The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1972-11-13 Report No. 8Nov 16 1972 xremL S Municipal Planning Consultants CO. LTD. Mr. Horace R. Best, Secretary, Township of Clarke Planning Board, P. 0. Box 219, Orono, Ontario. Dear Mr, Best: 400 MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD. TORONTO • CANADA• (416) 486-]]77 November 136 1972. Re: Rezoning Applications, Township of Clarke, Our Pile:' PN 3530. RECEIV ED NOV 15 1972 Cle&'s Denartment TGwnsl6p 0t Clarke GoN50L7APJi57 R EPo a7 W-2 8 Please find enclosed twelve (12) copies of Consultants' Report Number 8 containing our comments on the Chapman rezoning application, in accordance with the request in your letter dated October 31, 1972. As requested in paragraph three of your letter, I have reviewed the comments made by Mr. Brian Carney to the Ontario Municipal Board and would suggest the following course of action. 1. By-law, Number 1137 As I understand it, this application for a rezoning was to allow the construction of an additional residence in connection with a market garden operation. It should be pointed out to the Ontario Municipal Board that this was the case. It may also strengthen the case of the applicant to indicate to whom the application had been circulated and to forward copies of their replies. A suggested draft of such a letter is enclosed. 2. By-law Number 1738 Again, I think the necessary course of action is to write to the Secretary of the Ontario Municipal Board and point out that this is in accordance with the Draft Official Plan and that no objections were received from the agencies to whom it was circulated. This should be verified by forwarding copies of the replies. A suggested draft letter is enclosed. /......2 TOWN PLANNERS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS Municipal Planning Consultants 2.. It should be noted in both cases that Mr. Carney is not recommending these applications, and it cannot be foreseen how much weight his recommendation will carry. However, we feel that the course of action recommended above will give the best chance of obtaining approval. If we can be of further assistance, please contact us. Yours truly, MUNICIPAL PLANNING CONSULTANTS CO. LTD, JELF/kt John'E. L. Farrow, M.T.P.I.C. Enc. (Draft Concerning By-law Number 1737) Mr. K. C. Andrews, Secretary, The Ontario Municipal Board, 123 Edward Street, Toronto, Ontario, Dear Sir: Re: Restricted Area By-law Number 1737, Township of'Clarke. The Township of Clarke recently received copies of a memo dated October 3rd directed to you from Mr. B. Carney of the Ministry of Treasury, Economics and Intergovernmental Affairs. Council is concerned because we feel that this memo contains erroneous information. The memo indicated that By-law 1737 is an amendment to the Zoning By-law to allow non-agricultural uses in the rural area. In fact, the By-law is being amended to allow the construction of a second single-family dwelling house in a market garden which is to be occupied by a person directly involved in market garden operations. The use of the land is intensive and involves greenhouses which require careful supervision for long periods. The necessity of having two permanent residents on the site to work the land and supervise the greenhouses has been demonstrated tothesatisfaction of Council. The Council is of the opinion that this is an appropriaterural use and does not conflict witin itis policy ror rural areas as expressed in the Draft Official Plan. have been circulated: (list of agencies to whom gppu a ion has been circulated should be inserted). ! No objections were rece��ilc6d from these agencies and copies of their comments are enclosed for your information. We hope that the above information clarifies the situation with respect to this Zoning By-law amendment and may allow it to proceed to approval. Yours truly, Clerk, Township of Clarke. (Note: This letter should be read carefully before being signed to ensure that it reflects accurately the situation and the views of Council.) (Draft Concerning By-law Number 1738) Mr. K. C. Andrews, Secretary, The Ontario Municipal Board, 123 Edward Street, Toronto, Ontario. Dear Sir: Re: Restricted Area By-law Number 1738, . Township °of'Ciarke:' The Township of Clarke received copies of a memo dated October,3rd directed to you from Mr. B. Carney of the Ministry of Treasury, Economics and Intergovernmental Affairs. The information in this memo with respect to the policies in the draft Official Plan are out of date and we are writing to advise you of the present position. We understand that Mr. Carney must have one of the earlier drafts of the Official Plan as the site of this Zoning By-law amendment is within an area designated for commercial development in later drafts. The Council investigated all aspects of this application carefully and circulated it to the following agencies for comment: (list agencies to whom the application was circulated here). Copies of the replies are enclosed for your information. No objections were received. Council's policy is to consolidate future highway commercial development in a limited number of locations. This site is one of the locations in the draft Official Plan and Council is satisfied in absence of objections that this amendment to the Zoning By-law is in the interests of good planning. Yours truly, Clerk, Township of Clarke. (Note: This letter should be read carefully before being signed to ensure that it reflects accurately the situation and the views of Council.) N O V 16 1972 ITLh9 2 MUNICIPAL PLANNING CONSULTANTS CO. LTD. November 10, 19T2. 400 Mount Pleasant Road, Toronto 295. PN: 3530 CLARKE PLANNING HOARD Consultants Report No.-8 1. APPLICATION FOR REZONING CHAPMAN This application is for the rezoning of approximately 42 acres to permit use for mobile homes. 2. GENERAL SITUATION The site is situated adjacent to the junction between Highway 115 and Highway 35. A Township road provides the northern boundary to the site. 3. SITE FEATURES The area is steeply rolling and the site is situated close to the top of a hill overlooking a small valley. The soil in this area is light grey -brown sand and yellow sand over grey coarse calcareous sand and stony sand. Drainage in the area is generally severe and this type of soil is liable to wind and galley erosion(l). 4. THE DRAFT OFFICIAL PLAN POLICIES The site is designated rural in the draft Official Plan and this designation does not permit Mobile Home Parks. 5. ZONING The site is zoned Agricultural, which does not permit Mobile Home Parks. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (1) Source: Report No. 9 of the Ontario Soil Survey. (1) 6. DISCUSSION To permit this development to proceed, it will be necessary to change both the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law. It is assumed that this proposal involves mobile homes for year- round occupancy. A mobile home is a residence, and a mobile home park is a resi- dential use. A site for mobile homes must, therefore, be assessed in a similar way to a residential subdivision as the needs of the occupants and the effect on the Township will be very similar. Except for the attractive nature of the site and the good drain- age, we do not feel this site has much to recommend it for mobile homes. Services will have to be in the form of wells and septic tanks. The sandy nature of the soil is not likely to cause any immediate problem with septic tanks. However, it must be remembered that this sandy ridge is the catchment area for water which supplies most of the wells in the Township, and the extent to which septic tanks can be located in this area before contamination will occur is not pos- sible to predict. The sandy nature of the soil means that site development would need to be carefully planned to avoid erosion. The site is well away from any existing community facilities. It is not advisable from a planning point of view to concentrate a group of permanent residents away from existing communities. Assessment on mobile homes is low; but the costs to the Township of providing services aresimilar to the costs for other residents. There is a strong possibility that the Province would be con- cerned about mobile home development in this location, and though it is difficult to anticipate Provincial position on some of these matters, I do not feel that they would approve of it. Their com- ments to the Ontario Municipal Board would be made accordingly. 7. We would not recommend the establishment of a mobile home in this location as there are a number of planning problems and a prob- able conflict with Provincial policy. (2) We suggest that mobile home sites should generally be located close to, but screened from, existing residential communities. Before a rezoning of a mobile home park is finally approved, the developer should be required to submit a plan showing the layout he proposes. JELF/lea Respectfully submitted, PLANNING(�ONPULTANTS CO. LTD. John E. L. Farrow, \ i M.T.P.I.C. (3)