HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-248-87~9~
,.,.r. x.~„~~
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT File # ~ ,~-~a~~.%-~f
Res. #
By-Law #
hEETING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, October 5, 1987
~T #: PD-248-87 FILE #; 86-54/D (revised)
SUB.~CT: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION - WILLIAM CLARKE
PART LOTS 1 & 2, CONCESSION 1, CLARKE
OUR FILE: 86-54/D(Revised)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-248-87 be received; and
2. THAT Report PD-48-87 be lifted from the table; and
3. THAT the Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommends that
Official Plan Amendment Application 86-54/D (Revised) submitted by Mr. William
Clarke be den-i-e-d ; and
4. THAT a copy of Council's decision be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the
applicant and the interested parties indicated hereto.
BACKGROUND:
On February 16, 1987, the General Purpose and Administration Committee considered Staff
* Report PD-48-87 (Attachment #1) in respect of Official Plan Amendment Application 86-54/D
submitted by Mr. William Clarke to permit the development of a 46 lot estate residential
...7_
f~
REPORT NO.: PD-248-87 Page 2
subdivision on a 48.34 hectare parcel of land in Part Lots 1 and 2,
Concession 1, Clarke. The site is designated "Major Open Space" and
"Hazard Lands" by the Regional Official Plan. Granby Creek traverses the
southern portion of the site.
In the report, it was noted that a peat swamp occurs immediately adjacent
to Highway 2 and ground water on-site, which was found at approximately
1.5 metres depth, is considered to be perched in nature. Soils on-site
are susceptible to erosion and the applicant proposed a series of
temporary and permanent storm water retention ponds to reduce the amount
of silt reaching Granby Creek.
As a result of Health Unit concerns, Agricultural Code of Practice
setbacks from 3 livestock operations in the area, and the 300m setback
from agricultural buildings housing livestock required by Section 3.19(c)
of By-law 84-63, a total of 21 lots in the proposed plan were sterilized
for development.
Staff recommended, based on the factors discussed above, as well as the
proximity of the site to Highway 401, the intrusion into a predominantly
agricultural area, concerns regarding the suitability of the site for
private servicing, and the greater development pressures and demand for
municipal services, that the subject application be denied. Committee
and subsequently Council resolved to refer the Report back to Staff for a
further review and subsequent report.
* On May 25, 1987, the Town received a revised application (Attachment No.
2) proposing the development of 33 lots and deleting the areas adjacent
to Highway 2 and within Agricultural Code of Practice setbacks. The
applicant also submitted a hydrogeological study and an acoustical impact
report. The hydrogeological study states that available well reports
suggest that drilled wells will provide adequate yields of freshwater
from deeper aquifers, and anticipate wells will be 30 to 60 metres in
depth.
...3
~9~
REPORT NO.: PD-248-87 Page 3
The Report also notes that the occurence of shallow water table
conditions preclude the installation of conventional in-ground the beds.
The Report recommends the use of raised the beds with a mantle extending
15m in the direction of sewage efficient flow. Given the site topography
however, more detailed examination may be required with respect to the
t he bed and mantle setting on individual lots, as Ministry of the
Environment regulations do not permit waste disposal systems on slopes
exceeding a 4:1 grade. The report concludes that there is sufficient
recharge available to the aquifer to dilute sewage effluent and to
maintain the yields of available water to neighbouring wells.
The Acoustical Study notes that predicted noise levels along Highway 2
fall within acceptable limits. Noise levels along Highway 401 are well
in excess of recommended noise levels and noise control measures are
required for Lots 16 to 25. The report recommends the construction of a
combination berm/fence up to a height of 4.5 metres above grade along the
southern property line to maintain acceptable noise levels in outdoor
recreational areas . The report also recommends modifying site 1 ay outs to
allow the house to act as a barrier to outdoor recreational areas.
Acceptable noise levels will be attained through appropriate construction
details and by keeping windows closed. Central air conditioning and a
warning clause on title will be required for Lots 17 to 25.
The revised application was re-circulated to technical agencies and the
following comments were submitted:
Region of Durham Health Unit
This department has no objection to the revised application. However,
the number of lots that are unsuitable for on-site sewage disposal will
be determined when the subdivision proposal is circulated to this
department.
P~inistry of Agriculture and Food
Staff have reviewed the revised amendment. As this revision addresses
the Ministry''S Agricultural Code of Practice concerns, we have no further
comments to make.
...4
~~9~
REPORT NO.: PD-248-87
Ministry of Natural Resources
Page 4
Staff initially voiced concerns regarding the proposed design of the
plan. tJe have since met on-site with the applicant and the consultant
for this proposal. The revised plan of subdivision has resolved our
design concerns. When the draft plan of subdivision is formally
circulated for comment, we will recommend appropriate conditions of
approval to further address drainage, erosion and sedimentation control.
Hope Township
No objection to the proposal provided that the developer is responsible
for all up-grading required on the Boundary Road.
The Town of Newcastle Public Works and Fire Departments indicated no
objection to the original application; however the Works Department
stated they were not prepared to assume responsibility for the temporary
and permanent storm water ponds proposed by the applicant. As well, the
Fire Department indicated that the proposed subdivision is outside the
recognized 5 mile response limit from a fire station.
The following agencies indicated no objection to the original and revised
applications:
Town of Newcastle Community Services Department
Public School Board
Separate School Board
Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority
Region of Durham Works Department
Ministry of Transportation and Communication
COMMENT:
The revised plan addresses the concerns identified by the Health Unit and
the Ministry of Agriculture and Food by deleting 10 lots along Highway 2
and 2 lots along the Boundary Road with Hope Township. The lot
incorporating the existing farmhouse, included as part of the original
plan, has been deleted from the revised plan.
