HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-112-06
REPORT 1/2
Cl~mglOn
REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting:
COUNCIL
Report #:
PSD-112-06
File #: PLN 31.5.2
KCS6LU7ION 1t: C- Cj3G-06
By-law #:
Date:
Monday, October 16, 2006
Subject:
HANCOCK NEIGHBOURHOOD DESIGN PLAN
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PSD-112-06 be received;
2. THAT staff report back on the options for the review of the Hancock Neighbourhood
Design Plan; and
3. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of
Council's decision.
S,bm~ed byo ~
David J. Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.
Director, Planning Services
S,bm;'ed byo 4#fI/Mfl
A.S. Cannella, CET.
Director of Engineering
Reviewed by:
()~~
Franklin Wu
Chief Administrative Officer
11 October 2006
CPIDJC/ASC/df
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE. ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830
REPORT NO.: PSD-112-06
PAGE 2
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 In July the Planning Services Department received a petition with respect to
development in the Hancock Neighbourhood. The petition and covering letter request
protection for the Provincially Significant Black Farewell Wetland Complex within the
Hancock Neighbourhood and essentially requested the Neighbourhood Design Plan be
revised to address the Black Farewell Provincially Significant Wetland Complex.
1.2 The Hancock Neighbourhood planning area is located in Part Lots 27 and 28,
Concession 3, former Township of Darlington. The neighbourhood is generally
bounded by Courtice Road to the west, north of the Black Creek - Highway NO.2 to the
south, Hancock Road to the east, and the Courtice Urban area boundary to the north
(Attachment 1).
1.3 In September 1998, the Neighbourhood Design Plan for the Hancock Neighbourhood
was approved. The design plan was consistent with the land use designations and
policies of the Clarington Official Plan and formed the basis for approval of two
proposed plans of subdivision 18T-92014 and 18T-94027.
1.4 The referenced subdivisions were supported by Council, approved by the Region and
subsequently appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. The OMB heard the appeal and
issued its decision on July 28, 1999 to approve both proposals subject to conditions.
1.5 In August of 1999 the Ministry of Natural Resources released updated mapping for the
Black - Farewell Wetland Complex. The revised mapping incorporated a number of
wetlands that were not examined in the original 1987 evaluation. The wetland complex
is comprised of mostly mixed coniferous swamps. It functions as a significant discharge
area feeding cold water to the Black and Farewell Creeks. The August 1999 revisions
to the Black-Farewell Provincially Significantly Wetland Complex include lands identified
for residential development in the approved Hancock Neighbourhood Design Plan
(Attachment 1).
1.6 In 2004 an application for proposed plan of subdivision was submitted for the lands
immediately east and south of 18T-92014. Application S-C-2004-002, proposes
approximately 35 residential units consistent with the Hancock Neighbourhood Design
Plan, as well as a portion of the park and public school blocks for the neighbourhood. A
pocket of the PSW straddles the park and school block. This development has been
subject of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) which has recommended retaining the
PSW and buffer in a natural state.
2.0 STAFF COMMENTS
2.1 The Provincial Policy Statement 2005 states that development and site alteration shall
not be permitted in significant wetlands. The limits of the wetland complex as identified
by MNR have been overlaid on the Hancock NDP as contained in Attachment 1. The
limits of the wetland has various pockets within the Hancock neighbourhood some of
which have a significant impact on road and lotting patterns of the approved plan,
especially west and north of the limits of 18T-92014.
REPORT NO.: PSD-112-06
PAGE 3
2.2 Staff has continued to work with the owners of the draft approved plan of subdivision
18T-92014 as they fulfil conditions of draft approval and prepare engineering
submissions. The limits of this subdivision fall outside of the wetland complex identified
by MNR. However, as staff have been reviewing the engineering for the development it
has become evident that a further review of the neighbourhood design plan is
appropriate given potential future road and servicing impacts on the wetland.
2.3 In consideration of the revised limits of the Black-Farewell Provincially Significantly
Wetland Complex; the request by area residents for a review of the neighbourhood
boundaries; and the recent changes to the Provincial Policy Statement staff believes it
is appropriate to consider a review of the approved Neighbourhood Design Plan. The
review may lead to partially withdrawing approval of the Neighbourhood Design Plan, to
lands located generally north and west of the limits of 18T-92014. These are lands
most affected by the limits of the PSW.
