Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-113-08 Leaffliwavon REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, November 3, 2008 �e I ` �i 69,b 03- ©9 Report#: PSD-113-08 File #: LD004/2008 By-law #: I I Subject: REPORT FOR INFORMATION REGARDING RESOLUTION OF THE APPEAL OF LAND DIVISION APPLICATION LD004 12008 APPLICANT: ERHARDT WITZKE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-113-08 be received for information; and 2. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: 4DidJrome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Franklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer SA/CP/sh/df October 27, 2008 i CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 REPORT NO.: PSD-113-08 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: D.G. Biddle &Associates 1.2 Owner: Erhardt Witzke 1.3 Appellant: John Colville 1.4 Land Division Application: For consent to sever a vacant 10.67 ha parcel of land for further development within the urban area boundary of Bowmanville, retaining a 17.55 ha lot for agricultural purposes outside the Bowmanville Urban Area. 1.5 Site Area: 28.22 ha 1.6 Location: The subject lands are located west of Bowmanville, on the north side of Baseline Road and east of Maple Grove Road. The property is contained within Part Lots 17 and 18, Concession 1, in the former Township of Darlington (Attachment 1). 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 In December of 2007, the Municipality of Clarington was circulated by Regional Land Division, an application for consent to sever a parcel for future development. Durham Region is the approval authority on all land division applications and the Municipality of Clarington is a commenting agency. 2.2 A decision was made on January 14, 2008, by the Land Division Committee to approve the application, subject to conditions. A copy of the decision in its entirety is contained in Attachment 2. 2.3 A neighbouring property owner, Mr. Colville appealed the decision of the Land Division Committee to the Ontario Municipal Board and the Municipality of Clarington was subsequently notified of this appeal. A copy of Mr. Colville's letter of appeal is contained in Attachment 3. 3.0 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD 3.1 The Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) convened September 23, 2008, for the hearing. Presiding over the hearing was OMB member, M.C. Denhez. Municipal staff was subpoenaed to appear to provide the municipal position on the land division application, j and to support the expert planning evidence presented by Mr. Witzke's expert planner. 3.2 The Ontario Municipal Board heard all of the planning evidence, presented by the applicant's (Witzke) planning expert. It became apparent at that point in the hearing that an accommodation could be reached without the Chair, and Mr. Denhez suspended REPORT NO.: PSD-113-08 PAGE 3 the hearing and stepped away from the discussions. Following the discussion, Mr. Colville indicated, to the Board, his intent to WITHDRAW his appeal and thus the Board ordered the appeal be DISMISSED. The OMB issued their written decision on October 14, 2008 and it is contained in its entirety in Attachment 4. The retained lands are outside the Bowmanville Urban Area boundary and will not be available for development purposes, while the severed parcel is designated Urban Residential and will be subject to future applications for development. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 Staff recommends that Council receive the report for information. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Decision of Land Division Committee Attachment 3 - Appeal Letter Attachment 4 - OMB Decision List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Mr. and Mrs. Witzke Mr. John Colville ( Attachment , To mrrt m5g3oe � - — � \ � E* % ) t § C CL 40 w L: 0 ƒ o { � } _ ` } [ , | , $ � � CIL \ 2 ) , \ � \ \. §| \ \ \ q ` ` | ^�> \ `©: \ / \ } Fkod 3406T — \ ( Attachment 2 To Report PSD-113-08 MINUTES AND DECISIONS DURHAM LAND DIVISION COMMITTEE As per: The Planning Act, and in accordance with the Provincial Rules of Procedure CONSENT APPLICATION heard on: Monday, January 14, 2008 LD 004/2008 Submission B004/2008 Owner Witzke, Erhard Witzke, Henriette Agent D. G. Biddle &Assoc. Ltd_ Location Part lots 17 & 18, Conc. 1 Municipality Municipality of Clarington (former Darlington) Consent to sever a vacant 10.67ha agricultural parcel, retaining a vacant 17.55ha agricultural lot. Mr. E. Witzke, owner, Mr. Rob Larocque, agent, Mr. Kelvin Whalen, representing The Kaitlin Group Ltd_ Mr. James Cryderman, and Mr. John Colville, all 60m notified neighbours, were present. A written correspondence was received January 10, 2008 from Mr. Kelvin Whalen, Vice-President, Land Development, The Kaitlin Group Ltd. requesting a condition for front-ending agreement by-law be part of the subject application's. s.a pproval. Mr. R. Larocque advised the Committee that he approached the Municipality of Clarington and completed an Environmental Impact Study in preparation of the Land Division Application. He advised the Committee that the retained parcel is currently used for farming purposes. He also advised the Committee that the applicant is prepared to agree to The Kaitlin Group Ltd.'s front-ending costs. Mr. K. Whalen advised the Committee that The Kaitlin Group Ltd. has no objection to the planning principles of the application. He advised the Committee that they had developed the property to the east and sized it for the potential to allow for this severance by oversizing the sewers etc. Mr. J. Cryderman advised the Committee that he was not in opposition but wanted to point out the location of the creek and woodlots and expressed his concern that he would not like to see these natural features destroyed. 