HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-207-87
TOXIN OF NE1~'CASTLE
«)
REPORT File # ~.•~a5
Res. # ~- /C~j.-~
By-Law #
I~'° General Purpose and Administration Committee
~~~ Tuesday, September 8, 1987
T #: ~~,_~, FILE #: npn R7-
CT: APPLICATION TO AMEND THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
OFFICIAL PLAN - 684658 ONTARIO LIMITED
3 CHURCH STREET, BOWMANVILLE
FILE: 87-11/N
RECOMMiENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-207-87 be received; and
2. THAT the Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommends that
Official Plan Amendment application 87-11/N submitted by 684658 Ontario Limited be
denied; and
3. THAT a copy of Council's decision be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the
applicant and the i nter•ested par•ti es indicated hereto .
BACKGROUND:
On May 19, 1987, Committee considered Staff Report PD-138-87 (Attachment No. 1) in respect
of Official Plan Amendment application 87-11/N submitted by 684658 Ontario Limited. The
subject application seeks the r•edesignation of a 1395 square metre lot at 3 Church Street,
Bowmanville from "Low Density Residential" to "Main Central Area/Commer•ci al" to permit the
...2
-~a~-~~
REPORT NO.: PD-207-87 Page 2
development of a parking lot to serve a new commercial/ residential
development proposed for• the pr•oper•ty located directly to the south (208
- 210 King Street East) and fronting on King Street. This latter parcel
is designated "Main Central Area/Commercial" by the Official Plan and
zoned "General Commercial (C1)" by By-law 84-63.
In the r•epor•t, Staff noted that a number of residents, a majority of
which live south of the Bowmanville Mall, were concerned that the
additional entrances onto King and Church Street resulting from the
proposed development would be hazardous for• young children walking to and
from Vincent Massey Public School.
Staff recommended that the subject application be r•efer•r•ed back to Staff
for• a subsequent r•epor•t upon receipt of all circulation comments.
Committee and Council resolved to adopt Staff's recommendation and to
for•war•d all petitions and comments to the Nor•thumber•land and Newcastle
Board of Education and the Region of Durham for• review.
The following comments were received subsequent to Council's
consideration of Report PD-138-87.
Nor•thumber•land and Newcastle Board of Education (May 5, 1987)
"The Board is concerned
r•estr•i cti ons ar•e placed
I f tr•af fi c i s per•mi tted
congestion will result.
children ar•e presently
sidewalks."
with the proposed changes unless clear
on access from the par•ki ng 1 of to Church Street.
to flow from the lot to Church Street, fur•ther•
A fur•ther• danger i s the fact that school
valking along Church Street which has no
...3
~'~-~>
REPORT NO.: PD-207-87 Page 3
Nor•thumber•land and Newcastle Board of Education (June 2, 1987)
"With respect to Report PD-138-87 concerning the petition which outlines
the concerns that the r•esi dents have for• thei r• chi 1 dr•en walking to
Vincent Massey Public School, I would like to add the following comments
which ar•e comments as they relate to safety on solutions to the problem.
At the present time, children ar•e walking from the Simpson Deer• Park -
Ashdale Area to Vincent Massey Public School. Their present route is
Simpson to King Street, cross King Street, along the north side of King
Street to Lambert Street, and,..-then north to school. This walk, under the
present situation, is not, from a safety point of view, the best since
the students ar•e having to cross seven entrances or• exists to commercial
establishments. Some of those commercial establishments have a
significant volume of large trucks moving in and out. With the addition
of the proposed commercial development between St. George Street and
Lambert Street, I have a concern with the added volume of traffic that
these children will be faced with. In addition, I have a concern with
respect to an entrance or• an exit to the proposed development on Church
Street, since it is my understanding that Church Street is designated in
the Official Plan as a residential Street and such access would not be
allowed.
