Committee of Adjustment Minutes

Meeting #:

Date:

Thursday, July 18, 2024

Time:

6:00 P.m. - 8:00 P.m.

Location:

Council Chambers

7 Broadway Street West

Paris, ON

Present:

• Brown, 
• Emmott, 
• Hamilton, 
• Smith, 
• and Vamos 

Regrets:

• Schmitt 
• and Panag 

Alternative formats and communication supports are available upon request. For more information, please contact the County of Brant Accessibility and Inclusion Coordinator at 519-442-7268 or by email

---

1.

Attendance

Staff Attendance: Dan Namisniak, Diana Morris, Sarah Dyment-Smith 

2.

Approval of Agenda

• Moved by Member Emmott
  Seconded by Member Vamos

  Moved by myself and seconded by Member Vamos that the agenda for the County of Brant Committee of Adjustment meeting of July 18, 2024, be approved. 

  Carried Unanimously

3.

Declaration of Pecuniary Interests

No conflict declared. 

4.

Adoption of Minutes from Previous Meetings

• Moved by Member Hamilton
  Seconded by Member Smith

  That the minutes of the June 20, 2024 meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be approved, as printed.

  Carried Unanimously

5.

Public Hearings

5.1

A9-24-HH-DeLeye-29 Broadview Dr

Staff Presentation 

• D. Morris, Senior Planner presented minor variance application A9-24-HH-29 Broadview Dr for approval. She reviewed the property location, the current land designation of Urban Residential and zoning classification of Suburban Residential.
• She outlined the proposal seek relief from Zoning By-law 61-16, Section 4, Table 4.4.1 to permit:
  • An increase in lot coverage of 178.38sqm, whereas 140sqm is required.
  • A reduced rear yard and interior side yard setback of 1.2m, whereas 1.5m is required
  • An increase in maximum height of 5.4m, whereas 5m is required
• Staff recommended approval of A9-24-HH as outlined in the report. 
• Member Hamilton identified four variance requests. 
• D. Morris notes staff determined side and rear yard setbacks are considered minor given the request is .3m reduction. Each variance was considered minor and reviewed independently. The increased lot coverage does not impact adjacent land uses. There is an agricultural use on one side. 
• Member  Emmott questions if there is enough room to add a double entrance that does not encroach on the tile bed. 
• D. Morris responds 3 m property boundary to septic bed. 
• Member Emmott questions if 3m is sufficient for adding a driveway. 
• D. Morris the site plan does show garage and vehicle access and the owner wants to use for personal storage. The applicant will need to prove that they have access to the structure. 
• Member Vamos notes that the adjacent land use may change in the future. 
• D. Morris indicates the increased setback does not anticipate to impact future land uses. Location of the structure is supportable given the lot size. 
• D. Morris reiterates the setback increase is considered minor given the .3 m reduction. 
• Member Brown requests clarification on the distance from the septic. 
• D. Morris notes 3 m distance from the septic. 

Agent/Applicant Presentation

• Michael DeLeye, Applicant 
• Member Smith requests the rationale for the location and the need for the variance. 
• Applicant responds the location maximizes the usability of the backyard. 
• Member Hamilton notes mature trees on the lot and seeks clarification if the trees are on the property. 
• Applicant confirms the trees are located on the property and will be removed during the construction. 
• Member Hamilton comments forestry did not provide feedback.
• D. Morris responds the County of Brant does not have an individual tree By-Law. 
• Member Hamilton requests staff to respond to the change in the County's position. 
• D. Namisniak confirms the tree approach has shifted. It was determined the tree inventory was onerous for applicants. The intent in the past was for the right reasons however the County does not have a mechanism in place to monitor that process. 
• Member Vamos confirms existing shed is remaining and questions if there was consideration to reducing the size of the structure. 
• Applicant would like to avoid reducing the size. 
• Member Hamilton seeks confirmation that the structure will be used for storage. 
• Applicant notes personal storage, vehicles, recreational vehicles, seasonal storage, etc. 
• Member Hamilton notes Development Engineering posed a question regarding access to the structure. 
• Applicant indicates the grass would provide access or the possibility to extend the driveway in the future. 
• Member Emmott poses the question regarding access and the location of the tile bed. 
• Applicant responds the plan is not to scale. The tile bed will be moved if required. 
• Member Brown seeks clarification on the chosen location . 
• Applicant confirms it was a consideration however; it would have been too close to the septic. 
• Member Smith questions staff if septic setback is identified in the zoning by-law. 
• D. Morris confirms it is not identified. 
• No further questions. 