21 atiEG 39Vd ----- -- - Mr. J. Colville advised the Committee that he does not want to see the hill and drumlin be altered. He advised the Committee that it is the only natural berm within 1 mile of the lake in Durham Region. As well he expressed his concern for neighbouring wells, stating that his father lost his well due to the development to the south and east of these lands. Mr. R. Larocque explained that an Environmental Assessment Study was done reflecting the projected line for severance. He also advised that a small shaving of the hill would be inevitable. The Committee noted the signs were not posted at a visible location and were difficult to view. The Committee noted Municipality of Clarington's comments about entering into an agreement before development of the land. The Committee had for information reports received from the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning, Health and Works Department- the Municipality of Clarington and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. Agency comments were handed to Mr. R. Larocque. DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE APPLICANT/OWNERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR FULFILLING ALL CONDITIONS. MOVED: J.-M. Kormanicki SECONDED_ J. Hurst That application LD 004/2008 be approved as applied for, subject to: 1/ That the applicant satisfy the requirement of the Municipality of Clarington, financial and otherwise. 2/ That the applicant submit two copies of a registered reference plan on the subject parcel. 3/ That the consent be subject to the following time periods: Last Date for fulfilling Conditions is Friday, January 23, 2009, Expiry Date of Application LD 004/2008 is Monday, February 23, 2009. CLEARING AGENCIES 41 That prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary/Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary/Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the Municipality of Clarington that condition #1 has been 22 c carried out to its satisfaction. 5/ That prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary/Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary/Treasurer has to he satisfied that the time periods outlined in condition #3 have been adhered to. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Signed by all members present and concurring that this is the Committee Decision of LD 004/2008 on Monday, January 14, 2008- (CHAIR) D. Sullivan (VICE CHAIR) H. Graham J. Collins ABSENT J. Hurst J.-M. Komamicki L. Patel R.E. Sutton W,Taylor ABSENT 1 Assistant Secrafary/Treasurer t Last Date of Appeal of this Decision or any of the conditions therein is Tuesday, February 12, 2008, 23 ZL/SB 39vd -Z1rfCITA Attachment 3 To Report PSD-113-08 .04 Mr 2009 12: 17PM HP LASERJET FRX _.. p. 2 • V I I Re:Consent Applications LD OW2oo8,submission 8004/2008 i Location: Part lots 17&18,Concession 1 Municipality: Municipality of Caarington, (former Darlington Township) It is with much regret that I must file a Notice of Appeal regarding the descision of Durham Land Division Committee at the meeting held an Monday,January 14,2008. I feel that many of my concerns,as welt as that of some of my neighbours have not been addressed,and I would like to have time to study and reply to the information reports from the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning,Health and Works Departments, Municipality of Ctarington and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. I My concerns are as follows: 1. PROPERTY VALUE: A genuine concern to myself,as my property is presently surrounded by mature and growing tree lots to the east and north. This enhances the property greatly,and the loss of the tree line of both the mature and growing trees would be certain to diminish the landscape. A proposed medium to high density housing,would also GREATLY compromise i my Property value,and the value of my neighbours properties as well. Most of the houses that currently border the property in question were built in the late 1950's to early 1970's and sit on parcels of land ranging from I acre to nearly 10 acres. Any proposed high or medium density housing would look out of place in this area. An ideal subdivision for this particular area would be low density estate type lots like the ones that exist on Old Scagog Road, Pamela Court, Sydell Court and Rebecca Court In BOWmanville, A subdivision of this nature would lessen environmental impact by retaining a lot of the trees and landscape, as well as being a lot more pleasing to