HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-84-87~~Pe;
.~+Y yx.11UU .y,~
.~~~~~~~~`1
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT File # 5 ~.F
Res. # ~ '-~
By-Law #
I`~ETI~: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, March 16, 1987
T #: PD-84-87 FILE #:
CT: MINISTERIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE TOWN
OF NEWCASTLE OFFICIAL PLAN
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-84-87 be received; and
2. THAT Staff's comments on the proposed Ministerial modifications to the Town of
* Newcastle Official Plan, attached to this Report as Attachment No. 2, be endorsed;
and
3. THAT a copy of Staff Report PD-84-87 and Council's decision be forwarded to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and the Region of Durham.
BACKGROUND AND COMMENT:
By letter dated February 3, 1987, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs advised the Region of
Durham that it had completed its circulation and review of the Offici al Plan Amendments
implementing the Town of Newcastle Official Plan. The Ministry's letter, attached hereto
as Attachment No. 1, outlined a number of proposed modifications to the Official Plan and
requested the Region's comments on same. By copy of the letter to the Town of Newcastle,
the Ministry also requested the Town's comments on the proposed rnodificatio ns.
*
...2
^i
REPORT NO.: PU-84-87 Page 2 '~
Staff have reviewed the modifications as proposed by the Ministry and note
that their primary effect is to clarify the wording of certain sections of
the Official Plan. With the exception of Modifications No. 2 and No. 14
which delete all references to a land use schedule as part of the Official
Plan in favour of Schedule A5 of the Regional Official Plan, the proposed
modifications do not challenge the basic structure and intent of the
Official Plan as approved by Town Council. The Ministry has also proposed
that Section 9 of the Official Plan relating to Hamlets be deferred to
facilitate further discussion regarding Hamlet Development Plans.
Staff's comments on the proposed Ministerial modifications were forwarded
* to the Ministry by letter dated March 4, 1987 (see Attachment No. 2). A
copy of the letter was also sent to the Region of Durham for their review.
In the letter, Staff did not indicate any major objections to the proposed
modifications and the one deferral. However, with respect to Modifications
No. 2 and No. 14, we did indicate that, although the inclusion of a land
use schedule as part of the approved Official Plan remains our preference,
Staff would have no objection to such a schedule not being included at this
time in order to expedite the approval of the Town's Official Plan.
Staff's letter specifies that the comments as outlined by the letter only
represent Staff's comments on the proposed modifications and that Staff
would be seeking Council's endorsement of same. It is therefore
respectfully recommended that Council endorse Staff's comments to the
rviinistry and that a copy of this Report and Council's decision be forwarded
to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and the Region of Durham.
Respectfully submitted,
. war s, .C. .
Director of Planning
Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
Lawrence otsett
Chi of A ' ~ i trati ve Uf ficer
JAS*TTE*jip
*Attach.
March 6, 1987
CC: Dr. M. Mici~ael
Planning Commissioner
Regional Planning Department
105 Consumers Drive
WHITBY, Ontario L1N 6A3
Fek,ru.,ry 3, 19E;7
Dr. M. Mir_haei
Commissioner of Planning
Regional Municirality of Durham
] 05 ConsurnFar':, Drive
W}71tt]y, Ontario
LiN 6A3
Dear. Dr_ Mir_hael:
~~
Fie ~ a ~sr
P o~NN ~ ~~w~asnF
Subje:r..t.: I~mendment No. 22 t.o the DarlinuLor~
Official Plan (new Official Flan for
the Tnwn of Newca~.tl e: )
File No.. 18 OP Oggn 02:?
Amendment No. ~ to the Sawr,;arlville
Official Plan
File no_: 1.8 OP 018 003
Rmc~ndmrnt No. 2 to the Newcastle
Village Official Plan
File no: 18 OP 01.9 00?
4I t, have now co:l;pleted the: r_irculation ana revi~=:w of
t.e::e ame.nclrnent.c. Amenclmento 2~+rtd 3 to the
Ofii._~<al Plans of Newcastle tint ;3c,wn~;nnv ille,
resl~e~:.~~ivEl`1', are ::CCeptahle %!:; ~'Li~3ih].t.'t.Et= WI-:i1°
Anler_d:~lent ?2 is generally acceptulal.c, we hLve sours:
corn+,;ents whit}~ follow.
n.7 ~7;il.y !~ r 19CJ,U, t=}7e ariendrtier.t rECei.vE:d a Pa=: tai
a I~r'CV21 Sub,jC~t t0 c`1 muC:i~"iCatlOl7, ~2:: ice. affect:."