• Moved by Member Hamilton
  Seconded by Member Smith

  
  THAT Application for Minor Variance A9-24-HH from Michael and Kayla DeLeye, owner(s) of lands legally described as PLAN 1686 LOT 24, municipally known as 29 Broadview Drive,Geographic Township of Burford, County of Brant, BE APPROVED subject to the attached conditions. The applicants are proposing to construct a 167.23 m² (1800.05 ft²) for an accessory structure that will be used for personal storage and storage of vehicles. The applicants are requesting relief from Zoning By-Law 61-16, Section 4, Table 4.4.1 – for variances to the rear yard and interior side yard setback and maximum accessory structure lot coverage. The applicant is also requesting relief for the purpose of increased structure height.

  The following summarizes all variances being sought by the applicant:

  • To permit a reduced rear yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas 1.5 metres is required.
  • To permit a reduced interior yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas 1.5 metres is
    required.
  • To permit an increased maximum height of 5.4 metres, whereas 5 metres is required.
  • To permit an increase in the maximum total lot coverage of 178.38 sq.m, whereas 140 metres is required.

  and that the reason(s) for approval are as follows:

  • The relief requested is considered minor in nature and is desirable for the appropriate
    development and use of the subject lands;
  • The proposed variance is in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and
    Zoning By-Law 61-16;
  • The proposed variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act.
  Carried

5.2

B5-24-DN-Bishopsgate & Colborne St W-Shadeview

Staff Presentation 

• D. Namisniak, Acting Director of Development Planning presented consent application B5-24-DN for approval. He reviewed the property location, the current land use designation of Agriculture and Employment and Zoning Classification of Agriculture (A-197) and Light Industrial (M2). 
• He outlined the proposal to facilitate creation of one (1) new industrial lot within the Light Industrial (M2) zone having a frontage of 106 metres, depth of 240 metres and area of 1 hectare (2.65 acres). The retained lands will maintain approximately 37.6 hectares (92 acres).

• The lot creation will facilitate additional development opportunity for employment land uses, compatible with the context of the surrounding area. The application is required to facilitate future development of the land within the Employment designation, through a  subsequent Site Plan Control application. Staff recommends approval of B5-24-DN for the reasons outlined in the report. 

• Member Hamilton seeks clarification of the .3m reserve along the frontage request by Development Engineering and is not displayed on the plan. 
• D. Namisniak responds it will be part of the detailed design and site plan application. 
• Member Hamilton notes the owners should be identified as a contributor to the Bishopsgate Municipal Drain. 
• D. Namisniak indicates future landowners will part of that process. The process is ongoing. 
• Member Brown asks staff if a number of employees is required to meet employment use. 
• D. Namisniak lands are currently designated to permit light industrial uses. If the proposal included land use changes then it may be considered to meet employment density targets. Not required for this application. 

Agent/Applicant Presentation

• Bob Phillips, JH Cohoon Engineering, Agent 
• Agent notes the potential purchaser is looking to relocate his business to the County of Brant. 
• Agent corrects the size of the parcel is 2.65 hectares. 
• Agent is supportive of staff report and they are actively working with the County regarding the drain aspect of this application. 

• Moved by Member Emmott
  Seconded by Member Smith

  THAT Consent Application B5-24-DN from JHC Engineering Agent, on behalf of Applicant UTOVA Enterprises Inc on behalf of 1000399788 Ontario Ltd c/o K. Spierenburg Owner of BRANTFORD CONCESSION 5 PART LOTS 1 AND 2, County of Brant, in the geographic former township of Brantford, located at 1318 Colborne Street West proposing the creation of one (1) new industrial lot within the Light Industrial (M2) zone having a frontage of 106 metres, depth of 240 metres and area of  2.65 hectares, BE APPROVED, subject to the attached conditions.

  and that the reason(s) for the approval of Consent Application B5-24-DN are as follows:

  • The lot creation will facilitate additional development opportunity for employment land uses, compatible with the context of the surrounding area. 
  • The application is consistent with the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and consistent with the policies of Provincial Policy Statement.
  • The application is in conformity/ compliance with the general intent of the policies of the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law.
  Carried Unanimously