In addition to this, as yora ar•e probably aware there ar•e no sidewalks on
St. George Street from King to Church and likewise on Lambert Street from
King to Church. The principal of the school has required the children to
use Lambert Street sinr_e this par•ticular• street seems to be a little
avi der•, and ther•efor•e, safer. As a general comment, the amount of
commercial development that has taken place on King Street between
Liberty and the Bowmanville Pull is significant and that the addition of
more commercial development in that par•ticular• area, I feel very strongly
will jeopardize the safety of the school children walking to school.
There is however, a solution to this problem which is a walkway from the
end of Frank Street at King Street around the back of the Texaco Station,
Medical Centre, and Frank Real Estate which would connect to Church
Street. Obviously, the development of this wali<way would take the
chi 1 dr•en out of the commer•ci al area and pr•ovi de them wi th a way to wal k
to school safely. I am strongly suggesting that the walkway be fenced
and paved since this will not only add a permanency to the situation but
also safety. I have discussed this par•ticular• situation with Terry
Edwards and my understanding is that the pr•oper•ty on which the walkway
would go is slated for• a residential development, which such development
pr•ovi di ng for• sidewalks. It i s also my under•standi ng that the walkway
would integrate well with the proposed residential development.
Ther•efor•e i n summary,
1) A walkway be built on the lot between Frank Real Estate and the
King's convenience store and that such walkway connect to Church
Street at St. George Street and be fenced and asphalted.
...4
~~~~
REPORT NO.: PD-207-87 Page 4
Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education (June 2, 1987)
Cont d
2. That no access be allowed to the proposed commercial development off
of Church Street."
Region of Durham Works Department
"The intent of this Official Plan Amendment is to allow the use of the
subject pr•oper•ty as a par•ki ng 1 of for• the proposed commer•ci al plaza to be
developed on the adjacent pr•oper•ty to the south. Ther•efor•e, no services
ar•e anticipated to be r•equir•ed on the subject land.
For• the above reason, this proposed parking lot would appear to have no
concerns from a Regional Works Department's point of view and we have no
objection to fur•ther• processing of this rezoning application."
The Ministry of Tr•anspor•tation and Communications and the Roman Catholic
Separate School Board have indicated no objection to the subject Official
Plan Amendment application.
COMMENT:
Staff note that, with the exception of the Nor•thumber•land and Newcastle
Board of Education, none of the agencies circulated with the subject
Official Plan Amendment application have any objections to the
r•edesi gnation of the pr•oper•ty at 3 Church Street from "Low Densi ty
Residential" to "Main Central Area/Commercial". The Public School Board
has indicated that thei r• pr•i mar•y concern r•el ates to r•estr•i cti ng acces s
from the proposed parking lot onto Church Street.
Planning Department Staff however have serious concerns with the proposed
r•edesignation of the land at 3 Church Street from "Residential" to "Main
Central Area". These concerns relate pr•imar•ily to the intrusion the
proposed par•ki ng lot would r•epr•esent into an established 1 ow density
residential area. Although the par•Icing lot is intended for• the use of
the residents of the proposed building and no access onto Church Street
would be permitted, it is Staff's opinion that a parking lot of this
nature is not in keeping with the residential char•acter• of Church Street.
...5
<~~
REPORT NO.: PD-207-87 Page 5
Staff ar•e also concerned that the approval of the subject Official Plan
Amendment application would establish a precedent for• the r•edesignation
of other r•esi denti al pr•oper•ti es on the south side of Church Street. The
limits of the Main Central Areas defined by the Town of Newcastle
Official Plan were recommended by Staff after careful consideration of
land use issues, and were approved by Council, the Region of Durham and
the Mi ni str•y of Municipal Affai r•s. The approval of the subject
application would r•epr•esent a fragmented approach to land use planning
which could ultimately lead to the erosion of other residential areas
abutting the Main Central Area.
In consideration of the above, it is recommended that the Region of
Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommends that Official
Plan Amendment Application 87-11/N be denied.
The other issue of concern, as identified by both area residents and the
Nor•thumber•land and Newcastle Board of Education is the increased danger
to children walking from the Bowmanville Mall Area to and from Vincent
Massey Public School which would be posed by the additional commercial
entrance onto King Street. Currently, there ar•e no sidewalks between
King Street and Church Street on either St. George or• Lambert Streets.
