Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-05-79 (2) not a duplicateCORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAMPTON, ONTARIO LOB 1.10 TO: Mayor Rickard & Members of Council L.L. KRISTOF, M.C.I.P., Director TEL. (416) 263-2231 REPORT NO. 5 DATE: March 2, 1979 SUBJECT: Application for Plan of Subdivision No. 13T-76071, Part Lot 14, Concession 2, Darlington Our File No.: S -A-2-1-2 1. Purpose of Application On October 22, 1976, an application was submitted requesting approval of a plan of subdivision proposed for a 36.69 acre parcel of land in part of Lot 14, Concession 2, Darlington. A revised plan, proposing fourteen two acre single family lots and an eight acre open space block was submitted by the applicant on March 10, 1977. A later revision proposed by the applicant was unacceptable to this Department. 2. Official Plan Provisions (a) Region of Durham Official Plan Amendment Number 5 to the Region of Durham Official Plan, which was approved by Regional Council on October 4, 1978 and is currently under review by the Minister of Housing, would permit the development of a fourteen lot estate residential subdivision on the site. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies of this plan. -2- (b) Bowmanville Official Plan The site is designated "Residential -Estate" and "Hazard Land" in the Bowmanville Official Plan. The lands designated "Hazard Land" will be dedicated to the Municipality for open space purposes and the lands to be developed for residential purposes conform to the policies for Estate ResidentiAl Development articulated in the Plan. 3. Zone Provisions The subject lands are zoned "Agriculture" and "Conservation and Hazard" in the Bowmanville By-law. A rezoning would be required to permit an estate residential subdivision on this land. We note that an application for rezoning has been filed, and subsequently referred to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant. 4. Circulation of Application The subject application way circulated to the following agencies i for their comments: 1. Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education, 2 Peterborough -Victoria -Northumberland & Newcastle Separate School Board, 3. Durham Works Department, 4. Durham Health Unit, I 5. Bell Canada, 6. Ministry of Natural Resources, 7. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, I 8. Bowmanville Public Utilities Commission, 9. Newcastle Works Department, 10. Newcastle Building Department, -3- 11. Newcastle Fire Department, 12. The Newcastle Recreation Department, 13. Ministry of Agriculture & Food. Bell Canada and the Newcastle Fire Department did riot reply and were assumed to have no ocmments. The Northumberland Newcastle Board of Education, Peterborouqh- Victoria-Northumberland and Newcastle Separate School Board, Bowmanville Public Utilities Commission, Chief BuildincLOfficial for the Town of Newcastle and Newcastle Recreation Department indicated that they had no objection to the proposed subdivision. Other agencies submitted more detailed comments recommending revisions to, or conditions of approval for, the plan. These are summarized below: The Region of Durham Works Department advised that they have no objection to the proposed subdivision, subject to the follow- ing conditions: "The following Regional Municipality of Durham Works Department's conditions shall be complied with prior to consent by the Works Department for registration of the plan of subdivision and said conditions shall form part of the Subdivision Agreement: (a) That the subdivider pay for those service charges and/or development charge levies which are in effect at the time of registration of any portion of this plan. Said service charges shall pertain to those services which are the res- ponsibility of the Regional Municipality of Durham. (b) That engineering drawing for Regional services and the final plan of subdivision be submitted to, and approved by the Regional Works Department prior to the preparation of the Subdivision Agreement. (c) That satisfactory arrangements be made for financing of the Region's share of servicing, if any, prior to the release of the final plan for registration. -4- (d) That the developer obtain approval of the Durham Health Unit for installation of individual wells and septic tanks for each lot within the plan. (e) That the developer dedicate to the Regional Municipality of Durham free and clear of all encumbrances 10 feet of road widening across the total frontage of the property abutting Regional Road No. 57. (f) That the developer dedicate to the Regional Municipality of Durham 10 ft. x 45 ft. daylight triangles at the intersection of the proposed road with Regional Road No. 57.. (g) That the developer dedicate to the Regional Municipality of Durham a 1 foot reserve across the total frontage of the property abutting Regional Road No. 57 (as widened), except for that portion required for the proposed internal road." 2. The Durham Health Unit submitted the following comments: "The above proposal can now be approved in principle by the Durham Health Unit. Prior to the issuance of any septic tank permits, further soil testing may be required if tile bed sites have been cut or filled. Some 500 to 600 lineal feet of weeping tile will be required for each dwelling." 