. held
aL the close of the m_et:_ng and
the ollo-wing motion •.res m _de
by K. Schocnmaker anu s-c:nded by E.F.R. C:sborne thaL
due to tlr_• extra meeti_m,,s and time involved in drafting
decisions; visiting properties; also consultations
following the increase in the number of
the ;nc:ibers receive an additional fee of $50.00 each..
Carried,
k
The Secretary wao rec1uee;ted to requisition Council for
a cho _ ue in tine a;:iount of $150.00 for this
djournc-d at 1:00 ,_.ln.
Sscretiirv-Tre-Ourer 49;
Deceiiiber 4, 1963
Application File No. 148-63
Colin C. : armincfer
Owners
Patricia .�arminner
822 Glen St.,
Oahawa, Ontario,
Ownere.,
Kurt Kern,
73 Centre St.,
Osha.:a7 Ontario,
fez past of Lot 31,
Con V1.1,
Townshi _ of C1ar'-
,
SubrnisSion No. "A"
148-68-2
The Committee rLvisit_d i --he °)ro_p-rt r on Wednesda, ,
December 4, 1968 and were of the opinion tht there appearec
to be nothing to change the attitude they previously adoc,ted.
The ch-_rade= of the area being estahlished, the
lot havinca been previous'y in existence; the
dwelling to b` erected ;could constitute an "infilliric
op er:.tinn" on a "lot of record."
The Secretary was instructed to request the agent,
Mr. Kurt Kern to complete the application by submitting a Plan of
Survcy prepared by an Ontario nand Surveyortobe pr<�c,nte.d to
the Committee for their- fo. -a1 decision.
CLAS5IFIC_.T=ii AT port
-c•plicati }-`ile No. 152-68
�r. Kay Lycett B.:i. ,
Agent,
BarrisL-er - Solicitor,
Oro:.c, Ontario,
Audrev Milli n,
Ownere.,
,.Amy Sophia iilligan,
Jean Lorraine Hall,
iJ_::t:: ville, On':,-:rio,
for p;;,rt of Lot 7, Con.
11,
To..;.zshi of Clarke,
Submission Pdo. "B" 152-58-137
Ti is a_plic-tion oras brcugh[: for,aard for further discussion.
The Committee noted th-.:t this ap:�lic.t__on c.zs for a
completely ncvr sa =e_:.nc•< and did riot concern a "lo_ of record".
The Committee ,ierc concerned ov-ar the f: ct th=.t thev were,
U a degree, doi_g some elementary planning. It '.r:s felt that
the pgwer to control should mean more than a total prohibition
Page 2
becomber ^, 1963
against all activity. 7ant the applicant pro _ses is a reasonable
usa in the particular circumstances.
The Committee noted that this application was for a
single lot. Multi:_:.le applications which collectively would constitute
an unapthorized subdivision might t✓ -ll be viewed in a different
light..
The size of the lot in this case is matt�r for some F
thought, A larger area than 15,000 square feet is zood_ly avail-
able to the applic%nt.
As a matter of record. this Qnerty was visited on
December 4, 1963.
Th- Committee are pr=Dared to consider the _utter of
this specific_ severance further u_:,on =h=_ submission of a Flan
Of Survey rseDared by an Oni:r_rio Lana Surveyor of th_ l_:nd
sought i:o b v sovered.
CLi'SS FT'_..TION rr Jrr
-Ynlicati_on File No. 155-63 Edwin _'osher Owner,
R. 1. ,s/1, urt- ;L_ -;c,, Cot -:i.o,
for n rt o` Lo: 47 c0q, 11,
`_o,n::;'.i_;; of Clc:,_�:_i
S u'�m i r; s i .-,, . IIo , ' � "✓ s r -4 � -� � 9
The Committee visited the property on Deco. bcr :, 1963
and noted the followinC facts:
(1) The subject lr.nd abuts a well. {r:,vell==d and paved
goad;
(2) The major porti_;n of
t:-, , land r_ons _.. t,: of a ccd---,r
hush c::i.th a running stream;
(3) The western _portion is of a higher elevation of
the creek and is a_nroximately of the same qltvation
as tin:, abutting road;
Lcvc-;.i_n -t-:d t.h J_ ha had -.revionsi , declared that
he had a conflicting interest -nd the refor_'. wiLhdrnw from the.
discussion.