2.4 A review of the Hancock Neighbourhood Design Plan will allow for servicing and
transportation options to be reviewed and considered in light of the provincially
significant wetland boundaries and the necessary appropriate buffers thereto. The
review of the Neighbourhood Design Plan will not impact the ability of the Owner to
register draft approved plan of subdivision 18T-92014 based on the engineering
submission that is currently being reviewed.
2.5 Review of the Hancock Neighbourhood Design Plan will have staff and budget
implications as environmental consultant will be required to assist staff in determining
appropriate buffers and uses, and will be considered by the Planning Department in
preparing a work plan for the new Council.
3.0 CONCLUSION
3.1 It is recommended that staff report on the options for a review of the Hancock
Neighbourhood Design Plan.
Attachments:
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
- Hancock Neighbourhood Design Plan
- Request from Residents of Hancock Neighbourhood To Council
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision:
Headgate Group
1361189 Ontario Limited and Claret Investments Limited
WDM Consultants
George Khouri
Libby Racansky
R. Pearce
G. Kosanewski
Pamela Callus
R. Perron
18T-94027
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_J
-1
I
I
I
I
I~
Ill:
UJ "
Ig
I~
18
I
I
_J
-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
)
/'
/'
Attachment 1
To Report PSD-1!2-0~
18T-92014
I
I
I
I
I
SC 2004-lJ03
."
I
~l
ll:
~I
81
ul
~
I
I
I
L__
r--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
~ ~~~{PSW) ~ EXISTlNGRESlOENTIAl
0.78 ha [!] 24 m SINGLES [::J INALL RESlDENTlAL
H~G'UIAI _ ~ 15mSlNGLES .. ~~=:ooo
- - - _ 17r"AY M -
...- _ _ 0.2 [!] 137mSlNGLES II1II GREENSPACE
......... ---
/' -.. 12mSINGLES __ __ .. PARKS
( HANCOCK NEIGHBOURHOOD _ 9mSEM>DETACHED ___ - _ SCHOOL
DESIGN PLAN _ MEIliUMIlENSITY --- f:lillIl CHURCH
Attachment 2
!()~eport PSD-112-06
Request from Residents of Hancock Neighbourhood To Council
~lE~~cri"i:l<i\~!-;;'-Ci\ I"
~-;/ l.b...i.l..-:. \.i Ii 'I ~ I
<::..;:;::;;U .
,20StL 'I. 0 2006 '
June
During the last Town Hall Meeting, Mr. Crome, Mr. CandIa and some Councillors tha .lftffifuIPALn 0' rLAR 1',G"or,
present at this event agreed that the Draft for the Hancock Neigbourhood Plan coul 'll'eplANNIN~ OEPART~E~j;
looked at since some original plans cannot be applied anymore. Redefining of this
needed.
Residents of this Neighbourhood decided last year that we will wait to present our request to
Council until the new EIS for Headgate will be completed. But, developer is planning physical
changes to this neighbourhood that will affect our properties. Therefore we feel that there are far
more important Conditions of the Draft Plan Approval that he should fulfill prior to these
changes. That is why we are requesting Council to now please allow Planning and Works
Departments to revise this neighbourhood Plan. This neighbourhood Plan should be
acceptable and fair to all stakeholders.
Lands of the residents living in the current 240, out of the total planned 975 units still form a
majority of this neighboorhood. These lands should be taken into consideration before any
physical changes will be done.
Areas that should be looked at are:
The positioning of roads, location of SWM facility, school, park and commercial site;
provincially significant wedands and streams shonld be protected, not deleted or drained
since we know that the world is suffering from unavailability of water resources.
The plan should form a sustainable development Plan that would rest on four guiding principles:
Environmental stewardship
Economic opportunity
Social conscience and
Fiscal responsibility.
Planning and Works Departments could, with consultation of all landowners and developers,
prepare a Plan that would create a neighbourhood that would be livable, doable, easy to maintain.
The Plan that recognizes that successful sustainability in a community must be supported and led
by the community. Modified urban design with higher-efficiency mechanical and lighting
equipment that would reduce energy consumption and decrease C02, reduce water consumption,
address light pollution, support passive energy like solar, gray water recycling, etc, could be
planned for.
In partnership with provincial government, Hydro One, etc. we could apply for grant to fund
this improved neighbourhood plan. Not only people who would live, work and play here would
benefit, but also our Municipality as a whole. Subdivisions that are using updated housing
techniques are in great demand.
Councillors, as our representatives, should be the driving force and decision-makers of plans
creating sustainable, energy-saving and livable neighbourhoods, not the developers.
I am handing in the petition that we had started last year. I am respectfully requesting Council to
please grant us our request.