the eyes. Z. WELL WATER: Recent construction on Baseline Road virtually destroyed the well of the house located at 974 Green Road,(southwest corner of Green Road and base]inO,and forced the residents,namely my parents,to have to have town water service brought in. This past summer and fall was exephonally dry, but the combination of the road construction,the oversized j sewers that follow along Green Road, and the continued deepening of the limestone pit at the local cement plant have all contributed to the overall lowering of the water table_ My neighbour to the east had trouble with his well as the result of the construction on Baseline Road, creating the washing f ZZ/SB 39Vd 94 Mar 2006 12: 17PM HP LRSER.IET FRx P. 3 down of silt and and water from the roadbed on to his property,thus camprom sing his well. My well,as well as the neighbour across from me experienced the phenomenon of a"rotten egg" smell when we tamed an our taps,suggesting that sulphur gas has infiltrated the well. This continued throughout the summer and fall,and only began to disappear when we received snow before Christmas,and the creek began to run again. It is my feeling that if constrnction of a housing development were allowed in this area, there would have to be additional sewer lines pmt in,but I fear in doing so, it would compromise my well,as well as my neighbours in the immediate area. I would request reports from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority,Health and Works Departments,and any related material to this matter. 3. ALTERATIONS OF CREEK BED, TREE REMOVAL: Main concern is contamination of creek bed by silt from disturbed earth or construction related activity. Now close will the subdivision,when built,come to tae creek? It is possible to create a"BUFFER ZONE"around the creek of say 25 to 30 meters, leaving existing vegetation and trees,including some of the younger pines intact? Again, I would ask for clarification from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation, as well as proposal from intended developer(s). 4. RETENTION OF THE HILL: This unique geological feature to the southwest of Bowmanville was formed over 10,000 years ago during the Ice Age, and was the result of glacial activity. What especially makes this hill significant is that it is the highest point of land along the North Shore of Lake Ontario within a mile of the Lakeshore itself. This hill also provides some measure of shelter from both winter and summer storms,especially those coming float a south-southwest direction The retention of mature trees on the west side of the hill would also provide shelter. Subdivisions that were constructed in the area of Grandview near Bloor > Street,and Adelaide Street just east of Harmony Street lit Oshawa not only retained the hills,but left the trees on the sides giving the area a less stark look, and leaving an area where a walking or cycling path could he put. In the meeting that was held on the 14th of January, Mr.Rob Larocque who is an agent of D,G.Biddle&Assoc. Ltd and who is representing Mr.Witzke stated that a "small shaving" of the hill was inevitable. I would like this clarified a bit further to how much"shaving"would take place, and not have it completely levelled like the hill that once existed to the easL Sadly, all that was left of it were the "shavings7% In conclusion,any major alteration to or removal of this hill would ruin the j i " I c.T/60 39Vd 31QQI2 RF.)Rq)ggAR gq:TT RPA7/Cq/PP U4 Mar 20oe 12: 17PM HP LRSERJET FnX P. 4 i landscape,leaving the area without any charadaristic IratlrtC and would Permanently destroy a(mown landmark that has a siguifica_nt geological distiuctfulness. Again,I would like C.L.O.C.A.'s imput, i S. LOSS OF PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND: "You don't know what you i have'til its gone", a line from a popular song by Canadian recording artist joni Mitchell immediately comes to mind. The permanent loss of prime agricultural land in Southern Central Ontario is beginning to reach a crisis stage. Continued overpopulation and urban,sprawl along the north shore of Lake Ontario has dramatically reduced both dairy and crop farming in this area. This region of Ontario has had some of the best growing conditions containing good rich topsoil for crops of vegetables,wheat,oafs,as well as apples,and enjoyed a slightly Zpr growing season because of the moderating effect of the lake. It is,second to none. Any further loss of will condemn future generations to having to depend on markets that are far nff, Iflea ire United States. The COSt of transporting farm products to the markets and food processing soon be prohibitive, ben the ongoing plants will given un rise is S $ the price of feel and transportation. As well,because of climatic changes Liking lace o ur de eadan p P cy on these regions may be in jeopardy should there be due to draw ap failure ; draught, disease,or weather related incidents. A flood example took place in California and Florida should be a wake-up call. The time to start conserving farmland and greenspace is NOW.Governments NEED to encourage farming and agriculture. Future generations are going to depend on it. It