The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About75-182Report No. 182 1,Pt Irpose of Application - An application was made to the Region for an amendment to the Darlington Official Plan to permit a 45 lot Estate Resi- dential Subdivision on part of ]Bot 119 Concession 3, Darling- ton. This application was subsequently referred to the Town for processing, and then to the Planning Advisory Committee. 2, Official Plan Provisions - The subject site is designated "Agricultural" in the Darl- ington Official Plan and "Rural" and "Environmental Protection Area" in the Interim District Plan. While the Darlington Official Plan states that "the pre- dominant use shall be for agricultural or farming purposes, some provision is made for "single family dwellings on large holdings". However, no provision is made for an estate resi- dential subdivision, "'The Interim, District Plan provides for a limited amount of Estate Resi-dential development "on lands uniquely suited to this type of development" according to locational, agriculture poten-ial and physical criteria. However, the plan provides only for "individual estate residential lots" and states that an amendment would be required to provide for a subdivision. The Plan states that the proposed lots should be greater than 2 acres but less than 5 acres in area. 3. Circulation of i�n�licat�n - The application was circwlated to the following agencies for comments - 1. Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education a . . a 2 3. Circulation of AADlicati0n - (continued)... 2. Peterborough -Victoria -Northumberland and Newcastle Separate School Board 3. Durham Works Department 4, Durham Health Unit 5. Bell Canada 6. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority 7. Ontario Hydro 8. Newcastle Works Department 9. Newcastle Building Department 10. Department of Agriculture The Newcastle Fire Department did not reply and was assumed to have no comments. 4. Resume of Comments - 1. The Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education - advised that they had no objections to this proposal. 2. The Peterborough -Victoria -Northumberland and Newcastle Separate School Board - advised that they had no objec- tions to this amendment application. 3. The Durham Works Department - advised that this proposed development is located beyond the existing sewer and water service areas, and that there are no plans to extend services to the area within the foreseeable future. For this reason, they suggested that this application is pre- mature at this time. They also advised that if the sub- division were subsequently approved, road allowance wid- enings, daylight triangles and 1'-0" reserves would be required from the subject lands. . . 3 4. Resume of Comments - (continued).,.. 4. The Durham Health Unit - advised that they approved in principal of this development but that lots 19 119 139 149 159 169 19 and 23 are affected by the presence of drainage ditches, and that this could pose a problem in locating tile bed areas despite the relatively large size of lots. They also advised that several lots will likely require the addition of a considerable amount of fill material. 5. Bell Canada - advised that they had no objections to this proposal. 6. The Central hake Ontario Conservation Authority - advised that portions of the site are environmentally sen- sitive, both because of the Creek valleys which trans- verse the property and also because of their location in a major creek recharge area. These portions have been designated as "Environmental Protection Areas" in the Interim District Plan. It is the objective of the Conservation Authority to minimize development in these sensitive areas and to protect the recharge areas of the creek systems under its jurisdiction. They pointed out three features of the proposed plan which were at variance with this policy. First, the draft plan appears to propose that a major portion of the creek valley be filled to permit the construction of dwellings and sep- tic tanks on lots 11 to 16 and that many other lots will require substantial fill for tile beds. Secondly, they noted that the Durham Health Unit had expressed concern over the problems of locating tile bed areas in lots 19 and 23. The third problem concerns the proposed parkland dedication. All of the land the developer proposes to deed to the Town for parks purposes is hazard land. 4. Resume of Comments - (continued).... 6. (cont'd).... The Interim District Plan states that the Munic- ipality need not accept this valley land, but may require tableland. Any active recreational use of these creek valleys will cause serious erosion problems, destruction of vegetation , and subsequent reduction in water quality. Several solutions were suggested to these pro- blems. These could be incorporated into the draft plan if the raquired Official Plan amend- ment is approved. 7. Ontario Hydro - advised that they foresee no problems in serving this project. 8. The Newcastle Works Department - requested that the developer enter into a subdivision agreement with the Town. 9. The Newcastle Building Department - advised that the minimum lot area should be 2 acres to accommodate septic tanks. 10. The Ministry of Z'griculture and Food - indicated that 25% — 3010 of the property on this site is Class 3 or better agricultural land which would be capable of sustained production of common food crops. The Mini- stry has adopted a policy of retaining in food pro- duction, wherever possible and practical, high capa- bility agricultural land (Class 1-4). However, greater concern was expressed over possible detrimental effects of this proposed subdivision to the maintenance and continued operation of the apple orchard immediately to the west. 4. Resume of Comments - (continued).... 10. (cont'd)... For these reasons, it was stated the Ministry could not support the proposed rural estate subdivision in this location. 5. Comments - There are two questions which must be considered in conjunc- tion with this application. (1) Is the site suitable for Estate Residential dev- elopment? (2) Is the Plan, as proposed by the applicant, suit- able to the Town? Any amendment to the Darlington Official Plan would have to conform to the policies of the Interim District Plan. The Interim District Plan states that Estate Residential develop- ment should be located "reasonably close to community facil- ities but not in areas where future urban development or piped services are planned" on land where the soil capability for agriculture is rated in the Canadian Land Inventory as Class 7. The minimum area required under this plan is two acres. For this reason, consideration of the proposed amend- ment must deal with two matters. (1) The suitability of the subject site for agriculture. (2) The future development pattern of the Town of Bowmanville Although a portion of the site is class 1-3 agricultural land, these patches of good land are disected by creeks. This would severly limit the agricultural potential of the land. In this case the land could possibly be considered appropriate for ..6 5. Comments - (continued)...* estate residential use. The second consideration is the stipulation that Estate Residential lots should not be permitted in areas where future urban development is planned. Stage Three of the Regional Official Plan proposes several alternatives for development in Bowmanville. One of these alternatives for a population of 50,000 indicated that the southern portion of this lot could form part of the Bowmanville urban area. It also indicates the possibility of an arterial road bisecting the site. A decision on the suitability of this area is premature until the Region has given a clear indication of its policies regard- ing both the final shape of the Bowmanville urban area and the criteria for estate residential development. There are thousands of acres of land in the Town which are suitable for this type of development L "; only limited demand. No estate residential subdivisions should be allowed until the most suit- able locations have been determined. Other issues, such as lot size and greenbelt requirements, cannot be resolved until the major issues have been resolved. It appears at this stage that because the area is environment- ally sensitive, an increase both in lot size and the size of the greenbelt will be required. To reiterate, it is recommended that the Region be advised that this application is premature pending receipt of clear guidelines on future development in the Town of Bowmanville and a policy on Estate Residential development in the Region. Respectfully submitted, ,Ze,orge F. Howden, Planning Director. Lots 14 IOCATIOfl 13 12 ` 11 Man 10 9 8 7