HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-37-95
THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
DNi DEFSRNAL.GPA
REPORT
Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # '~q ~ ~~ ' 4 3 ,~G v
Date: Monday, April 3 , 1995 Res. #~6~A - ~4 3-9 Y
Report #;PD-37-95 File #: PLN 2.2.7 By-law #_
Subject: 1991 DURHAM REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN
REFERRAL OF DEFERRAL NO. 6 TO THE ONTARIO MIINICIPAL BOARD
FILE: PLN 2.2.7
Recommendations:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-37-95 be received;
2. THAT the Municipality not participate at the Ontario Municipal
Board Hearing in respect of Deferral Area # 6;
3. THAT the Durham Region Planning Department and all interested
parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of
Council's decision.
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 On March 22, 1995, Staff received a copy of a'letter from the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs to Mr. Stan Racansky advising
that Deferral Area No. 6 to the Durham Regional Official Plan
was being referred to the Ontario Municipal Board (Attachment
No. 1).
1.2 The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the
foregoing as well as to establish the position of the
Municipality of Clarington with respect to the referral to the
1991 Durham Regional Official Plan of the lands formally known
as Deferral Area No. 6, and in order to determine the role the
Municipality will take at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing
in respect of the subject referral.
J / n ....2
REPORT NO. PD-37-95 PAGE 2
2. BACRGROIIND
2.1 The Durham Regional Official Plan, as approved by Regional
Council in June 1991 and later in July 1993, designated lands
north of the Courtice Urban Area on the east and west sides of
Trulls Road and south of Pebblestone Road, as 'Living Area'.
The Ministry, in approving the Regional Plan in November 1993,
deferred its consideration of the Living Area designation and
related urban area boundary for the lands west of Trulls Road
(Deferral Area No. 6 - Tonno Construction/Erhard and Henrietta
Witzke/687120 Ontario Limited). However, the lands designated
east of Trulls Road were referred to the Ontario Municipal
Board (Referral No. 1 - Kingsberry Properties). Both areas
are indicated on Attachment No. 2.
2.2 As noted below, Council has adopted a number of resolutions in
respect of urban development north of the existing Courtice
Urban Area boundary:
• March 25, 1991 - Council recommended the designation of
a Special Study Area for lands bounded by Townline Road,
Pebblestone Road, Courtice Road and the existing urban
area in the new Regional Plan;
• May 11, 1992 - Council resolved that it "strongly opposes
the designation of a Living Area north of Courtice" in
the new Regional Plan but supported the retention of a
Special Study Area north to Pebblestone Road;
• May 10, 1993 - Council, in consideration of its
resolution to reduce the population target for Courtice
to 40,000, approved Staff's report recommending "no
northerly extension of Courtice should be contemplated
within the timeframe of the Regional Plan"; Council also
supported the elimination of Special Study Area No. 7 to
the north of Courtice;
• July 18, 1994 - Council resolved to request the Ministry
of Municipal Affairs to support a 30 year boundary in the
Clarington Official Plan to facilitate the resolution of
water quality problems on Courtice Road; ....3
c: ', i
J %" i
REPORT NO. PD-37-95 PAGE 3
• March 20, 1995 - Council approved Staff Report PD-17-95.
This Report concluded that the technical reports
submitted in support of Deferral Area No. 6 do not
adequately address the principle of development for the
subject lands with respect to .the protection of Farewell
Creek and the Second Marsh, which is most appropriately
addressed through a watershed planning study. The Report
also concluded that the preparation of a comprehensive
watershed study for the Farewell/Black Creek watershed
and the implementation of long-term cumulative impact
monitoring for the watershed are possible approaches to
address the environmental sensitivity of this area.
2.3 Staff has consistently opposed the northerly expansion of the
Courtice Urban Area in the Regional Official Plan, noting the
environmental sensitivity of the Courtice North lands.
3. Comments
3.1 As the Minister will be referring Deferral Area No. 6 to the
O.M.B., it is likely that the Board will be dealing with this
matter in conjunction with other referrals of the Durham
Regional Official Plan and specifically with Referral Area #1
(Foley) which is adjacent to the subject area.
3.2 Committee previously considered the matter of the
Municipality's participation at the Ontario Municipal Board
hearing in respect of the 1991 Durham Regional Official Plan
through its consideration of Report PD-8-95. In that report,
Staff recommended that the Municipality take a limited role
for most of the matters before the Board in an effort to
minimize costs and staff time required for the hearing. It
was recommended, whenever the position of Staff, Council and
the Region are coincident, that the Region take carriage of
the case and Planning Staff be made available as witnesses if
the Regional solicitor so desires. It was also noted that, on
....4
~ f i_
REPORT NO. PD-37-95 PAGE 4
any of the referrals, Planning Staff may be under subpoena by
the Ministry of Municipal Affairs or the Board to appear at
the hearing and give evidence on the basis of their
professional opinion.
3.3 Through Report PD-8-95, Staff specifically requested Council's
direction with respect to the Municipality's participation on
Referral No. 1. Council resolved that the Municipality would
not participate in the hearing on this matter. Given
Council's previous direction with respect to Referral No. 1,
it is advisable that Council not to participate in the Ontario
Municipal Board hearing on Deferral Area #6 for the sake of
consistency as both properties are adjacent to each other.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs has identified concerns with
the urban designation of these lands, especially in relation
to their environmental sensitivity. Presumably, the various
Ministries will take part in the hearing although their final
positions will not be known until the prehearing.