C'E1-twirl 1~:I7G~ In t}l E: SUL'th hii~r CF LOt .~'~~,
CUr:Ce~'siOn ii , .a; r~~c~uected by the Regiol: thrat.g%1
r.;c~di.fication i. anti 2. Cor.~equentl.y, our canments
I~ertain only to the rerrtainder of t}-lc dccument which
wc... ;:E;rG':.. rPG~ f or ~:~~ ,-hE?C GOS..~1CUr3t~...I"i.
We have also recently received proposed
Modification ~~; to Amen.c3ment Nc,. •22. from "thr
Region, which ~ would add' a" new Subsection ~2.:3,
Comrr;unity lmprovement F'olicie;. T,ie:ae ~,c,licies
hr:,ve been C:1rCL:lHted to the Cortimur,iLy Renewal
F'.ranch for their review. Approv~.l. of this new
sc::cti on may havF: to he deS'er•red :should we L,e iti a
position t.o maH;e ~, recommendation on the rc:ruainder:
of Amendment No. 22 bc:for.e comp]E~ting our
circulation and review of tt,e Cc,rnmunity In,provernent
Polici.e~.
Amendment No. 22 wau circulated to a numbF~~r of
agencies for commE:rrt. The fol.lowirrg have no
objections:
- Durham Regional Health Ur:it
~' - Central La}:e Ontario Conservation Authority
- G4inar.a::kU Region Conservation Authority
- Ministry of Tran>portatiori and Con;munications
- Ministry of. Agr:icult.ur.-e and Food
- Communi~y Planning Advisory Branch, MMA
- Office of Local ??.:ginning Poli.tsy, NiriA
- the Ministry of the Environment has indicated
that the amendment does not identify ail known
waste di~po~al areas within the Town.
- the hinistry c>f t~~-,aural RPSOUrces ?,as noted i~.ti:-,t
the followinc! rr=ineral aggregate resource e::traci:ian
areas as s;,own on Nap A have h~,d ttreir. i. i.c•ences
cancelled and ;,ave kieen re},a'.:•i] ita'~cd:
a) i\o. 51 : Darlington Township, ?art of i.ots 1.3
anc: 14, Conce~:.,ion ~;
~;) No. ~7: Durlinctc,n Townsini;_~, Fart of Lot ?_2,
Conce~~ion ?; and
Cl,~rke mownsh'.p, Part of Lots 27 and 2E,
Cc:icess i or: 7.
. / J
~As 'Map~'A• does• rir,t .form :part of t}re Ameodment,' no
modificatioris are propo~.;•ed in either of the above
cases. However, the Region might cnn~~ider an'
amendment to the Regional Official Fian to reflect
MOE and MNR'r comments in the near future, perhar-~~
in conjunction witri the review.
The MNR al::o i,ad additional concerns. These are
dealt with under Modifications 2, 4 and 12.
_ A copy of MNR and MOE'e~ comments are attached fnr
• your information.
bur comments nn Amendment Nn. 22 arc as follows:
:~. ~~
Modification 1:
Ta correctly reflect the name of this ministry, we
rzugctc~::t the fifth line of Sectinn 1.1.2 on page 3
be modified by deleting the words "and I-Inusinq."
Modification 2:
Any references in this docuri,ent to a rr,ap or.
:schedule must tie made to one w1',ick, :i~• approved ;or
one which is to be approved) by the Minister.
Since the land u~~F sr.hedule for the.Town oi'
Newcastle Official Flan is to kie Map A5 of the
Re~ior.al Offici.:,l F].an, it is Map A5 1_.hat should lie
referred to throughout the Amendment No. 22_
ConEquently, to en~;ure that there i~ no confu~icn,
Section 1.1.4 should be revised to clarify which
~chedule s•1~rould be referred +~o. We! c;uggest th::t
both ~aragraph~ of Section 1.1.4 be replaced with
the fc;llowina:
.. /4
:~~,
"~1.;..9 Map A i.ndicat.er; for information purpo~:c:+~~
only, the designations for the Town of
Nc~wcast.le as provided in the approved .
Durham Regional Official Plan. For
accurate reference, the approved Regional
Plan and schedules should be consultEd for
the land use de~ignatian~ and provisions
relevant to the particular designations."
