Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-152-97 Addendum"UNFINISHED BUSINESS" WDOMi- aoo.GPATHE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee Date Report #: Monday, January 5, 1998 Addendum to PD- 152 -97 File #: ROPA 96 -016 and PLN 32.12.8 File # Res. #C_ By -law # REPORT Subject: CLARIFICATION OF SECTIONS IN REPORT PD-152-97 AND JOE DOMITROVIC PART O CONCESSION FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTO COURTICE ROAD Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD- 152 -97 be lifted from the table and its recommendation be approved by Council; and, 2. THAT the Addendum to Report PD- 152 -97 be received for information. 1. PURPOSE 1.1 On October 27, 1997 Council passed the following Resolution: "THAT Report PD- 152 -97 be tabled to allow Staff an opportunity to confer with the applicant and bring back a further report addressing those sections of the report which are being questioned." The purpose of this addendum report is to provide a Staff response to the report sections which are being questioned by Mr. Domitrovic. All previous reports pertaining to this matter are attached herein to assist Council in the understanding of the background history. 1.2 At the Planning Department's request, the applicant submitted a letter outlining the specific sections which were being questioned. Staff met with the applicant 7. ,J'`� ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PD- 152 -97 PAGE 2 on December 1, 1997 to discuss these concerns in detail. 1.3 The following sections are being questioned by the applicant from the listed reports: (a) Report PD- 152 -97: Sections 3.2 and 3.4 (b) Report PD- 12 -97: Sections 4.2, 7.1, 7.4, 7.6, 7.7, 8.4, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, and 9.1. Section 7.5 of Report PD -12 -97 was discussed with the applicant for clarification purposes. 2. CLARIFICATIONS TO REPORT PD- 152 -97 2.1 Section 3.2 (a) The applicant objects to the reference of "degradation" contained in the following sentence: "The presence of abutting waste disposal sites does not justify any further degradation of the lands and /or environment." The applicant further argued that his application should be approved on the basis that his lands were surrounded by three former waste disposal sites. Staff would like to point out that the word "degradation" is used within the context of protecting the land and /or the environment from incompatible development. We maintain that approving the autobody repair business on the basis that the surrounding lands may already be contaminated is not an appropriate planning rationale on which to approve the application. ,6 Fill 1 l I Jill • • ' • (b) On October 14, 1997, Council passed the following resolution with respect to the petition submitted by Bernice Petryshyn: "THAT the petition submitted by Bernice Petryshyn advising of local residents who are in opposition to the rezoning application submitted by Joe Domitrovic, be received; THAT the petition be referred to the Director of Planning and Development for appropriate action; and, THAT Bernice Petryshyn be advised of Council's decision." Mr. Domitrovic does not agree with the petition's suggestion that these area residents really oppose the rezoning application. Staff respect Mr. Domitrovic's opinion but cannot offer any assistance on this matter. At its meeting held on December 15, 1997, Council received correspondence from Bernice Petryshyn and referred the correspondence to the Planning Department. In summary, Mrs. Petryshyn reiterated her objection. A copy of her letter is contained in Attachment #1. 2.2 Section 3.4 The applicant does not agree with the Municipality's procedures for allowing Council to reconsider previous decisions. Staff presented the procedures in the last report based on information provided by the Clerks Department. We suggested to Mr. Domitrovic that he may speak to the Clerks Department or request Council to change the procedure. 3. CLARIFICATIONS TO REPORT PD -12 -97 3.1 Section 4.2 The report indicates that existing uses to the east consist of "vacant lands formerly used as a gravel pit ". The applicant disagreed with the words "vacant lands ". He i -, , ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO: PD- 152 -97 PAGE 4 indicated that the site continues to be operated as a sand and gravel business on an occasional basis with various materials being placed into the empty pit. The Ministry of Natural Resources, which licenses aggregate pits, has no record of an extraction license for this operation. During site inspection, there was no evidence of any business operating. The statement "vacant lands ", in our opinion, is an accurate description of the surrounding lands. 3.2 Section 7.1 This section outlined the Fire Department's safety requirements for the autobody operation. The report indicated that these requirements had not been fulfilled as of the date of writing of PD- 152 -97 prior to January 10, 1997. Mr. Domitrovic indicated that he has fulfilled the Fire Department requirements. By memo dated January 13, 1997 the Fire Department advises that the applicant had fulfilled the safety requirements. 3.3 Section 7.4 and Section 8.8 A portion of the applicant's building encroaches onto the neighbouring property to the west. The Building Division had provided comments indicating that, in order to meet spatial separation requirements under the Ontario Building Code, a portion of the building would either have to be demolished or additional lands would have to be obtained. The applicant has verbally indicated that a portion of the building will be demolished to meet the Ontario Building Code requirements. At its meeting held on December 15, 1997, Council received correspondence from Frances Scanga and referenced said correspondence to Staff (Attachment #2). In summary, Mrs. Scanga requested that the encroaching building be removed immediately and a fence be erected as soon as weather permits. i -) "t ryl-T • 1 virrorr 111 1 1 -• • -� As stated earlier, Mr. Domitrovic has verbally advised Staff that he will remove the encroaching building. Staff wish to advise that the Municipality has no jurisdiction to deal with encroachment issues between two private owners. Mrs. Scanga may wish to consult her lawyer in this matter. However, in the event the Domitrovic's application is approved, the Municipality must require the demolition of the encroaching building. On the issue of fencing, the Line Fences Act provides for the procedures and legislative policies to assist property owners. In the event of a dispute, the owners can request the Municipality, through the Clerk's Department, to request a line fence review. 