4. CONCLII3ION8
4.1 Until Council directs otherwise, Staff recommend that the
Municipality not participate in the Ontario Municipal Board
Hearing on Deferral Area ~ 6.
Respectfully submitted,
.~ ~~
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning
and Development
FW*cc
Reviewed by,
~~~ ~-~
W. H. Stockwell
Chief Administrative
Officer
Attachment No. 1 - Letter from Ministry of Municipal Affairs
Attachment No. 2 - Location Map
March 28, 1995
7
~~J
A#tachment No. 1
•3 O Ministry of
Municipal
Affairs
Ontario
Ministere des
Affaires
municipales
` ~ ~~
MA&, c ~ 9.'?9y
March 20, 1995
Mr. Stan Racansky, P. Eng.
3200 Hancock Road
Courtice, Ontario
L1E 2M1
Dear Mr. Racansky:
Re: Request to refer Deferral No. 6 to the Official
Plan for the Regional Municipality of Durham to
the Ontario Municipal Board
Ministry File No.: 18-OP-0012
On behalf of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, the
Honourable Ed Philip, I hereby acknowledge your letter
dated February 5, 1995 requesting that Deferral No. 6
to the Official Plan for the Region of Durham be
referred to the Ontario Municipal Board.
It is also noted that your letter requests that
Deferral No. 6 be considered in conjunction with
Referrals No.'s 1, 6, 20 and 36. As you are aware, the
Ontario Municipal Board has begun proceedings on
referrals to the Durham Region Official Plan. This
took the form of a preheating conference on January 30
and 31 of this year. The Board has now advised that a
second pre-hearing conference is scheduled for April
21, 1995. The hearing itself is to begin on September
8 and run through to December 15, 1995.
We therefore intend to refer this matter to the Ontario
Municipal Board such that it is in the Board's
possession in time for the April 21 pre-hearing.
Please be advised that it is solely up to the Board to
determine which referrals should be heard together. I
therefore recommend that you be prepared to address the
Board on your reasons for having this matter considered
in conjunction with the other referrals you have
identified.
/2
J/4
-2-
We have also sent a copy of this letter to the
Municipality, the Region and a representative of the
primary property owner seeking development within the
Deferral No. 6 area. As well, upon request and pursuant
to Section 17(9) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, a
copy of your letter will be released to any interested.
person, body or agency.
If you have any questions,. please call me directly at
(416) 585-6029.
Yours truly,
Victor Do~~M.C.I.P.
Senior Planner
Plans Administration Branch
Central and Southwest
c.c. A. Georgieff, Region of Durham
F. Wu, Municipality of Clarington
W. Manson
~~:
'FROM PEGgSUS IMPORTS PI-ZONE h10. 905. 637 6660
}
To Tne Hon, Ed Phillip FEb. O5
Min. of Municipal Affairs 1996
Subject: Durham Region Official Development Man
Clarington Official Development Plar.
Item- Deferral #6
OMB Hearing- File OMB 0940179
Dear Sir,
This is a formal request referring to the OMB Hearing on Monday
Jan.30, 1996,
The item that has been DEFERRED by the Minister known as the
'DEFERRAL # 6" (Tonne Construction Ltd,-M.Fo1ey/W, Manson/D.
Martin) should be considered in conjuction with referrals # 1, 20,
and 6&36,
-your file OMB 0940119- Courtice North Urban Expansion, since it
is a part of the groundwater recharge for the Black antl Farewell
Creeks.
Not only to be considered is the fact that 06 is larger than R1, it
is even more sensitive by its proximity to the farewell Creek, by
its location to cut--off points in tt~e basoflow, underground
recharge system and being the vitsl part of a cummulative effect of
the Courtice North Urban Expansion Area.
Our concern is the need for the complete WATERSHED Study, and the
impact the planned development would have on the basoflow, quality
& quantity of the water in our creeks, water wells end the Courtice
~~Healthy" Community now and in the future.
There are many facts and studies supporting our request. Dfi
contains and affects the creeks we are concerned about and is in
the same highest class of environmentally significant area. In
reality it is a neigbouring property to R6 and even more important.
Thank ynu for takin0 our request into consideration.
PS. All related information to the fact of #p6-and R6 being in the
same category may be provided by us or by CLOCA.
Stan Racansky, Eng.
3200 Hancock Rd.
Courtice, Ont.
L1E 2M1
Tel. (905) 436-2376
cc: V. Doyle
Min. of Municipal Affairs
P01
~l
Attachment No. 2 _
~ ~~~ ~~~~a~ a~c~oo~a~ o~~oc~oa~ p~~
~~~~~aa~ aa~a~ ~ ~o~~a c~o~a~o~~
PEBBLESTONE ROAD
--- -
~ REFERRAL
1 ~
~ REGIONAL
~.~ OFFICIAL
PLAN
0
Q
0
w
DEFERR~L AR A 6
REGION L OF CIAL °
~ U
PLAN
~,. ~,
.,,~ _~.
~ ~~~ I
---, ~~ I
COURTICE URBAN AREA
BOUNDARY
L. 1 1