As noted by the School Board, the principle has r•equir•ed the chil dr•en to
use Lambert Street to reach the school and a crosswalk has been provided
across Church Street at Lambert Street. Staff note however that this
route br•i ngs the chil dr•en across the new entrance to the subject
pr•oper•ty, an existing commer•ci al entrance on the cor•ner• of St. George
Street and two (2) potential new entrances for• commercially-zoned
pr•oper•ti es to the west.
The School Board has concur•r•ed, following discussions with Town Staff,
* with pursuing establishment of a walkway as shown by Attachment No. 2
hereto. Staff have initiated discussions with r•epr•esentatives of
Nor•thdown Homes which owns the pr•oper•ty across which the School
Board has proposed that a walkway be provided. Such a walkway could
ultimately be incor•por•ated into the future development of the
...6
rr~~
REPORT NO.: PD-207-87
Page 6
Nor•thdown Homes site as a permanent feature. From discussions with
School Board Staff, there apparently is no difficulty with children
living to the south and west inasmuch as they can use the existing
sidewalks along Liberty Street and the south side of Church Street.
Following the Public Meeting of May 19, 1987 the applicant indicated a
deli r•e to proceed with constr•ucti on of a proposal which would not i ntr•ude
into the area subject of this application. That proposal complies with
the cur•r•ent zoning regulations and Staff will be approving the site plans
in due course.
JAS*TTE*jip
Attach.
August 6, 1987
CC: Mr•. R.D. Scott
Diamond & Fischmann
Barr•i ster•s & Solicitors
Suite 1, 58 Rossland Rd. E.
OSHAWA, Ontario
L1H 7V4
CC: 684658 Ontario Limited
96 Frank Rivers Drive
SCARBOROUGH, Ontario
M1W 3N3
CC: Mr•. John Stephenson
Manager of Tr•anspor•tati on
Nor•thumber•land & Newcastle
Board of Education
834 D'Ar•cy Street
P.0. Box 470
COBOURG, Ontario
K9A 4L2
Recommended for• presentation
to the Committee
d,.-
~•` ~--~
r•ence otseff
Chief Ad ' ~ ' s r•ati ve Of f i cer•
~c~)
REPORT NO.: PD-207-87
CC: Mr•. Gordon Stewart
Ms. Jane Chadwick
28 Ashdale Crescent
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
L1C 3M9
CC: Mr•. Char•1 es Nash
27 Church Street
BOWMANVILLE , Ontar•i o
L1C 1S4
CC: Mr•. Wally Pitt
19 Deer•par•k Crescent
BObJMANVILLE, Ontario
L1C 3M4
CC: Mr. George Brooks
5 St. George Street N.,
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
L1C 2K4
CC: Ms. Kay Moore
9 Church Street
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
L1C 1S2
CC: Mr•. Philip Palmer
26 Ashdale Crescent
BOWMANVILI_E, Ontario
L1C 3M9
Page 7
. ~ .. REPORT. ~ ~~ ~ ~Ei:le~.# ~ . ~ ~ ..
~; -
~; ,, r i :~ .~ .. Res. ~# ~ ~ .
'" ry. 1 .. -
:: ~ ~ ~ By-Law #
hEET~ING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
~~
~~~ Tuesday, Maly 19, 1987
REPORT #: 'PO-~~s-~~ FI(.F #: 67-11~D .. "
~~~~ APPLICATION TO AMEND TOWN OF NEWCASTLE OFFICIAL PLAN .
APPLICANT: ~ 684658 ONTARIO LIMITED ~.
' 3 CHURCH STREET; BOWMANYILLE
BACKGROUND AND COMMENT:
~.d'
~®
On March 18, 1987, the Town was advised by the Region of Durham of an application.
submitted by 684658 Ontario Limited to amend the Town of Newcastle Official Plan. The
subject application seeks to redesignate a 1395 square metre lot at 3 Church Street,
* Bowmanville (see attached Key Map) from "Low Density Residential" to "Main Central Area/
Commercial" to permit the development of a parking lot to serve a new
commercial/residential development proposed for the property located directly to the south
(208-212 King Street East) and fronting on King Street.