Modi.fi c~tian 3:
' For clarification purposes to indicate the
relationship of the "h" symbol. with the zoning by-
law as opposed to official plan designations, we
rer.ommend that item ~, regarding Section 2.1.2, be
7llOdifled as fO11GWF:
The fifth line of Section 2.1.2 on pwge ~i bc'
revised by deleting the word:: "use designation" and
replacing t:zem with the words "specific zoning
category".
Modification 4:
As~ requested by the Ministry of Natural Resources,
S,=r.tion 2.1.2 (b) on page 5 should be revised by
adding the MNR a~ an agency having input over
removal. of the "h" from lands to be protected from
any physical ha_ard or condition such a~ ~~lor~e
s•i..abi.lity or. f7.coding so that. ache. section would
read as follows.
"b) that the owner has satisfied the requirerilents
of t.h~ '!'own, the Ministry of Ivatural Re~ource~, or
~~
;7v Conservation Authority having jurisdiction ...
Modification 5:
Since i.t is the intent of the ~lar.nir.g Act that an
~rfi..ia1 plan s?-,ow or de.rr_:. _.be :s pre:posed .;ite p? un
.~
control ar~,a which may be designated i:: whole or in
^` I.
'±'. ~?y by-:.~W, +._. }-!°. fir~'~._. pc;rcl `_{r.1 f'}3 C ~eCt.l Ui,
2.2.1 ~hau3.d be revi~:ed L-y deleting a portion of
a.: l 1 E' :~ .. ~ i~ t : cl J'1 :~ _...,..: +:... ~.. n t~::. .~ :~ t :-. C }.: ; ~ 1 F~ C) c. C ~i. ~ ~ ; ~ i' 1.
,
. ~ 5
_ 5 -.~ ..
"ln accordance wi t.h~. Sects on 40 of the P..anninc~ nct.,
1983, all lands within the Town of Newcastle are
hereby designated as a pr.opo:;c:d site plan contrc:;l
area, Except for the following specific
Er~ceptions : "
Modification 6i
The Ministry of Natural Re~our•cES hac requested
that an additional exception };c added to Section
2.2.1 for pits and quarries, mince the actual
excavation of aggregate material is not conyidEred
to be "development" as defined under Suction ~0 of
the Planning Act. Consequently, wE suggest the
following new sub.;F~~ction be added to Section 2.?..1:
"h) any r.x1.r•acti.onc,Ct]Vlties wit}7in a pit or
quarry in areas de~ignatcd ur.dor the Pity and
~?uarrie.; T.ct, ].980."
MUdifiCat).on 7:
Section 40(S) of the Planning Act specifically
e cludEn "the colour, tes:ture and ty~>E of
materials, window detail, construction details,
architectural detail and interior design" fr.or,~ i.te
plan control. WE cannot approve official Ulan
provisions i.ndicati.ng architECtur.al contro.i. as ;gin
intended objECtive of site plan control.
ConsE,uently, subsection c) of SECticn 2.2.2 should
be revised to remove the word "architectural,"
leaving rei:ErencE only to the "design" of the built
farm.
Modification 8:
For reasons av discussed above under rr,odification
5, i.he first oac'acrap}i o`' Section 2.2.3 s~.ould bc_~
revised by replacing the word:- 'de:_;ign.i:.ed area" in
:_}:~~ <,r.cond i..ne w.i.h ":~rop~,s_:ii :. .. `e pJ an contro?.
~~ ..
ar.Ea.
.. /6
It i~ not clear why "residential buildings
containing less than three {?) dwelling units" Nava
been excepted in Section 2.2.3(b) since Section
~.?..](f) excepted all "residential buildings
containing less than three (3) dwelling units
unless located within an Entrir.onmental Protection
Zone as defined by a zoning by-law," as well as
variaus other. types of development.
Consequently, it is-suggestod that Section 2.2.3 (b)
be revised by deleting that reference so that the
section would read as follows:
"b) Drawings shaving plan, elevation and cro::s-
section views for each building to be erected,
uff: icient to it lustrat.e : "
Mcidif icatioti 1Q:
ItF:m 8, whicYi amends Section 3, Subsection 2,
should be clarified, since the explanation of the
changes to be made to the }policy doe,; not coincide
wi.~t1_i the difference between the policy as approved
liy Amendment. tic:. 16 and the policy as proposEid b}>
tthi~, amendment.