One of the criteria outlined by the Regional Official Plan with respect
to estate residential proposals in that such developments shall not
...5
1~~9,
REPORT NO.: PD-248-87 Page 5
unduly restrict the use of adjacent properties for agriculture.
Notwithstanding that the remaining lots on the revised plan be outside
the area of conflict as specified by the Agricultural Code of Practice,
Staff note that the intent of the Code is to highlight potential
conflicts and that the distance specified by the Code represents the
minimum distance between conflicting uses. Development of a residential
subdivision just beyond the calculated area of influence does not
represent good planning in that such development could potentially limit
any expansion of the agricultural operations. In that regard, By-law
84-63 specifies a minimum separation of 300 metres from agricultural
buildings housing livestock. Staff note that the revised plan fails to
recognize the 300 metre setback which, as indicated by Attachment No. 2,
would sterilize a further 9 lots. Staff recommend that the proposed
development would represent a significant non-agricultural intrusion into
a predominantly agricultural area. This could result in greater
development pressures on the area and, as noted earlier, could affect the
expansion potential of the existing agricultural operations.
The Official Plan also states that an estate residential proposal should
not require the undue expansion of municipal services. Staff are
concerned that the approval of the subject application could result in
greater pressures on the Town for the extension of municipal services to
the area. In this regard, Staff reference the comments from the Fire
Department with respect to response time from the nearest fire station,
and the Public Works Department's stated unwillingness to assume
responsibility for the storm water ponds proposed by the developer.
From a review of the Hydrogeologic and Acoustical Reports submitted in
support of the application, Staff are not satisfied that the subject site
is suited to estate residential development. The Hydrogeologic Study
confirms the presence of a high water table at a depth of approximately
1.5 metres and therefore recommends the use of raised t he beds. Staff
further note that the presence of the high water table will require
extensive site de-watering for the construction of homes on the lots.
...6
~~J'
REPORT NO.: PD-248-87 Page 6
The Acoustical Report concludes that, in order to achieve acceptable
indoor noise environments on 10 of the lots, special measures such as
central air conditioning are required since windows must remain closed.
Acceptable noise environments for the outside recreational areas on 6 of
the lots can only be achieved through the installation of a barrier along
Highway 401 and, on Lot 16, a barrier on the lot itself. The Regional
Official Plan states that estate residential proposals should not be
located so as to be adversely affected by highways.
Based on the above considerations, it is Staff's opinion that the
approval of the subject application would be contrary to the intent of
both the Official Plan and the Ontario Foodland Guidelines. Staff have
also considered the possibility of revising the plan to delete lots
affected by the various constraints and have rejected same as impractical
in consideration of all of 'the other site limitations. It is Staff's
opinion that approval of this application would not be in 'the public
interest. It is therefore recommended that Council recommend to the
Region that the subject application be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
T. war s, .C. .P.
Director of Planning
JAS*TTE*jip
*Attach.
September 24, 1987
cc Mr. William Clarke
c/o Vi ctori a Park Farm
R.R. ~1
Newtonville, Ontario LOA 1J0
cc Gary & Marsha Vandergaast
Box 52
Newtonville, Ontario LOA 1J0
cc Ms. Dian Schiuk
Newtonville, Ontario LOA 1J0
Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
r
,~ ~-
`~
'f, ~
~, r
~~~a. rence ~ otse
Chief Adm'ni trative Officer
...7
/l~i'
REPORT NO.: PD-248-87
Page 7
cc Mr. & Mrs. Tom Patterson
Box 57
Newtonville, Ontario LOA 1J0
cc Ms. Jean Kulyk
Box 84
Newtonville, Onario LOA 1J0
cc Tom McHaffie & Deborah Sturges
Box 12
Skops Court
Newtonville, Ontario LOA 1J0
cc Neil & Sandra Lucy
Box 147
Newtonville, Ontario LOA 1J0
cc Ken & Laureen Whitney
R.R. #3
Port Hope, Ontario L1A 3V7
cc Henry Kortekaas & Associates
82 Sherwood Road East
Pickering Village
Town of Ajax, Ontario L1V 2B4
~; --:, -
,~_. _ 2,
\_ \ ~-~.~
LOT~~ ~~ ' ~~ -~~ =° ~. ~~ `'~
l-- ~ :~. ~ s~ ~, J r-:
_ ~ ~.- ~ ,
.w
V , ~ ..~,,. ; .
•.. ~ W
• •1}~f.• • ifJ;~
••.•~,~ . .J•••l• .'.~.• •. ~
.WJ~ • •
_~ • • r .:
. .. -- -- ..-__...-i i i ~ t .
HIGHWAY N° 401 ~ SUBJECT SITE
10 9. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
'' V ` P~ ~ ~ ~ , ~
q ~ ~ ~ ~ N
Al ~ AI ~ ' ~
~ /~ . ~ ~ O
LOTS AFFECTED 6Y DEVELOPMENT ~ ' ` At r N
~,~ ~ W
Z
~xo~M<t z 4~, ~ E,~ U
' RESTRICTIONS. EP ~ ~ ~ U
uwcouiE 'r' _ _
~'
~ 12
EP ; ~
NuMwY M .01 ~'~ ~ N
N
~ I ~ ~ ~ U
' ~ ~ ~ 2
~Y ~_~ ~ /®
o swloo a».
KEY MAP •~~ ~