has been best said"FAR1yI R.,�3gpt�rgq� i &. LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE: When the town of Bowmanville came into being,it was not expected that it would grow at any great rate The layout of the town itself, and because of the surrounding geographical features,such as Bowma aville Creels to the west end,and Soper Creek to the east limited the expansion As it is now, there is only one east-west road,and two nortltsouth roads that pass directly through the town,Itself. Of these, No.2 Highway,ar � King Street cannot be widened through the town,, so traffic bottle-n,ecics at both ends and congests in the town itself. Liberty Street also cannof be widened because of existing housing in the older pad,of town. m a result traffic backs up dramatically during peals periods. It is not uncommon to have northbound traffic coating off 401 in the afternoon.backed up froant King Street almost down to the Baseline Road, The resulting difficult to access Liberty mock makes it extremely rh izont any of the side streets. Only I3e cn has any poten"for widening,and even then,more traffic lights needed, i i i i aiiei 39Vd 3-QQIS GIF.IF,4ICGRC qM TT �, , 04 Mar 2008 12: 18PM HP LRSERJET FRX P. 5 .. i namely at Aspen Springs Drive. There are times when you could be sitting nearly ten minutes at this intersection to make a left-hand bunt from aspen Springs onto Regional 57. With the addition of more development to the west alt ng Green Road,this will only make things much worse. Until Green Road extends from Highway 2 to Baseline Road will any improvement be made,and that may not be for Iong,if the current development is not curbed. Baseline Road from Holt Road to the West Side Drive area is now extremely busy,and artist take the excess from No. 2 Highway and overflow from 401 in the event of a traffic tie-up. Our local Hospital is now feeling the strain of more people coming into this area. The last addition to the hospital was in 1988-89. The maternity ward was closed down and moved to Oshawa.Trying to obtain a family physician in this area is almost impossible, as there have been more retirements of long standing medical doctors,and not enough replacements to keep up with the demand. A. L .!.L � 1M."Or Job opportunities in this area,, the prospects are not that great, There •' are only three major manufacturing companies in g p this area. Goodyear,which has been in decline over the Ye ars,St Mary's Cem en and O.P. G.Nuclear at Darlington.�• OnL y D ali ngto Nuclear has an potential to Y P expand,and will only see a peek employment during the construction period. As it was when Darlington was first built,there was a major influx of construction workers, but when the project was completed,most of the construction workers had left the area for other projects. Only about one in f o ur eo le who currently P P y work at Darlington nuke their home in the Clarington area Most come from Oshawa,Whitby, Toronto,Peterborough,Lindsay,Port Hope and Cobourg, and even further beyond, The only other significant employer in the area is General Motors,which is facing a major re-adjustment. G.M has closed a number of plants in the United States,and because of our high dollar-high wage and benefits, slakes a Canadian auto worker"high priced help". The manufacturer will look elsewhere to produce his product An example is the Chevrolet and GMC four door crew-cab trucks that were produced in Oshawa are now produced in Mexico. 'The local economy depends greatly on G.M, , and if there were any significant layoffs forthcoming,it works out that for every G.M. worker that is laid-off, the spin-off effect is between 6 and 8 people losing their jobs in related industries,as well as retail H we think that G.M. is invincible,remember what took place at St-Therese Quebec a number of years ago,it could happen here,with disasterous ruultst With a potential booming market in the east and south Asia,natty, manufacturing jobs have Ieft for this part of the world. With cheap labour costs,and not having stringent health and safety rules, as well as a potential ! i i I ZTrTT DDVcJ 3IQQI2 9EL69L9906 99 TT 899Z/591EP A4 Mar 2008 12: l8PM HP LRSERJET FHX P. S � I I booming middle class,India and China are fast becoming players in the global market. What that means for us is a continued less of manufarbxring jobs. Claringto=y and indeed Durham Region are fast becoming a service industry j area,which means that there are only limited opportunities. There has been j talk that Clarington is trying to attract Research and Development firma to this area, but don't forget,manufacturing jobs are in steady decline in other areas of the so-called G.T.A., and these areas will also will be in very hard competition to aquire these industries. Traditionally,the nearer to the city, the j better the chances. i 7. CONCERNS ABOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPER Recent media reports about the proposed developer of this property have made me very apprehensive about how they will deal with or co-operate with surrounding property owners. I am aware through the media,and personal contacts that a Statement of Claim was filed with the Ontario