Wr_: suggest that Iteri~ S be revised b}> replacing it
with the fol lawi nc;
"8. by further amending Section 3 Subsection 2,
by replacing Sectian ~(1)(e), as renumbered, with
trio following:
„~) ndul± ?~ahi ~ e Home par•!;
Natwithstanding the above, an adult mobile home
park will be permitted on Part of Lots i, 2 artd
~, L'.roken Front Concession, former Township of
Dar.linc;tor., and Lots 33, 34 and 35, Broken
Front Concession, forr!mer Township of Clarke, as
identified ~.~ "R EO" or. Nab-, 1;5 to th~~~ Off ici~:l
Plan for the regional Mur.i~ipaiity ~f L1llrslan'~. '
. ~ 7
,. .. 7
N,odification 11:
a) As the Planning Act does not provide for the
municipality to require dedications for road
improvements for roads other than those under
municipal jurisdiction, Section 3.2.2 should be
revised by deleting the words "public road"-and
replacing them with "road under the
jurisdiction of the Town or the Region of
Durham" in the first line of Section 3.2.2.
b) Since road widenings can not be taken beyond
what is described in an official plan, the
seventh line of -Section 3.2.2 should be revised
by adding "up to the maximums described on a
schedule to this Plan, as discussed in Section
3.2.1, or as specified in the Durham Regional
Official Plan for Type "A" and Type "B"
arterial roads designated in that Plan," after
the words "entrance improvements".
In additian, it is not clear what maximums
apply to the "additional road widenings"
referred to in the second paragraph of Section
3.2.2. We request that this be clearly
indicated or. that the words "additional road
widenings" be deleted.
c) As previously discussed with the Region, the
City of Oshawa and the Town of Pickering
regarding the taking of road widenings through
site plan control, it is not the intent of the
Planning Act to permit the taking of more than
50% of a road widening on either side of a
road. Consequently, the last two sentences of
the first paragraph of Section 3.2.2 should be
replaced with the following:
"Raced widenings will generally be taken
equally from both sides of the road. In
instances where this is not possible or
praci.ical due to development patterns or
site conditions, a greater road widening
may be required f corn one side of the road
than the other. However, only one half of
the maximum widening described in this Plan
or in the regional Plan will be ta}-:en on
any one sine of ~?:e roa~ t}.rou~h ~~te Ulan
C:7ntrai '
. ~ g
,. _
. ~ c9) Also, it should t,e .nat~~d tt,at. the ii:cl'u~~an o`~ ~ .
Section 50 of the Planning Act in t.hi~ polir.y migt,t
unnect:^r;~,r.ily res.t.rirt the rand widenings to be
taken in conjunction with approval of plans of
subdivision. Secti.an 50 i^ nat a^ restrictive as
Section 40 for the t;~k inq of r~oaci widenings.
~;adificatian l
Iteu, 1~, which amend:; Section 5, could be clearer
if revi.~ed by replacing parts'ii) and iii) with the
following:
"ii) by deleting Subsection 5.3, aN renumbered,
and replacing i t. with tl,e: fal.l.awing new Subsection
5.3 a~; follows
"5.3 In additio:: to the foregoing, specific
interpr.ct7ti.on pal.ici.e~,~ :sr,~ pr.ovided fcr
Courtice, the Bowmanvillc: Major Urban Area and
the Newca:±le Village Small Urban Area, in
Sections 6, 7 and 8, respecti.vely."
h;adific~~tion 13:
rurther to a request by the Ministry of Natural
Resources, Item ?2, which adds a r:ew Section 9
sl-iould be reviaed by adding the MNR as a cons.ultinc_
agency to the Town fir. detern,ir.ing t'-ic e:?tent of
i:a~ard lands and environrnenta?.ly ~en~•itivc areas.
Their rezquest is based an that M..nistry'~
rasponsibiiities~ for wetlands and wetlands
rnanaget;:ent a.ti; auti.ined in the C:uideii:taa for
Wetlands Management on Ontario. Consequently,
Section 9.9 ii) and iii) should L-,e mcdified ~.~
follows:
"ii) The real extent of hazard lands and
environri,ental ?.y sensitive areas shc.l'_ 2~e
accurately dGfinedin zoning by-laws ~..
can~•,;~-~,:~;tian ca_t?-r i.: ;-, r. ?~;i..~st.,-y o_f i`o~- ~ _ - 1.
~t_ra
Re:-c,urce~ and the rer:pective Can~•crv~tion
Autt:or..tty .
