HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-194-87.,.,...m„ ~, ,~,
. ~'~ - ,,~,,,V1
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT
(v~I~;; General Purpose and Administration Committee
pq~; Tuesday, September 8, 1987
T #: PD-194-87 FILE #:
CT: COURTICE URBAN AREA
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS EAST OF COURTICE ROAD
~~y~
~ ~. • - e~;
File # ,• ,~:F
Res. #~~~ ~"~
By-Law #
RECOF~IENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. TNAT Report PD-194-87 be received; and
2. THAT Staff be provided with further direction.
BACKGOUND AND COMP1E NT
At the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting of March 16, 1987•, the
Committee resolved (Resolution #GPA-251-87) to request Staff to bring for•war•d a r•epor•t on
the implications of changing 'the land use designations of the area east of Cour•tice Road
within the Cour•tice Urban Area and recommendations on how to proceed. This resolution
arose from public delegations made in respect of application for• rezoning and suhdivision
approval DEV 86-82 and 18T-86073 respectively. In accordance with Council direction,
Staff initiated a review of the implications of changing the land use designation and
sought public input as part of this review through a public meeting held on June 29,
1987 .
...?_
T"C~>
REPORT NO.: PD-194-87 Page 2
The areas subject to the review include all those lands presently designated
within the Courtice Urban Area and located east of Courtice Road. This area
has been designated for• urban residential development since 1960 when the
Darlington Official Plan was approved by the then f~linister• of Municipal
Affairs. This designation was reaffirmed by the Durham Regional Official
Plan which was approved by the Region in 1976 and the R1inister• of Municipal
Affairs in 1978. The Courtice Ur•han Area Plan, which was approved as
amendment No. 12 to the Official Plan of the for•mer• Township of Darlington
in October 1979 and subsequently approved by the Minister of Municipal
Affai r•s and Housing on June 6, 1980, fur•ther• designated thi s area as "lJr•ban
Residential" with a "Special Purpose Commercial" node located at the
intersection of Highvray No. ?_ and Courtice Road and "Major Open Space"
systems followed the creek beds of the Black Creek and its tr•ibutar•ies. In
Febr•uar•y, 1982 the Phi ni ster• of Municipal Affai r•s and Housing approved an
amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan (Amendment Plo. 19) dealing
with the designation of environmentally sensitive lands. Roughly 50% of the
area subject to this review was identified as possessing envir•onmentall,y
sensitive char•acter•i sties . Simi 1 ar•i ly i n October of 1982 , Counci 1 r•esol ved
to request a review of the Courtice Urban Area as it related to the proposed
extension of GO Rail service to the Oshawa/Newcastle Townline. That review
included among other things, an assessment of the impacts of existing land
use designations upon the environmentally sensitive areas of Courtice in
consideration of an environmental impact analysis initiated by the Town in
April 1981 and subsequently adopted by Council in November of that year.
That analysis also identified a large portion of this a.r•ea as being
environmentally sensitive and not suitable for• urban development. In
December of 1983 Staff r•epor•ted to the General Purpose and Administration
Committee on the results of our Courtice review (PD-182-83) and recommended
that significant. portions of the Courtice Urban Area he deleted from the
Urban envelope due to the environmentally sensitive nature of the lands.
* Attachment 1 hereto, depicts the amendments to the Courtice Official Plan
that were being contemplated at that time. The effect upon the area subject
...3
~C~)
REPORT NO.: PD-194-87 Page 3
of the current review would have been to delete from the Urban envelope all
of those lands located between Cour•tice Road and Hancock Road, north of Nash
Road and not pr•esentl•y occupied by residential development. The balance of
these lands were to be retained for• Urban development in accordance with the
policies of the Durham Regional and Newcastle Offical Plans.
At the meeting of March 16, 1987 specific concerns were identified relative
to the proximity of existing agr•icultur•al operations and the appropriateness
of the residential designation in consideration of these operations.
In that r•egar•d, the Durham Regional Official Plan r•ecluir•es residential
development within urban areas to comply with the agr•icultur•al code of
pr•acti ce. At the present point i n time, the Mi ni str•y of Agr•icul tur•e and
Food has not identified a concern with respect to the code of practice
r•el ati ve to any application cur•r•ently under consi der•ation by the Town
within the area subject of the review. Liven the history of the urban
designation and cur•r•ent development applications within this area, Staff
would suggest that there ar•e specific implications should Council wish to
revise land use designations east of Cour•tice Road.
It would appear from our• review that there is sufficient rationale for•
deleting or• altering the designations as they relate to environmentally
sensitive lands north of Nash Road. Similar•ily, there is some rationale for•
deleting the urban residential designations to the south of Highvray Two.
However, Staff find it difficult to justify or•r•ationalize a deletion of the
designated lands between Nash Road and the Black Creek save and except that
deletion of the area north of Nash Road and the area south of Highway Two
would result in an unusual configuration for• the urban boundary in this area
and an isolated neighbourhood bounded on three sides by r•ur•al development.
Deletion of the areas east of Cour•tice Road would necessitate revision to
servicing schemes for• the north-eastern portion of Cour•tice and provide
additional capacity within the Cour•tice Urban Area which conceivably could
permit increased densities in some locations and thus more efficient use of
urban lands or• the expansion of the urban boundary in other areas at present
densities.
...4
~~)
REPORT NO.: PD-194-87 Page 4
In comments to Town Staff, the Region of Durham Planning Department noted
that it would be possible to utilize some of the excess capacities of
existing trunk facilities to service other areas outside tl~e Urban Area or
to increase the development density within the remaining Urban Area.