Mr. Schoe.nmAker and Nr. Osborne furthor noted that the
=p lic.nt alleTed that this m=atter pre -dated contra! in the
area and 1n effect was a slLu--tion `.;herein a bonafide farmer sold.
.his farm and retain=d a lot.
lllov_d by K. Schocnm_:kA and sacan2ed by E.F.R. Osborne LhL L
the Sec=Lar2 be instructed to write Mr, roster and ask nim to
fila thn following material:
(1) Proof cf doc,_im' ntnry evidonce pre-dUlnr_., the
_ subdivision control by -1`w;
t
(2) A sworn affidavit to show that he previously was
a bona fide farmer who reserved one lot .-hcn he
sole his farm; Carried.
CLASSIFICATION °E"
Applicotion File No. 156-68 W. Kay Lycett B.A., Agent
Barrister r& Solicitor,
Orono, Ontario,
Eric Boettcher Propos^d Furchva rs
Marie.. Boettcher,
for pert of Lot 2Con 1V,
T:)wnshi'_ of Clarh
Submission No. "A" 156-68-1
The Committee vi-itod'th,_ orcperty_ on Wednesday, _ 1968.
the lot o.=aed by the appl aeant i oily 100' vie ,
_ , is butted
an th- immcci,te south sid, 4y
- nb c ....
Page 3
December 4, 1968
area" adjacent to the lot on the south thereby giving the
lot a much larger area, in fact, than it appears to have from
the title deed.
The creation of this lot is definitely an "infilling"
operation as there are several houses further south of the
applicant's land.
A perusal of the site indicates this is a highly desirable
first class residential area.
To preserve the character of the area, it is a condition
of this decision that any house to be constructed must conform
to the existing building line as established by abutting owners.
The Secretary was instructed to send a copy of this
decision to the Building Inspector and request him to advise
the Committee if this condition is not met.
Application granted .on motion by K. Schoenmaker, seconded
by E.F.R. Osborne. Carried.
CLASSIFICATION "J"
Application File No. 158-68
R.A. Wallace Esq., Agent,
Barrister & Solicitor,
Box 471,
112 Simcoe St. N.,
Oshawa, Ontario,
Merrill Leonard Ross, Owner,
Way Street,
Brooklin,
for part of Lot 15, Con. Vll,
Township of Clarke,
Submission No. "B" 158-68-140
The property of Mr. Merrill Ross was re -visited on Wednesday,
December 4, 1968 by the Committee. They recalled seeing the
property on a previous occasion. They also noted that at the
southern end of the property a former house was being extended
and the name "W.R. Spry" was displayed on a sign.
The Committee:.
(1) were of the opinion that there would be no
justification to sever these lands unless
it was granted on the basis that it was to
clarify a matter of title and, in effect, to
formally recognize a severance made, in fact,
by a public road;
(2) The issue in this decision, therefore, is narrowed
to one question which may be stated as follows:
"can the applicant produce evidence to show
that the existing laneway is in effect a legal
road giving access to lands to the west that
would normally have been served by a north -south
road which had not been opened due to the fact
this would have necessitated the construction of an
expensive bridge?
If the applicant can show that public funds were expended
on this road and it, therefore, became a public road the case
can be given further consideration.
The Secretary was requested to send a copy of this decision
to the applicant and his agent and this application was adjourned
awaiting the submission of further material.
CLASSIFICATION "M"
Secretary -Treasurer
F M
wfflp__%0�00_02 AW ON I ���i
+!rte