.. /9
• .. •.. ii:i'): ~• •.~Bui1d'~nq" aiid%ci'r•' ltit Tine"~.ct.t;ack.., '
..•.Setback .rec7uireme"nts shall be determined Ly
the Towr, i.n can:;ult.at_ion with i.ti~ Mini:;t.ry o£
Natural Rc~s•c,ur-ces anc] the respective
Con:;ervation Authority...
Modification 14:
Item 15, regarding ~~chedule~, does not correctly
r. eflect the amendrnc:nt a.~; submi t.ted tc, the Mini :;ter ,
since Map A does not form part of the amendment.
This should be clar.ifi.ed liy eii.t;er adopting ,the.
schedule as part of the arr,endment, by de].etirig the
reference hero to Map A, or by not deleting the
currently approved schedules to the Darlington
~ Official Pl~~n. As mentioned ear.li.cr. , any referenr.e
in this dor_ument to a ~ and u: c, schedule rnu;:t be
made to one wtiicli is aj~prc>ved by the mini. :;tor.
Modification 15:
Further to the Region's rEque~ted modification. 3
which r-clatt~s to Amendment No. ~! to the Bowrnanville
Uffici~a.l Plan (approve>_d ,?uly 28, 1Q86,) Schedule 7-
?_ should he modified by ci-,angina the desiyr,.tian of
the lands described from "commercial" to "rr,ediur:,
and high density r.e~identi~l."
Modification 16:
Further to the Region's reque.ted ri~odification 3A
which relates to Amendment Nc. 2.'~- t.o the Darlin~t.on
Official Plan (approved >`lover,-;ber 17, 1886,) Section
6.~i.2 iii) b) ohould bt=~ mc,difie.d by :~d•dir.c; ~. new
r;ub-clause b) as follows:
"b) Eiloc}; 75, Regist.ere:d plan lOM-755, Nor'~hwer;t
corner of Hig}iway No. 2 and Centref.-ield Road shall
ha~>e a ma<~imum of 1,1?.0 ~cuare metres (1,000 sq.
ft.) of ret<,il and personal oervice flo.:,r space_ '
.../10
To facilitate further discussion regarding Hamlet
developn;ent: plans we suc;gest hint Section 9 r,e
deferred.
We look forward to receiving the Region's corr~ments
on these proposed modificati.onc iri the near future.
By copy of this letter to the TGW27 of Newcastle, we
are alao requesting tri~:ir con~rner7ts.
Should you have any questions or concern:, do not
hesitate to call me at 585-6064, or: Stella
Gustavson, Area Planner, at 585-6067.
Yours truly,
~~
Paul Featherstone
5'eni or Planner
Plans Aciministr.:~tir~n Br. inch
Central and Southwest
nttac.t-~n;cnt
c.c. h3r. T. Edward
t~irector of ?'lanr.ing
Town of Newcastle
. •.' .. .
, ' '"~" ,
ATTACHMENT NO.. 2 TO ~ ~/~
.~REPORT:PD-84-$7 •. ..
• CORPbRL1TION OF~YNE:TOWN'OF N~WCASTCE ~•
40 TEMPERANCE STREET
BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO
' ~ ~ ~ L1C3A6 .: ~ ~ TELEPHONE 623:3379 -
Niarch 4, 1987
C
Mr. Paul Featherstone
Senior Planner
Plans Administration Branch
Central and Southwest
Ministry of Municipal Affairs
14th Floor, 777 Bay Street
TORONTO, Ontario
M5G 2E5
Dear Sir:
RE: AMENDMENT N0. 22 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE
FORMER PLANNING AREA OF THE TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON
YOUR FILE: 18-OP-0994-002
OUR FILE: 85-33/ND(22)/NB(3)NV(2)
Town of Newcastle Planning Staff have reviewed the modifications
to Amendment No. 22 to the Darlington Township Official Plan as
outlined in your letter of February 3, 1987 to the Region of
Durham. Staff's comments on the proposed modification are
detailed below. We will be seeking our Council's endorsement of
these comments at the earliest possible oppo rtunity and will
advise you accordingly of their decision.
Modification No. 1: No objection.
Modification No. 2: Town Staff see merit in having a land use
sc e u e as proposed by Map A as part of the approved Offici al
Plan, and the inclusion of such a schedule in the Plan remains as
our preference. However, we also realize that the issue of the
land use schedule will be resolved at such time as approval
authority for local of ficial plans is delegated to the Region of
Durham. Therefore, in order to expedite the approval of Amendment
No. 22 and the implementation of tine Town of Newcastle Offici al
Plan, Town Staff would have no objection to Map A not being
included in the approved Official Plan at this time.