However, it was their concern that it would not be possible to utilize the
existing trunk facilities as efficiently as intended, resulting in some loss
of capital expenditure already invested in existing trunk facilities.
Regional Planning Staff noted as well, that the current urban boundary also
relates to landuse, transportation and urban features such as Central Areas,
schools and parks, and that any redesignation of lands would adversely
affect the structure of the urban form.
A further Staff concern with respect to complete deletion of the areas east
of Courtice Road is relative to possible suggestions that the Town has not
proceeded in a consistent manner with respect to its prior commitment,
particularly, since we are presently considering two development
applications, one residential in nature and the other commercial within this
area. As a compromise, we would suggest that Council give consideration to
the possibility of deleting from the urban boundary only those lands
presently used for agricultural purposes south of Highway Two and those
lands north o~f existing development along Nash Road and Courtice Road due to
their environmental sensitivity.
We note however that there are presently a number of holdings within this
latter area under the control of development interests and any attempt to
delete these areas could result in Ontario P~iunicipal Board Hearings, which
the Town may be hard pressed to defend against given past development
approvals on lands exhibiting similar environmentally sensitive
characteristics. Regional Planning Staff have a1 so expressed a concern with
justifying such a redesignation. bde would therefore suggest that
consideration only be given to deleting the area south of Highway Two, save
and except those lands presently under consideration for commercial
development, and retaining within the urban area those lands north of the
Creek and deferring development of same pending preparation of a
neighbourhood development plan and submission by development proponents of
...5
~~2~
REPORT NO.: PD-194-87 Page 5
fur•ther• detai 1 ed i nfor•mati on r•el ati ve to mi tagati ve measures for•
environmentally sensitive lands.
Staff would ther'efor'e request that fur'ther' direction be provided relative to
Council's objectives for• this area so that we might proceed with any
necessary amendments to the Official Plan.
CC: Mr•. Don Bernstein, Solicitor
1500 Don Mills Road
DON MILLS, Ontario
M3B 3K4
Mr•. Ron Jones
Jones & Jones
Bar•r•i ster•s & Sol i ci tors
130 Kinq Street East
OSHAWA, Ontario
L1H 1B6
Mr•. Ken Srnith
R.R. #5
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
I_1C 3K6
Mr•. Bi 11 Manson
W.D.M. Consultants
20 Clematis Drive
WILLOWDALE, Ontario
M2J 4X2
Recommended for• pr•esentati on
to the Committee
~~~
r -'~
L-'awr•ence Kotseff
Chief A iinistr•ative Officer
G.P.A. REPORT
PAGE 5.
20. OOUF~PICE URBAN AREA LAND USE DESIQ~IATIONS EAST OF OOURTICE ROAD
That Report PD-194-87 be received; and
That pro~:;eessing of subdivision applications east of Courtice Road within the
Courtice Urban Area, be deferred as premature at this time.
i! _ ~ lJ ~ ~
~ yu1. ~ U Z ~
_
o~ E
d
`
A _
~
C
r d
Q c~
LQ
p-
~
G ~
T
N
~ ~
~
~
g.
C
m C
z O
a ~
C
N
v
~O y
v d
O p
?~ U~
~ J
c~
g
~
~
a d
g ~
O
4.
c O~
6.
~y
W c
~ a ~
e o E
0 EE
0o ~E
no o«
10'-
f~ ~
m E
E
g ~
'm ~E
xA'
ww
x
w~
~G
I ~ ~ ¢ v vv vc~ s c z
T
~+ --- - - -
w
N
Y W W C W
C ~ Q ~
~
ro W
...a
U
~
Z i a
Y
c ~
0 g.
E
~ Q
~ ~ W
j
~~d~ o`_ ~ ~ ~ ~
r~~ /~~ z U
~ ,4~
•
V c~° .~;
,'.~~`
Q ' `~` ~~~~~~` _ ~, •~,,,~
i_ ~ (~~~~
~~ s.
- ~;
~ r'
~f:
i~Z i,
~~ ~ ; r~•:; ~, 1 ~
r
r - r .~ .......'
A ~ ~ ~ '~
q O f
K i
,,~ ~va
kt. , ; '
~..,~,
( ,~.
Q Q ~ 4 ~ ~
_ (~~~_ dl /~~~~v
_ \/
r 1\\
.~ ,~ S .,~ _ - I 1
_ ~ I Z
S
is ,
a, S~ 0!1 IOOj
~p yj0
N
(~!
~~ny
Z ~ -
~~
~o3~e~
i
j
0
J W In
Q W Z ~ Q
aWU ~ d W
a~~~
aNV> a a ~
zza o z a
QWD W OY
m d W E- F.. ~
~oz ~' a O
~~~ ~ ? 3
W
haw } °- za.
WpW o O~J
~W~ Z OQ~
JQa =O 3 ~W
~~° 00 O ac=>
w<na z = Nu,
J
mpW m ~? Q~
OWD ~ W ~W
F~a ~ z 1-a
~ ~r.~f~. _,~r
t e
a "_:
~Z~ ~C~ Tb~~t ~ ~ /
~# t ~i4ti ~E~ ,, 'v ~ N~c~i
'__ '~~~
~ O
.i h3s`~I...
Fr ~ h
PNB 1 tr r i~ .y
1€+~ ?' s ~ v t4 e
8 $ F ~~
'~
E
W
0 $ s
W
_ e
C~ ~ R
(( R
~i ~~
~A
in