...2
` ~ REPORT``N0. ': PD-138-87, ,• ' . - •~Page 2 ~~•
. ~ . ~ _
. • • •`:Thi s~ •K•i rig~~Street frontage ~ ~ s 'designated "Mai'n ~~Centi^~al.Area/Commer. ci~~al."• by , :~
the Official Plan and zoned "General. Commercial (C1 )" by By-law 84=63. A .
* copy of the proposed development is attached hereto. The proposal .'
involves•a 3 storey building with 968.5 square metres (10,423 square ~ {
feet) of commercial floor space on the ground floor, and~a total of 24
residential units on the second and third floors.
The, applicant originally submitted to the. Town on November 18, 1986 an a
'
application for Site Plan Approval for a proposed two-storey commercial/
. residential building on the King Street property. The development
• proposed 637.8 square metres of commercial floor space on the ground
.. - -
.
- ~: floor.:and 9 .residential ~ units. on the second floor. • T.he revi sed plan ~ _
_ currently being considered.was submitted to the Town on .December 18, .~#
•986 Town .Staff subsequently ;advised the applicant that;. i n order for.
the revised application to be,consider-ed; an Official Plan Amendment -
. ,
. F:
.
application and~'a rezoning 'application were required.
{
' ~
5
on~Church sStr~eet fsubdect, of~;the ,Office al Plan Amendment ,, ~,~k ,
;~R ,
~,~~ ~r,,,~,The~_property~ ; <y F
,,
F
appf l;i cati on ~ s}+bounded on the east `.and west by si ngl e`~;fami 1 y, homes, -..
,.
Vincent.Massey Public School and single family homes lie_to the north
!l7S _ _ ~'
.~ .,. ~. ` ~ The ~ Reg i on-~ of Durham':P 1 anni ng Department ;~c~ rcul ated. the ::Of fi ci al P,1 an `.
~ ~~ Amendment ~applicat~on to the Regional Works:_Department, the Ministry of ~~
,, ,
,.
Transport,at~ on ''and Communications and the. ~Publ i c and Separated School ~
:, _ ,;~.
-
: ,~ _. _
,
_
Boards ..Comments from these, agencies ..have knot, as of yet, -'been .~
_
~
. ~ .:
,, ~,,
submitted:' The-following comments-were received from Town Departments:
Public Works Department
"We have reviewed the above-noted Official Plan Amendment and at this
point in time have no objection in principle."
Fire Department
"No objection."
...3
"Some concerns about spatial separation on the west side of the building.
I f there are no openings, then what;,about window requi rements for
dwelling units."
One letter with two (2) signatures and a petition with eighty-five (85)
signatures have been submitted in objection to the proposed official plan
amendment application. The residents, a majority of which live..in the _
area south of the Bowmanville Mall, are concerned that~the additional '-
entrances onto King and Church Street resulting from the proposed
development would be hazardous for young children walking to and from.
Vincent Massey Public School. The map accompanying the petition is
* attached hereto for Committee's information. ~ - ,- -,
.. ~ . ~ ~:
COMMENT: '.
Staff note that none of the Town's Departments haveobjected to the t ~'~"''~" ~r~.>, ~ °'
proposed development; however, comments from agenci es circulated `with-the
application by .'the Region have ,.yet-to be received: ~~ ~t - 3
3
S.
i"
With respect to the concerns expressed by area residents, Staff further' -
note that the applicant is entitled to an entrance onto King'Street -
z
inasmuch as the southern portion of the property is designated and zoned
for commercial uses. Staff have advised the applicant that an entrance ,_.
onto Church Street would not be permitted and that a landscape buffer,
pursuant to Section 3.15 of By-law 84-63 would be required along the
Church Street frontage of the property, as well as along the side lot
lines abutting adjacent residential uses.