3. The Ministry of Natural Resources expressed the following concerns: "Block A appears to satisfactorily protect the lots from the flood susceptible area. However, there are erosion problems on the steep slopes in the east parts of Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 that could affect buildings on them (especially on lots 10 and 11). Bowmanville Creek is also important as a coldwater trout stream and should be protected from erosion and siltation. RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the above we would recommend that this plan be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the municipality's Restricted Area Zoning By-law contain provisions which would have the effect of prohibiting all buildings and structures in Block A except those necessary for flood or erosion control; 2. That the owner agree in the Subdivider's agreement, in wording acceptable to this Ministry; -5- (a) To neither place nor remove fill of any kind, whether originating on the site or elsewhere; nor alter any existing vegetation in Block A, without written consent of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. (b) That prior to initiating any grading or construction on the site, to prepare a slope stability analysis and erosion control plan acceptable to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources, which will describe the stability of the slopes adjacent to Block A, and the means of stabilizing and preventing erosive areas, and minimizing siltation. (c) To develop Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 according to site plans acceptable to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. These site plans are to show existing and final grades, the locations of all buildings and structures, site drainage and vegetation; in accordance with the findings of the slope stability study described above. (d) To erect a snow fence, or other suitable barrier along the top of bank, or 20 feet from the rear lot line of lots 8, 9, 10, and 11 to prevent the unauthorized dumping of fill or alteration of vegetation in Block A, or down the steep slopes. This barrier shall remain in place until all grading, construction, and re -sodding on the site is completed. In order to expedite clearance of these conditions, a copy of the signed subdivider's Agreement should be sent to the District Manager, Ministry of Natural Resources, 322 Kent Street, West, Lindsay, Ontario K9V 2Z9." The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority shared the views of the Ministry of Natural Resources, and submitted the following comments: The subject site is intersected by the main branch of Bowmanville Creek the floodline of which has been accurately delineated on the draft plan. At present, the to -be -developed portions of the site are devoid of vegetative cover and are undergoing sheet and gully erosion. The banks of the Bowmanville Creek valley in the vicinity of lot 11 are being undermined and are in an unstable condition. It is essential that the steeply sloping areas to the rear of this lot be rehabilitated prior to any development occurring in this area of the site. - 6 - Based on the above, we would recommend this plan for draft approval subject to conditions: 1. That the flood -prone areas of Block A be placed under the appropriate zoning category which would have the effect of prohibiting all buildings or structures in Block A other than those required for flood or erosion control. 2. That the subdivision agreement contains provisions wherein the owner agrees: a) not to oppose the by-law provision above; b) to submit to the Authority for approval plans which will indicate the method to be employed in rehabilitating the steeply sloping areas to the rear of lot 11 as per draft plan dated February 14, 1977; c) not to place fill of any kind whether originating on the site or elsewhere within Block A nor to alter that branch of Bowmanville Creek traversing Block A without the written permission of the Authority; d) to develop lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 according to site plans approved by the Authority. These plans shall indicate existing and final grades, the locations of all buildings and structures, site drainage and vegetation; e) that prior to initiating any construction or grading on the site including the rough grading of roads, to erect a snow fence with a 20 foot setback from the rear lot limits on lots 8, 9, 10 and 11; f) to carry out or cause to be carried out those conditions of approval described in b), c), d) and e) and to comply with the conditions stated on permits issued by the Authority under Ontario Regulation 824/73. In order to expedite our clearance of condition 2, a note should be added to the conditions of draft approval request- ing that a copy of the signed subdivision agreement be sent to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority." 5. The Town of Newcastle Works Department requested the following con- ditions for the approval of the subdivision: "1) That the developer enter into a subdivision agreement with the Town. 2) That storm drainage be provided to the nearest suitable outlet -7- 3) That the road allowance between Concesssion 1 and 2 be improved to the Town's satisfaction abutting the developer's property. 4) That the 17 -foot road widening and the 1 -foot reserve on the east side of Regional Road #57 be accepted. 5) That the developer grant any easements to the Town. G) That all works constructed under the jurisdiction of the Town of Newcastle be constructed to the Town of Newcastle's design criteria and standard detailed drawings." The Ministry of Agriculture and Food originally commented on the proposal in June of 1977, as follows: "Staff of the Ontar reviewed the above it in view of the and the guidelines objectives. F io Ministry of Agriculture and plan, and consideration has bee present goals and objectives of on land use which support these ood have n given to the Ministry goals and A review of the subject area indicates that it consists of a soils complex of 70% Class 1 agricultural soils and 30% Class 3 limited by erosion damage, as defined by the Canada Land Inventory (1:50,000 scale). The subject site is currently rented for agricultural production and we note that it appears to be designated as 'major open space' in the draft Durham Regional Official Plan. However, the proposal realistically would have a minimum impact on the agricultural land resource base due to its small size and irregular shape. Moreover, it is probably a more desirable location for estate residential development than development on good farmland elsewhere in the Region in view of the existing houses abutting half of the subject area to the north and southeast. However, this Ministry does have a poral at this time as it conflicts the Agricultural Code of Practice. enclosed subdivision map, there is dairy use approximately 152 feet to Lot 3. This dairy barn appears to area 13' in the Regional Plan. The 50 cows in loose housing as well as its proximity to the above subdivis protect the interests of the dairy complaints by prospective