3.4 Section 7.5 Staff discussed the Durham Region Public Works comments with the applicant for clarification purposes. The existing residential access from Courtice Road will remain. Access for the autobody repair shop would only be permitted from Pebblestone Road. A 5.18 metre road widening along Pebblestone Road will be required. The applicant has no objections to these requirements. 3.5 Section 7.6 This section summarizes comments from Central Lake Ontario Conservation (CLOC). The applicant objected to the fact that the Central Lake Ontario Conservation comments were not provided to Council in its entirety. At the request of Mr. Domitrovic, the Central Lake Ontario Conservation comments are provided in their entirety as follows: "Authority staff have been contacted by Mr. Domitrovic regarding a proposed application for an Official Plan Amendment for the above -noted site. Further, it r JJ ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO: PD- 152 -97 PAGE 6 is staff's understanding that the purpose of the application will be to legalize the existing uses on the property (Auto Body Repair Shop). Staff have inspected the site with regard to potential environmental concerns with the proposal and to scope the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the proposed application. However, given the existing developed nature of the property, staff do not foresee additional environmental impacts resulting from the legalization of the existing uses. Nevertheless, the application would provide an opportunity to ensure that chemicals stored on -site (eg. paints and solvents) are properly safeguarded from spills /leaks, which could contaminate groundwater. It is anticipated that given the relatively small scale of the business and limited volume of this type of material on -site, spill containment could readily be achieved within the material storage area(s) of the existing building." 3.6 Section 7.7 This section discusses the concerns raised by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. The applicant feels that if CLOC does not have any concerns with the application, then the concerns raised by the Ministry would be in direct conflict. Staff suggested to Mr. Domitrovic that we cannot speak on behalf of another government agency. 3.7 Section 8.4 The applicant disagrees with Staff's position that the existing use cannot be considered a home industry for the following reasons. The applicant feels that the existing use is a small -scale operation on the basis of comments from CLOC. He indicated that only autobody repairs are conducted on the property and that mechanical repairs only include those required for structural purposes as part of autobody repair. Therefore, noise and exhaust ADDENDUM T• REPORT NO: ► fumes should not be of concern. He further indicated that he only works on one car per week and that outside storage is limited to the vehicle awaiting repair. Despite Mr. Domitrovic's opinion on the subject matter, staff cannot accept an autobody repair business as a home industry. 3.8 Section 8.6 This section indicates that approving illegal uses on an individual basis would set a precedent throughout the Municipality. The applicant feels that a precedent has already been set in that approvals are given to large developers. Staff has no comment on this. 3.9 Section 8.7 This section commented on the information required to examine the impacts of the surrounding former landfill sites on the subject lands. Upon further discussions, the applicant has no objections to this statement. 3.10 Section 9.1 This section summarizes the report and provides a rationale for Staff's recommendation. The applicant felt that the Planning Department could not adequately comment on whether a future reconstruction of Pebblestone Road would limit the effectiveness of the existing use on the property. Staff agreed that such a statement is speculative and therefore agree to withdraw the statement. 4. CONCLUSIONS 4.1 This report has been prepared as per the direction of Council. For the information of the Committee and Council, both local and regional planning Staff recommended against the proposal; and both local and regional Councils denied the proposal to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan. At the Ontario Municipal Board prehearing held November 17, 1997, the Board will schedule a two day hearing after March 1, 1998. Respectfully submitted, 9 Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning and Development RH *FW *df Attachment #1 - Letter from Bernice Petryshyn Attachment #2 - Letter from Frances Scanga Attachment #3 - Planning Report PD- 152 -97 Attachment #4 - Addendum to Report PD -12 -97 Attachment #5 - Planning Report PD -12 -97 Reviewed by, W.H. Stockwell Chief Administrative Officer Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision: Joe Domitrovic 3872 Courtice Road Courtice, Ontario L1 E 21-5 Irving Gleiberman Suite 208 50 McIntosh Drive Markham, Ontario 1-313 9T3 Marylynn Riseborough 4193 Tooley Road Courtice, Ontario L1 E 1Z4 Bernice and Walter Petryshyn 1671 Taunton Road East Hampton, Ontario LOB 1 JO Francis Scanga and Nick Groe 43 Waverly Street North Oshawa, Ontario Li J 8H2 Florence Carnochan 1742 Pebblestone Road Courtice, Ontario L1 C 3K4 .,