Innisfil council has denied a resident’s request to build a boathouse on the shores of Lake Simcoe, likely setting up a date with the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT).
In a recorded vote, all nine members of council opposed the staff-recommended motion that would have granted amendments to the Community Planning Permit System (CPPS) “Our Shore” bylaw and issued a Class 1 permit, allowing the owner of 970 Shoreview Dr. to build a nearly 5,000-square-foot boathouse.
“That’s a big bunkie,” an exasperated Coun. Linda Zanella said.
The councillor admitted she was having trouble understanding why the proponent needed a boathouse that size. After all, it was more than three times larger than the house she currently lives in.
The application saw six variances to the CPPS were requested, including:
- Increased maximum length of an in-water boathouse from 10 metres to 14.38 m
- Increased maximum cumulative dock area from 50 square metres to 96.5 sq. m
- Increased maximum lot coverage of all detached accessory structures on the lot (collectively) from 160 sq. m to 458 sq. m
- Increased maximum height of an in-water boathouse from 5.4 m to 9.5 m
- Increased maximum width of an in-water boathouse from 13.5 m to 17.37 m
- Increased maximum projection of an in-water boathouse from 15 m to 18.48 m
The variances were necessary to add a boathouse to the property, where a home is currently under construction. The structure would provide amenity space and facilitate boat storage, which, as noted in the staff report to council, would correct “challenging lake access” caused by the steep slope and existing vegetation along the shoreline.
“The waterfront portion of the subject property slopes drastically towards Lake Simcoe and is maintained by extensive vegetation in the form of tall trees, which assists in providing a visual and physical buffer between the shoreline and the proposed boathouse,” the staff report indicated. “The vegetative buffer also mitigates visual bulk and massing impacts resulting from the proposed increase in height, width, length, projection and cumulative dock area.”
The Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority (LSRCA) agreed with town staff in recommending the project move forward.
Coun. Alex Waters warned that Lake Simcoe would be “Muskoka on steroids” if council allowed this proposal to move forward and was “disappointed” that staff made the recommendation it did.
“I was on council when we passed the CPPS bylaw, and the reason we did this was to prevent this type of development on the waterfront … Here we are, five years later, and we’re still having the same discussions,” Waters said. “We have to put our foot down now.”
Deputy Mayor Kenneth Fowler called it a “flex of epic proportions.”
“This is not working with the community, this is working to set the standard,” Fowler said.
Fowler and other councillors raised concerns about the building's third storey, an 824-square-foot amenity space. David Igleman of Design Plan Service, who spoke on behalf of the proponent, insisted the space — which he referred to as an attic rather than a third floor — would be for the property owners to enjoy the lake.
“There’s water and electrical being serviced into (the boathouse), and 800 square feet is not something you need for a couple of Adirondack chairs and a small area to put a couple of drinks or a barbecue,” Fowler said. “(They’ve) clearly got plans in the future.”
Six neighbours had supported the application, while three in opposition were represented at the Jan. 29 council meeting. Two spoke in open form, and one provided a delegation to councillors via a retained planner.
Even if there were seemingly more residents in favour, that didn’t sway council. If anything, it gave councillors more pause.
“If you have six neighbours who are in favour of this, these are six neighbours who want to see this type of boathouse on their own shoreline,” Waters said.
Precedent, arguably, already existed. In supporting its recommendation, staff compared the proposal at 970 Shoreview Dr. to 1610 Ladywood Way. The property on Ladywood also required several amendments to be approved before building permits could be issued. It ended up being longer, with a bigger dock area and smaller interior yard setback on the eastern side than what was being requested for 970 Shoreview.
Coun. Robert Saunders didn’t like the comparison and felt council needed to take action to stop it.
“We were a new council when Ladywood came up and in hindsight, for myself, I had done that Ladywood now, I wouldn’t have approved it,” Saunders said. “The lake is a privilege for everybody; it just seems that some waterfront properties think that they should be able to build whatever they want.”
He also pushed Igleman on the location of the boathouse, saying it would block the view from both neighbouring docks. Igleman reminded the councillor there is no legislative right of view in any of the pertinent planning documents, at any level of government. Waters, too, took issue with the location of the boathouse, which was off-centre and closer to one neighbour than the other.
“The only reason I can see that it’s not in the middle is that the owner doesn’t want to see his own boathouse, but he’s okay with his neighbours having to view it,” Waters said.
Councillors Kevin Eisses and Grace Constantine differed from their colleagues in the rationale behind their opposition.
Eisses was going to vote against the proposal not to tell a property owner what to do with their land but rather to keep with the spirit of the CPPS.
“The properties that are on this side of the lake are fancy; I hope they put the fanciest boathouse they can there,” Eisses said. “It’s good for the economy, it’s good for Innisfil.”
But it should only be as fancy as the bylaw allows.
“The lake belongs to the town, and if this project affects somebody else’s view, if it sticks out into the lake, if it masses too much … I don’t think that’s what Innisfil wants,” he said. “This bylaw that we’re using to keep these projects from getting too big, I think that’s where it has a place.”
Constantine agreed, saying this proposal caused her concern for the surrounding environment.
Mayor Lynn Dollin also found the size of the boathouse problematic. But that wasn’t the only thing she feared would be too large, pending the direction of council.
She asked the two delegates of the evening, Igleman and Leo Longo, who spoke on behalf of neighbours in opposition to the proposal, what their expectations were of the town, should the amendments be denied. As town staff had recommended approval, council would need to secure the services of an external planning expert to defend its position.
Igleman consistently tried to avoid hypotheticals throughout his presentation and in the answers to questions posed by council. So when asked if he expected the town to defend its position, he was non-committal. However, he did remind the mayor staff recommended approval.
Longo said he hoped the town would defend the CPPS bylaw as a whole if the matter went before the OLT, but even if it didn’t, he said his clients would be seeking party status to fight approval.
Dollin was happy to vote down the recommendation at council and leave the application’s fate to the OLT.
“If we vote against this tonight, considering that our staff and the LSRCA are recommending in favour of it, I would not be surprised at all if it went right to the ... tribunal,” Dollin said. “I’m happy to turn this down with the expectation that we do not spend tens of thousands of dollars hiring lawyers and hiring outside staff to defend the position.”
Town lawyer Lee Parkin assured council a decision to defend any appeal at the OLT was not made via the resolution being debated at the Jan. 29 meeting and would instead be brought back to council with a recommendation at a later date.