residents the minimum distance separation (MD Code of Practice. serious concern with this pro - with the MDS requirements of Referring your attention to the a livestock barn currently in the west of the proposal's be designated as 'special study barn presently contains about outside feedlot area. Due to ion proposal and in order to operator from future odour , it was necessary to apply S) Formula 1 of the Agricultural Referring your attention to the attached MDS Formula 1 calculation, it was found that the minimum distance separation between the existing dairy barn and the proposed residences should be 842 feet. As noted on the attached subdivision map, this would preclude residential dwellings on Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12 and half of Lots 5, 10 and 13. Should this proposal be considered for approval, we strongly recommend that no residences be constructed on the above lots or within a radius of 843 feet from the above dairy barn until such time that this dairy barn ceases to house livestock." The applicant was immediately advised of these comments, and re- quested that staff take no action on the subdivision application until he had had an opportunity to resolve this conflict with the Agricultural Code of Practice. On March 1, 1979, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food advised staff that they are willing to withdraw their earlier com- ments and allow approval of the subdivision in spite of the provisions of the Code of Practice. 5. Comments The site proposed for this development is within the limits of the former Town of Bowmanville, but is separated from the urbanized section of Town by a branch of the Bowmanville Creek. Estate type residential development abuts the northern and eastern boundary of the subject parcel. In addition, the proposal conforms with the policies of both the Bowmanville Official Plan and a proposed amendment to the Region of Durham Official Plan. In fact, our only concern regarding the merits of the proposed subdivision had been related to the earlier comments of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Since the applicant has satisfied their concerns in this matter, we are now in a position to recommend approval of the plan. 6. Recommendation It is recommended that the Minister of Housing and the Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommends approval of application for subdivision Number 16T-76071, subject to the following revisions and conditions: Revisions• 1. That the plan be revised to provide the 10 foot road widening abutting Regional Road 57, and the daylight triangles at the intersection of Street A with Road 57, as requested by the Region of Durham Works Department. 2. That the plan be revised to provide lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 with a minimum lot area of two acres, exclusive of the land road to be dedicated for/widening purposes. rnn,ii+innc. 1. That approval apply to a plan dated February 14, 1977, to be revised according to the recommendations contained in Report of the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle. 2. That Amendment Number 5 to the Region of Durham Official Plan be approved by the Minister of Housing. 3. That the necessary Zoning By-law amendment receive Ontario Municipal Board approval. 4. That the owner convey land in the amount of 5% of the land included in the plan to the Municipality for park purposes pursuant to the provisions of Section 33 (5) (a) of the Planning Act. The land conveyed for park purposes shall include Block "A". -10- 5. That the owner enter into a subdivision agreement with the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle, to include, in addition to the usual requirements, the following provisions: 1. That the owner agrees: (a) To neither place nor remove fill of any kind, whether originating on the site or elsewhere, nor alter any existing vegetation in Block A, without written consent of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. (b) That prior to initiating any grading or construction on the site, to prepare a slope stability analysis and erosion control plan acceptable to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources, which will describe the stability of the slopes adjacent to Block A, and the means of stabilizing and preventing erosive areas, and minimizing siltation. (c) To develop Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11 according to site plans acceptable to the Central Lake Ontario Conser- vation Authority. These site plans are to show existing and final grades, the locations of all buildings and structures, site drainage and vegetation; in accordance with the findings of the slope stability study described above. (d) To erect a snow fence, or other suitable barrier along the top of bank, or 20 feet from the rear lot line of lots 8, 9, 10, and 11 to prevent the unauthorized dumping of fill or alteration of vegetation in Block A, cr down the steep slopes. This barrier shall remain in place until all grading, construction, and re -sodding on the site is completed. 6. That such easements as may be required for utility or drainage purposes shall be granted to the appropriate authority. 7. That the owner enter into a subdivision agreement with the Regional Municipality of Durham. 8. That the owner agrees in writing to satisfy all the require- ments, financial and otherwise, of the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle concerning the provision of roads, installation of services, and drainage. 9. That the owner obtain approval of the Durham Health Unit for the installation of septic tanks and individual wells, and that such approval be obtained prior to the release of the final plan of subdivision. Respectfully submitted, NJF:lb Leslie L. I<ristof, M.C.I.P. Director of Planning & Development. REVISED IST- 7607I (DATED FE®.14,19771 KEY„ PLAN ,(lJe I = Mile 1 , H tip« W 44 1� aa' p`H.l'2d WYII�Kd•YLYf1b(r •:f II.,:. 1 Nof rfr')d!. NOfNri {j, !l3 UIVI SIGN 1' � \IItlyrj c f• I!WG* IWAy I- I' �� I i II I II I, � 1� l • HIGHWAY I f I '•gypA��' I. ?� I "--, �� I I, IP � I CANADIgry r U i II Ilf i KEY„ PLAN ,(lJe I = Mile 1 , H tip« W 44 1� aa' p`H.l'2d WYII�Kd•YLYf1b(r •:f II.,:.