HomeMy WebLinkAbout75-178Report No. 178
1. Purpose of Application -
On .August 209 19759 an application was submitted for a
34 lot subdivision on a 9.12 acre parcel fronting on High
Street in Bowmanville. This parcel abuts the C.P.R. main
line.
2. Official Plan Provisions -
The site is designated "Urban Residential" in the Int-
erim District Plan. This designation permits the type of
single family home subdivision proposed by the applicant.
3. Zone Provisions -
The subject site is zoned "General Residential" in the
Bowmanville Zoning By-law. The lots proposed by the appli-
cant conform to the frontage and area requirements of the
By-law.
4. Circulation of Application -
This application was circulated to the following agen-
cies for their comments.
(1) Northumberland and Newcastle Board of
Education
(2) Peterborough -Victoria -Northumberland and
Newcastle Separate School Board
(3) Durham Works Department
(4) Ministry of the Environment - Noise Poll-
ution Control Centre
(5) Bell Canada
(6) Bowmanville Public Utilities Commission
4. Circulation of 1,pplication - (continued)...
(7) Newcastle Works Department
(8) Newcastle Building Department
(9) Newcastle Fire Department
(10) Canadian Transport Commission
(11) Canadian Pacific Railway
The Canadian Transport Commission did not reply and was ass-
umed to have no comments.
5. Resume of Comments
(1) The Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education -
had no objections to this proposal.
(2) The Peterboroueh-Victoria-Northumberland and Newcastle
Separate School Board - advised that they had no ob-
jections.
(3) The Durham Works Department,- reported that the Bow-
manville Water Supply Plant cannot support any add-
itional population until the system is improved in
1977 and that the proposal is therefore premature.
(4) Bell Canada - advised that they had no objections to
this proposal.
(5) The Bowmanville Public Utilities Commission - advised
that they have no objections to this request.
(6) The Newcastle Works Department - require that the
Developer enter into a subdivision agreement with the
Town before any work commences. They also suggested
that some type of buffer zone be arranged along the
C.P.R. tracks.
I
5. Resume of Comments - (continued)....
(7) The Newcastle Building Department - pointed out that
lots of this size could present a problem for front
and rear set backs when placing the dwelling on the
lot.
(8) The Newcastle Fire Department - requires hydrants,
six inch mains and access to all areas for fire emer-
gency vehicles.
(9) C.P.Railway - advised that this proposal abuts their
main line. There are 20 trains a day on this route
and 11 of these travel between 11;00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M.
These trains average 120 cars in length, and travel
at 60 M.P.H. Because of the excessive noise and vib-
ration, as well as the danger to children, the Railway
does not look favourably on residential development
adjacent to rail lines. They suggested a berm along
the tracks, as well as 6 foot high chain link fence.
6. Comments -
Since this site is designated Residential in the Offic-
ial Plan and the zoning by-law, the Town is committed to
allowing some sort of residential development on the site.
However, the type of subdivision proposed by the applicant
would be extremely undesirable. The applicant proposed 6
single family lots within 200 feet of the C.P.R. main line.
These lots would be subject to extremely high noise and
vibration from the heavy traffic on this line and should not
be allowed. The deleterious effects to residents farther
back from the tracks could be reduced by replacing some of
the proposed single family units with townhouses with a
blank wall facing the tracks.
6. Comments - (continued)....
Safety is also a factor to be considered. There is al-
ready a path along the High Street Road allowance across
the tracks which is used by area children. Continued use
of this path should not be allowed. For these reasons,
a 10' - 15' berm topped by a 6' chain link fence should be
required along the railway frontage.
Since the Noise Pollution Control Branch of the Ministry
of the Environment has not yet supplied us with exact in-
formation for this site, we have used their comments for
another similar situation.
An alternate design indicating these suggested modifica-
tions will be presented at Monday's meeting. The area of
Bowmanville north of the C.P.R. tracks is already defici-
ent in parkland. The portion of the site which is unsuited
to residential development would be better used as a park
for this subdivision and the surrounding area.
Another problem is the access to the subdivision. This
developer proposes only one entrance. It is doubtful
whether this is acceptable by O.M.H.C. standards, which
usually demand alternate means of access. There appears to
be sufficient vacant land owned by others to the north and
east of this development to allow an access from Bernard
Street as well. If this is not possible, an emergency
access should be provided to High Street.
For these reasons, it is recommended that the Subdivision
be redesigned according to these suggested modifications.
Our proposed design will be presented at Monday's meeting.
We note that Ontario Housing Corporation are currently
seeking land in Bowmanville for both Senior Citizen and
Family Housing. We recommend that it be condition of app-
6. Comments - (continued)....
roval that a portion of the townhouse units be offerred to
O.H.C. at a fair market value. I,u summary, the Minister
should be requested to grant draft approval to the subdiv-
ision on the following conditions.
(1) That the plan be redesigned in accordance with
the drawing presented.
(2) That the land abutting the railway line be con-
veyed to the municipality as parkland and land-
scaped to minimize noise.
(3) That a portion of the lands for multi family
units be conveyed to Ontario Housing Corporation
in accordance with terms to be specified in the
subdivision agreement.
(4) That authorization to commence work be granted
only when the Durham Commissioner of Works
certifies that sufficient water supply and sew-
age disposal capacity is available for the pro-
posed development.
Respectfully submitted,
AL
George F. Howden,
Planning Director.
IL