HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-56-93 I"hi CO~lRA7'!®h! OF THE TOtV F ~3t~CAST"(~
DN: COFA.GPA
Meeting; General Purpose and Administration Committee ,f~'~s,]
Date: Monday, April 5, 1993 ~ ~~A ° ~~-~~~°
PD-56-93 A93/006 to A93/010 Dy~La~#
F~epc~rt File
Subject: MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE MEETINGS OF MARCH 11 AND MARCH 25, 1993
FILE: A93/006 to A93/010
R~ r~trtatl~rt:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-56-93 be received;
2. THAT Council concur with the decision of the Committee of
Adjustment made on March 11 and March 25, 1993; and
3. THAT Staff be authorized to appear before the Ontario
Municipal Board to defend the decisions of the Committee of
Adjustment in the event of an appeal.
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 In accordance with Section 45 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990,
all applications received by the Town for minor variance are
scheduled to be heard within 30 days of being received by the
Secretary Treasurer. On March 11, 1993 the Committee heard
and APPROVED the two (2) applications for minor variance. On
March 25, 1993, the Committee heard three (3) applications,
approving one (1), tabling one (1), and denying one (1).
1.2 The three (3) applications which the Committee approved during
the two meetings were all considered to be in conformity with
the Official Plan and Zoning By-law provisions, desirable and
minor in nature.
1.3 Application A93/008 requested a variance to the exterior
sideyard provisions to allow a link dwelling to be constructed
...2
-- -_
PA. EH ° ~ FlF~~~«
SHI.S S PIIiN~EO _...IEGVClEO PAPEfi
REPORT NO.: PD-56-93 PAGE 2
having a 4.78 metre (15.68 ft.) sideyard as opposed to the
minimum required 6.0 metre (19.68 ft.). The applicant has six
(6) models which could be constructed on the subject lot
without need for a variance. In addition, the adjacent corner
lot has established a setback of 6.0 metres. Committee and
staff believe it is more desirable to maintain the established
streetscape at a 6.0 metre setback. The application was
DENIED.
1.4 Application A93/010 was TABLED to allow the applicant to
further assess the proposal and to satisfy the frontage
requirements of the Zoning By-law.
1.5 Staff have reviewed the Committee's decision and are satisfied
that the decision conforms to the general intent of the
Official Plan and the Zoning By-law and that the variances
sought are minor in nature.
1.6 Council's concurrence with the Committee of Adjustment
decision is required in order to afford Staff's official
status before the Ontario Municipal Board in the event of an
appeal of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
~
,4
1
~
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P. Lawrence E. Kot~s~ff
Director of Planning Chief Administ~jative
and Development Officer ~
CP*FW*cc
*Attach.
29 March 1993
1 -C
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
PERIODIC REPORT
FILE NUMBER: A93/006
APPLICANT: ALAN & HAZEL RABY
AGENT: D. STRIKE
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
21 SOPER CREEK DRIVE
PART LOT: 8 CONCESSION: 1
TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE
PLAN NUMBER: 10M-785 -69
ZONING: R2
HEARING DATE: 11-Mar-93
DECISION: APPROVED
APPEAL DATE: 10-Apr-93
MINOR VARIANCE:
TO LEGALIZE A LOT WHICH HAS BEEN CREATED WITH A LOT AREA OF 366M2
AS OPPOSED TO THE REQUIRED 370M2
REASON FOR DECISION:
THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS DEEMED TO MAINTAIN THE GENERAL INTENT
OF THE TOWN'S OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW, BE IN THE BE5T
INTERESTS OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND AND IS CONSIDERED TO BE MINOR
IN NATURE, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED
r.`~
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
PERIODIC REPORT
FILE NUMBER: A93/007
APPLICANT: MICHAEL DUGGAN
AGENT: G.M. SERNAS & ASSOCIATES LTD.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
31 FENWICK AVENUE
PART LOT: 10 CONCESSION: 2
TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE
PLAN NUMBER: 40M-1670 -53
ZONING: R2
HEARING DATE: 11-Mar-93
DECISION: APPROVED
APPEAL DATE: 10-Apr-93
MINOR VARIANCE:
TO LEGALIZE A LOT WHICH HAS BEEN CREATED HAVING A FRONTAGE OF
11.91M (39.07 FT), MINIMUM REQUIRED 12.OM (39.37 FT.)
REASON FOR DECISION:
THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS DEEMED TO BE IN KEEPING WITH THE
GENERAL INTENT OF THE TOWN'S OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW, IS
IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND AND TS
CONSIDERED TO BE MINOR IN NATURE, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED
=
,-
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
PERIODIC REPORT
FILE NUMBER: A93/008
APPLICANT: 909423 ONTARIO LTD.
AGENT:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
2 SIMNICK CRESCENT, COURTICE
PART LOT: 28 CONCESSION: 2
TOWNSHIP: DARLINGTON
PLAN NUMBER: 40M-1675 -69L
ZONING: Rl
HEARING DATE: 25-Mar-93
DECISION: DENIED
APPEAL DATE: 24-Apr-93
MINOR VARIANCE:
TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A SEMI/LINK DWELLING ON A LOT
HAVING AN EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 4.78M (15.7 FT.), MINIMUM
REQUIRED 6M (20 FT.)
REASON FOR DECISION:
THAT THE APPLICATION BE DENIED AS IT IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE MINOR
IN NATURE
.W ~
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
PERIODIC REPORT
FILE NUMBER: A93/009
APPLICANT: MARTIN ROAD HOLDINGS LTD.
AGENT: THE KAITLIN GROUP LTD.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
51 BONNYCASTLE DRIVE, BOWMANVILLE
PART LOT: 15 CONCESSION: 1
TOWNSHIP: DARLINGTON
PLAN NUMBER: 40M-1686 -13
ZONING: R2
HEARING DATE: 25-Mar-93
DECISION: APPROVED
APPEAL DATE: 24-Apr-93
MINOR VARIANCE:
TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A S.F.D. ON A LOT HAVING A
REAR YARD SETBACK OF 7.141M (23.4 FT.), MINIMUM REQUIRED 7.5M (25
FT.)
REASON FOR DECISION:
AS THE APPLICATION IS IN KEEPING WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING
BY-LAW, IS DESIRABLE AND CONSIDERED MINOR IN NATURE, THE
APPLICATION BE APPROVED FOR A REAR YARD SETBACK OF 7.141M
~JI
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
PERIODIC REPORT
FILE NUMBER: A93/O10
APPLICANT: PAUL & LISA HALMINEN
AGENT:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
613 MILL ST., NEWCASTLE, ONT.
PART LOT: 27 CONCESSION: BF
TOWNSHIP: CLARKE
PLAN NUMBER: -
ZONING: RC1 & Al
HEARING DATE: 25-Mar-93
DECISION: TABLED
APPEAL DATE: 24-Apr-93
MINOR VARIANCE:
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING PERMISSION FOR THE CREATION OF A DEFINED
LOT AREA OF 2353M2 IN THE RC-1 ZONE, THE BY-LAW REQUIRES 2500M2 ~
REASON FOR DECISION:
THAT THE APPLICATION BE TABLED TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING TO
ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO RE-EVALUATE HTS PROPOSAL
~S ~ L