5.3

B26-23-SL & A11-24-KD-Henderson-369 Scenic Drive

Staff Presentation 

• D. Namisniak, Acting Director of Development Planning presented consent application B26-23-SL & A11-24-KD-369 Scenic Dr for approval. 
• He reviewed the property location, the land use designation of Rural Residential and Natural Heritage, and the zoning classification of Rural Residential-62 and Natural Heritage-15. 
• He outlined the consent proposal to facilitate a severance for the creation of one (1) new residential building lot within Rural Residential (RR) zone having a frontage along Scenic Drive 35 metres and area of approximately 0.67 ha (1.65 acres).
• The minor variance application proposes to permit a reduced minimum lot frontage of 35 metres, where a minimum of 40 metres is required in the Rural Residential (RR) zone to facilitate related Consent Application B26-23-SL.
•  The studies and reports submitted are outlined in addition to the key conditions of consent. 
• Staff recommended approval for the reasons outlined in the report. 
• Member Emmott notes the irregular border of the east side of the proposed lot. 
• D. Namisniak responds the findings of Environmental Impact Study identified development restrictions. The recommendation prioritizes the environmental aspects of the lot and add a buffer from development. 
• Member Hamilton comments the development is proposed at the back of the property. 
• D. Namisniak responds the proposed plans indicate development at the back. The zoning boundaries, the Environmental Impact Study were considered in the the shape of the proposed lot and permitted the laneway to the rear. 

Agent Presentation 

• Douglas Stewart, Arcadis
• The key points of consideration: 
  • Implements the Council Approved Zoning By-law Amendment
  • Conforms to the Approved County Official Plan (2011)
  • Parcel Fabric/Configuration is a result of implementing a 30-metre naturalized buffer to protect the natural heritage features
  • The proposed single-detached building and private servicing will be located at the rear of the proposed Severed Lot
  • Meets the minimum Lot Area of 4,000 sq. metres
  • A Minor Variance to permit a Minimum Lot Frontage of 35.0 metres was identified after the approved ZBA due to the irregular shape
• The minimum of 120 m sightline distance has been achieved by conveying part 6 of the reference plan to the County of Brant. There will be additional conveyance of part 5 as a condition. 
• A permit will be required to obtain access. 
• The applicant and agent find the conditions of approval acceptable. 
• Member Emmott requires clarification of the drawing on page 17 if the line represents the driveway. 
• Agent notes the location was determined in order to meet the 120 m sightline. Applicant will be required to obtain an entrance permit. The precise location will be determined at the time of the permit. 
• Member Smith comments the GRCA had no further comments. Please provide confirmation of their involvement. 
• Agent confirms GRCA involvement in the ZBA process and issues were responded to during that process. 
• Member Brown questions the location of the proposed house at the back of the property. 
• Agent notes the existing topography is not appropriate given the house, driveway and septic space requirements. The front of the property is not appropriate.  

• Moved by Member Hamilton
  Seconded by Member Vamos

  THAT Consent Application B26-23-SL from Arcadis c/o D. Stewart, Agent on behalf of C. Henderson, Applicant on behalf of M. Kaye & E. Hilson, Owners of land legally described as CONCESSION 4 PART LOT 14, municipally known as 369 Scenic Drive, Geographic Township of South Dumfries, County of Brant, proposing a severance for the creation of one (1) new residential building lot within Rural Residential (RR) zone having a frontage along Scenic Drive 35 metres and area of approximately 0.67 ha (1.65 acres), BE APPROVED, subject to the attached conditions.

   

  and that the reason(s) for the approval of Consent Application B26-23-SL are as follows:

  • The proposal prioritizes the protection and enhancement of the Natural Heritage System while facilitating compatible development of a permitted land use, in accordance with recommendations determined by the completion of the Environmental Impact Study (EIS).
  • The application is consistent with the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and consistent with the policies of Provincial Policy Statement.
  • The application is in conformity/ compliance with the general intent of the policies of the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law.
  Carried Unanimously
• Moved by Member Hamilton
  Seconded by Member Emmott

  THAT Minor Variance Application A11-24-KD from Arcadis c/o D. Stewart, Agent on behalf of C. Henderson, Applicant on behalf of M. Kaye & E. Hilson, Owners of land legally described as CONCESSION 4 PART LOT 14, municipally known as 369 Scenic Drive, Geographic Township of South Dumfries, County of Brant, requesting to permit a reduced minimum lot frontage of 35 metres, where a minimum of 40 metres is required in the Rural Residential (RR) zone to facilitate related Consent Application B26-23-SL, BE APPROVED.

  and that the reason(s) for the approval of Minor Variance Application A11-24-KD are as follows:

  • The relief requested is considered minor in nature and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the subject lands;
  • The proposed variance is in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law 61-16;
  • The proposed variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act.
  Carried Unanimously

5.4

A10-24-HH-Goslin-164 Hwy 53

Staff Presentation

• D. Morris, Senior Planner presented minor variance application A10-24-HH-164 Hwy 53 for approval. She reviewed the property location, land use designation of Rural Residential and Zoning Classification as Residential Hamlets and Villages. 
• The proposal is requesting relief from Zoning By-law 61-16, Section 4, Table 4.4.1 to permit an increase in lot coverage of 158sqm, whereas, 140sqm is permitted for accessory structures. 
• Staff recommended approval of A10-24-DM for the reasons attached in the report. 

Agent/Applicant Presentation

• Matt Goslin, Applicant
• Member Emmott poses question to the applicant regarding drainage of the property. 
• Applicant is applying for a new house and there are plans to build a dry well currently under approval with the County. 
• Member Hamilton seeks clarification if this accessory building is in addition to a garage. 
• Applicant confirms that it is additional and will be used for personal storage. 
• Member Hamilton notes a correction to staff in the report and aerial map.

• Moved by Member Smith
  Seconded by Member Emmott

  THAT Application for Minor Variance A10-24-HH from Matt Goslin, Owner of lands legally
  described as PLAN 53B PART PARK LOT 5 REGISTERED PLAN 2R6509 PART 6,
  municipally known as 164 Highway 53, Former Geographic Township of Burford is seeking relief from Section 4, Table 4.4.1 of the County of Brant Zoning By-Law 61-16 for an increase in lot coverage for an accessory structure. The applicant has proposed an increased lot coverage of 158 m² (1700.7 ft²), exceeding the permitted 140 m² (1500 ft²) for accessory structures. It is recommended that the application BE APPROVED.

  
  and that the reason(s) for approval are as follows:

  • The relief requested is considered minor in nature and is desirable for the appropriate
    development and use of the subject lands;
  • The proposed variance is in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and
    Zoning By-Law 61-16;
  •  The proposed variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act.
  Carried

5.5

A8-24-JA-Abi Rached -14 Cornwell Rd

Staff Presentation

• D. Morris, Senior Planner presented minor variance application A8-24-JA-14 Cornwell for approval. She reviewed the property location, land use designation of Agriculture and Zoning Classification as Agriculture. 
• The proposal is requesting relief from Zoning By-law 61-16, 4, Subsection 4.5b(x)(4)to permit a setback of 51.5m, whereas 40m is required from the primary dwelling unit to facilitate the construction of a proposed detached additional residential unit.  
• Staff is recommending approval of A8-24-JA for the reasons outlined in the report. 

Agent/Applicant Presentation 

• Miled Abi-Rached, Applicant
• Member Hamilton requests the size of the ARU. 
• Applicant responds the ARU will be 21' x 42' is the allowable size on the property given the garage and the existing residence. 
• Member Hamilton seeks servicing consideration for the ARU for both well and septic. 
• Applicant confirms the ARU will have a separate septic however; the well has not been determined at this time. 
• No further questions. 

• Moved by Member Hamilton
  Seconded by Member Smith

  THAT Application for Minor Variance A8-24-JA from Miled Abi-Rached and Dounia Zahra,
  Owners of lands legally described as RANGE 1 NHR PT LOT 7 RP 2R6501 PART 1,
  municipally known as 14 Cornwell Road, Geographic Township of Brantford, County of Brant,
  seeking relief from Zoning By-law 61-16, Section 4, Subsection 4.5 b(x)(4) to permit a
  setback of 51.5 metres (169 feet) whereas, 40 metres (131.23 feet) is required from the
  primary dwelling unit to facilitate the construction of a proposed detached additional
  residential unit, BE APPROVED.

  
  and that the reason(s) for approval are as follows:

  • The relief requested is considered minor in nature and is desirable for the appropriate
    development and use of the subject lands;
  • The proposed variance is in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and
    Zoning By-Law 61-16;
  • The proposed variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act.
  Carried Unanimously

6.

Next Meeting

The next meeting is scheduled to be September 19, 2024, and we will be a hybrid meeting starting at 6:00pm. 

7.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 7:12 PM to meet again on September 19, 2024 at 6 PM. 

• Moved by Member Emmott
  Seconded by Member Hamilton

  Moved by myself and seconded by Member Hamilton that the meeting of July 18, 2024 be adjourned. 

  Carried Unanimously