Superior Court on December Lire,wG7 regarding the or[.going dispute between this developer and the Port of Newcastle residents. It is my belief that the Municipality of Clarington,in ' order to protect its own integrity should place an"on-hold"of any future I I construction r developme nt nt b this developer pending desciaion of the Superior Court in this matter, I j I I I I I I� t I IA ZTIZT 3917d 3-1QQI2 OEL6919906 9011T R2W/GRiER Attachment 4 To Report PSD-113-08 ISSUE DATE: }� ' `! '—' — — October 14, 2008 , f n t ` PL080219 ® ll•7�1°iii` sYf t Ontario Ontario Municipal Board' Commission des affaires municipales de ('Ontario IN THE MATTER OF subsection 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Appellant: John Colville Applicant: Erhard Witzke Subject: Consent Property Address/Description: 1053 Maplegrove Road Municipality: Town of Clarington OMB Case No.: PL080219 OMB File No.: PL080219 Municipal No. B-004/2008 APPEARANCES: Parties Counsel*/Agent John Colville Erhard and Henriette Witzke Michael Fowler* Municipality of Clarington Susan Ashton MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY M. C. DENHEZ ON SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 AND ORDER OF THE BOARD This appeal dealt with an application for consent to convey — approved by the Land Division Committee, but appealed by a Neighbour. However, part-way into the hearing, the Neighbour/Appellant advised that he had no interest in pursuing the appeal. There was an agreement among the parties on minor amendments to the Conditions for the consent. For that limited purpose, the Board maintains the appeal, but which otherwise has not been pursued. The details and reasons are outlined below. Erhard and Henriette Witzke (the Owners) own 28.22 hectares straddling the western Urban Boundary of the community of Bowmanville in the Municipality of Clarington (the Municipality), in the Region of Durham (the Region). That Urban Boundary had been adopted in the Durham Region Official Plan (DROP) in the early 1990's, and was approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in 1993. - 2 - PLOB0219 Outside the The DROP had designated the lands west of the Boundary, Urban Area: outside the Urban Area, for "Major Open Space". Inside the The DROP designated the lands east of the Boundary, inside the Urban Area: Urban Area, for "Living Area" and "Major Open Space". As required by law, the Municipality's "Local Official Plan" (LOP) followed suit, as approved in 1996. The LOP used different nomenclature, but with a similar thrust: it designated the lands west of the Boundary, outside the Urban Area, for "Greenspace" and "Environmental Protection", while it designated the lands east of the Boundary, inside the Urban Area, for "Urban Residential" and "Environmental Protection". The Owners applied for consent to convey, to split the siihject property. The split would be along the Urban Boundary. The 10.67 hectares east of the Boundary would be the severed parcel, and the 17.55 hectares west of the Boundary would be the retained parcel. The application was approved by the Durham Land Division Committee (DLDC), subject to certain Conditions. However, the DLDC Decision was appealed by John Colville (the Neighbour), whose property abuts the subject property. At the hearing, the Owners were represented by Counsel, clearly well-prepared and accompanied by experts. The Municipality was represented by its planner on the file. The Neighbour was not represented. Part-way into the hearing, the parties engaged in a discussion, leading to an "accommodation". In particular, the Neighbour understood correctly that there would be processes to address various aspects of future development, in which he would have a rightful role. As for the Owners and the Municipality, they agreed that more specificity could be brought to the wording of the Conditions. The Board was also asked to adjust the timetable, to reflect new dates in accordance with this hearing date. The Board has carefully considered their proposed revisions, and agrees that although the terms do not significantly change the substantive arrangements, the wording and timetable changes are appropriate. The Board therefore disposes of this matter as follows: THE BOARD ORDERS: C - 3 - PLO80219 That the Conditions as approved by the Durham Land Division Committee (Exhibit 1, Tab 4, page 27) are hereby amended as follows: Condition 1/: (No change) Condition 2/: Condition 2/ is deleted and replaced with the following: That the applicant submit two copies of a registered reference plan on the severed parcel, and that the applicant satisfy the Land Registrar with regard to a description of the retained parcel. Condition 3/: Condition 3/ is deleted and replaced with the following: That the consent be subject to the following time periods: Last Date for fulfilling Conditions is Wednesday, September 23, 2009. Expiry Date of Application LID 004/2008 is Friday, October 23, 2009 Condition 4/: (No change) Condition 5/: (No change) As the Board was advised of the Neighbour's intent to otherwise "withdraw his appeal", the appeal is otherwise dismissed. It is so Ordered. "M.C. Denhez" M. C. DENHEZ MEMBER