Modification No. 3: No objection.
Modification No. 4: No objection.
Modification No: 5: No objection:..
...2
- ~ f ,~
Mr. PaulFeatherstone ~ March 4,1987 ..
Page 2
Modification No. 6: Staff have .no objection .to exempting-
extraction actrv~t~es withi n~ an approved- pit or.~ quarry. .from s~i~te- ~ ~-. -
plan control. However, in order to clarify the intent of this
provision, we recommend that the proposed new Subsection 2.2.1 be
amended to read as follows:
"h) any extraction activity within a licensed pit or
quarry or wayside pit or quarry, as established under
the Pits and Quarries Control Act, 1980."
Ministry of Natural Resources Staff, in recent discussions with
Town Staff, have indicated no objection to this revision.
Modification No. 7: Town Staff feel that the word
arc itectural s ould be retained. It is not the intent to
control detail but rather to ensure the continuity of character.
We would therefore recommend changing the word "design" to
"character".
1
Modification No. 8: No objection.
Modification No. 9: No objection.
Modification No. 10: The proposed change in Amendment No. 22
re lects t e revisions needed for format. It was the intent to
replace the wording in Amendment No. 16 and to establish five
subsections, being a) Courtice, b) Bowmanville, c) Newcastle
Village, d) Hamlets, and e) Adult Mobile Home Parks.
Modification No. 11:
a) No objection.
b) First paragraph - No objection.
~ Second paragraph - In order to clarify the intent of the
second paragraph of Section 3.2.2, we recommend that this "
paragraph be amended to read as follows:
"Notwithstanding the foregoing specified maximum right-of-way
widths, additional road widenings for turning lanes and sight
triangles may, be required where necessary for traffic turning
movements and in order to provide sufficient sight distances.
In the case of turning lanes and sight triangles, the
following maximums shall apply:"
c) No objection.
d) Since Section 50(5)(c) of. .t he Planning Act, 1983 provides the
- ~ authority for: road widenings in subdiwisions;~-Town Staff -feel-~ ~ - ~ -
it is a necessary reference and would not restrict our
options.
$'~
Nir. Paul Fe.atherstone~ ~ Nlarch 4, 1987
Page 3
Modification No. 12: No objection. However, in order to
provide cons stent wording and to accurately reflect Uffici al Plan
designations, we recommend that Section 5.3 be further modified to
also refer to Courtice as a "Major Urban Area".
Modification No. 13: Section 9 is being deferred at this time.
owever, we ave no objection subject to changing the word "real"
in the first line to "areal".
Modification No. 14: See our comments on Modification No. 2.
imp emente we suggest that Item 19 be modified by deleting all
of the wording after the word "Roads" in the second line so that
Item 19 would read as follows:
"19. by deleting, in its entirety, Schedule "A" "Land Use and
Roads"."
Modification No. 15: Agreed.
Modification No. 16: Agreed.
Deferral 1: As noted previously in our letter of September
~,~to your Ministry, Town Staff would have no objection to
the deferral of Item 18 to permit any modifications required to be
assessed.
On February 25, 1987, Regional Council approved Amendment No. 24 to
the Darlington Township Official Plan to designate a Local Central
Area in Part Lot 30, Concession 3, former Darlington Township
(Courtice Urban Area). The resolution as approved by Regional
Cou-Heil failed to forward Amendment No. 24 as a modification to the
Town of. Newcastle Offici al Plan. Amendment No. 24 should therefore
also be processed as Modification No. 5 to the Town of Newcastle
Official Plan.
We trust the Ministry will have no difficulties with Town Staff's
comments as outlined above and that.Amendment No. 22, with the
exception of Item 18, will be approved shortly. By copy of this
letter,. a copy of these comments is also being forwarded to the
Region of Durham for their information .
Yours~ra'f ;,_~ _ CC: Dr. M. Michael, M.C.I.P.
~; 1. ~ Commissioner of Planning
-~~~ Regional Municipality of Durham
-~`~ '~~~ Planning and Development Department
T.T. Edwards, M.C.I.P. 105 Consumers Drive
Director of Planning WHITBY, Ontario
L1N 6A3
JAS*TTE*j i p