Inasmuch as all circulation comments have not, as of yet, been received,
it is recommended that Official Plan Amendment application 87-11/N be
...4
Respectfully submitted,
war s, .
Director. of Planning
.Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
awrence otse
Chief Administrative Officer
..1~2~-+ -: LOT: - I I~... :.LOT. ....Ip ., ~ : ~ ~ `~9:= ~~ ~'~
. ~ ~ CONCESSION 1- -STwEET __
R1 ~ - - ,
R4-~ 2
~~ ~ ~ ~ R1
~ IOwE T -
ti ~ yt. ~ Ri ~ E P
cy ~: '~~ R''~, - ~'
,f
C/ R'~I? ~ ~ R' Y~ GRIfSIE AfE.
''~ ~Q/y? ~ ~ W
C I W
bye' ,Q~'2r ~y? ' ~
~ ~ R,~ ~
y
a ~. i~~ 4, R,c ,p,~ i m R 3
Fr '? ~2 ~ EP
.. ~'~ ~o • ~, j CHURCH ~
h /
C~ ~ ~ (H) .~...
~ 'Qi ~ ___ __ KING - -R4 R3 Rt-3 Rl (f)
rrR ~~ ~ C , ^
F~ (~ ~ Cl ~ ~ ST --- sTaEET ~ W
' ci M}Ci ~ p C 1-3 v
~ oi' ~ ~ ~ ~ Z
1 p I -5 Ri-5 O
li\\ ~ / ~
if El' FLAP
O 50 f00 200 300m
50 m
rr~=
I~
~~~
I 1 I I rl
'~
~ ~ T
Y{ry[I•L f Xwt.r ~s"w..x
Z.MH. i•>rf -~
. .~ I I y. ~ I 'I
. _ .-__ _- ~.kM~F/1C.H r1a~D _ 1 1 _ I _ _I _ ~ ~ ~
~GRGGFI Fe~G
' , -
/ V
to t 4I w1.I 4.1 woP ~
. 1 r
• NN 3
• _ ~ ~'
-- - 1
t~ ~ .M,
' _ ~ w
~ ~'"'~ r
~ 3 --STONEY ~~ •, ~ .
GI.~ P~. ZG71.2 mL
N
.1 -
K
O
'~fo ~.~uy '... - rn
^: _ ra u..~.v .:..aic
h' ..
X1.46 ~+- C.o G.~ t.o ~t
-- _- ~_ -
.~ .~
1
- t.< ~ 19.6]..
KING S T R E E~__ _ __. Y` ~ ~``_-_' -.
~ .
V~'
~.)
~'
Li}
v7
v~
~~
~- ~
0 2
(~ ~
~~
2~
~ Q
o~
~~
~-
( d
'Z
"``~
O ~, ~ n
.~ Q Q r ry G ~
vv M w~ ..
~ uj Q ~3 ~`
~ ~ ~
~~
~ Q ~~ ~ ~'
w
Y
Q~
p ~ ~
-
. ~ -
t~~~
Q .?~
lL J °= ~
9 3
~ u~
a
w ~ ~(
~O
V
~ ~ ~ ~ ---
-_
~}
2~
~~ ~
~N
- zQ
>i
a, ~~
- ~~~~~~
~ -
~ ~~
~~ ~ J
'r
~4
L
1 ~
NW
-:ti:
~zn 3~ba NSV ~~ j` ',,~
tom-
~ `f
r
~ -,
1
} a' ~ l.t}
Zo1-~~~n~
Yu-V~~~~
~ z~~-~ ~~
~~'~2~~a
LLB 7-~=~~~~
~iQ>Le~
u
J ~ X
~ U o ATTACHMENT N0. 2 TO
------ ~~~ __2 ___ _ o~ ~~ REPORT PD-207-87
1S },1.~~~]il
J-S 3`97J0~"~
'!1.zl~~Wd~ '
W
V~
`~
~ /~b NoSd t,U 15
'! S Yl f`1 V 7J.~