HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-60-96DN: DEV960IO.GPIHE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
REPORT
PUBLIC MEETING
Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # �� c� C)
Date: Monday May 6, 1996
Res. # ' % ° 46
Report #: PD -60 -96 File #: DEV 96 -010 By -law #
Subject: REZONING AND SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS
BIRCHDALE INVESTMENTS LIMITED
PART LOT 35, CONCESSION 2, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON, 1422
HIGHWAY 2, COURTICE
FILE: DEV 96 -010
Recommendations:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration
Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD -60 -96 be received;
2. THAT the application to amend the former Town of Newcastle Comprehensive
Zoning By -Law 84 -63 submitted by Randy Jeffrey on behalf of Birchdale
Investments Limited be referred back to Staff for further processing and
preparation of a subsequent report subsequent pending receipt of all outstanding
comments; and
3. THAT the interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of
Council's decision.
1. APPLICATION DETAILS
1.1 Applicant: Birchdale Investments Limited
1.2 Agent: Randy Jeffrey
1.3 Rezoning: From "Special Purpose Commercial (C5) Zone" to an
appropriate zone permitting the development of a 585
m2 retail commercial plaza.
1.4 Site Area:
0.44 hectares (1.09 acres)
5n8
...2
REPORT NO.: PD-60-96 PAGE El
2. LOCATION
2.1 The subject lands are located at 1422 Highway #2 in Courtice, across from the
Dinnerex plaza containing the Swiss Chalet restaurant. The applicant's land
holdings total 0.44 hectares (1.09 ac). The legal description of the property is
Part Lot 35, Concession 2 in the former Township of Darlington.
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 On March 14, 1996, Randy Jeffrey filed an application on behalf of Birchdale
Investments Limited with the Municipality of Clarington to amend the former Town
of Newcastle Comprehensive Zoning By -Law 84 -63. The purpose of the Zoning
By -Law Amendment application is to change the current zoning from "Special
Purpose Commercial (C5) Zone" to an appropriate zone permitting the
development of an 585 m2 retail commercial plaza. The applicant proposes two
drive - through fast food restaurants and one other retail store.
4. EXISTING AND SURROUNDING USES
4.1 Existing Uses: Vacant land
4.2 Surrounding Uses:
East: Vacant buildings (formerly Adams Warehouse)
North: Residential subdivision
West: Residential dwelling
South: Commercial and residential development
5. OFFICIAL PLAN POLICIES
5.1 Within the existing 1991 Durham Region Official Plan, the subject lands are
designated "Sub - Central Area ". These areas shall provide an integrated array of
community, office, retail and personal service, recreational and residential uses.
A total of 28,000 m2 of retail commercial floorspace has been designated for the
Courtice portion of the Sub - Central Area. The application appears to conform
with the policies. ...3
599
REPORT • PD-60-96 PAGE
5.2 The subject lands are designated "Sub - Central Area: Primary Commercial Area"
within the Clarington Official Plan. Permitted uses within these areas include
retail, personal service and office uses, recreational and cultural uses including
places of entertainment but excluding video arcades, residential uses, and
community facilities. A total of 28,000 m2 of retail commercial floorspace has
been designated for the Courtice portion of the Sub - Central Area. The application
appears to conform to the Official Plan policies.
6. ZONING BY -LAW
6.1 The subject lands are currently zoned "Special Purpose Commercial (C5) Zone"
which permits the retail sales of furniture/ major appliance/ office furniture, motor
vehicle sales/ equipment/ accessories, building supply outlet, beer/ liquor/ wine
outlet, garden centres, fruit and vegetable outlet, eating establishments, taverns,
places of entertainment, hotels/ motels, and places of worship. As the proposed
use do not comply with the zoning by -law, an application to rezone the property
is warranted.
7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSION
7.1 In accordance with Municipal procedures and the requirements of the Planning
Act, R.S.O. 1990, the appropriate signage acknowledging the application was
erected on the subject lands. The required notice was mailed to each landowner
within the prescribed distance.
7.2 As of the writing of this report, a number of inquiries from adjacent residents for
general information have been received. The concerns are as follows:
• residents are concerned about traffic impacts of development along
Highway 2, particularly at the Varcoe Road /Darlington Boulevard
intersection. Although the Region has indicated that the intersection does
not meet the warrant for signalization, residents feel that signals should be
built as part of this development;
W
REPORT NO.: PD-60-96 PAGE 4
light trespass from the development is a potential concern of residents
along Bridle Court. It has been suggested that a lighting engineer prepare
a lighting plan to would ensure that no excess light levels affect adjacent
homes;
concerns over noise from the development have also been voiced,
particularly over hours of operation; and,
there has been some objection to the height of the proposed fence along
the rear property line. This may block the views presently enjoyed by
some neighbours. In addition, trees and hedges may be removed to
construct the fence.
7.3 A letter of concern has been received from the agent of the landowners to the
west (See Attachment #3). The concern is that the design of the proposed
development excludes a joint development scheme between the two properties.
They note that the proposal does not incorporate the joint access between the
properties. The correspondence notes that Section 8.2 of the Courtice Sub -
Central Area Secondary Plan seeks to ensure that smaller parcels are developed
in a comprehensive manner. The potential for an additional entrance to the
Birchdale Investment lands would aggravate the existing traffic situation. These
issues will be addressed in a subsequent section of this report.
7.4 A letter of concern was also received from a resident on Bridle Court (See
Attachment #4). Concerns mentioned in the letter have been discussed above
and will be dealt with through site plan approval. While the concern raised in
regards to the walkway between Bridle Court and the proposed commercial
development at Townline Road and Highway 2 is not relevant to this application,
the issue will be dealt with during the site plan review process of the Valiant
Property application.
...5
511
■• I• M .s
AW
8.1 The application was circulated to solicit comments from other relevant agencies.
The Clarington Fire Department has no objections to the application.
8.2 The Clarington Public Works Engineering Division has no objections to the
application provided that the following concerns are addressed:
• the applicant must provide a 6.0 metre wide rear laneway which provide
access between all adjacent properties;
• the applicant's engineer must prepare a site grading and drainage plan
that details the configuration of the on -site storm sewer system (minor
system) and the conveyance of the overland flow (major system) from the
site. Any proposed storm sewer connection will be subject to the approval
of the Regional Municipality of Durham;
• the applicant must enter into a development agreement with the
Municipality; and,
• any proposed entrances onto Highway 2 will be subject to the approval of
the Regional Municipality of Durham.
8.3 The Durham Regional Planning Department has indicated no concerns relating
to Official Plan conformity with the application.
8.4 The Durham Regional Public Works Department has indicated no objections to
the proposal. Municipal water supply and sanitary sewer are available from
Highway 2. A planned joint access will require a 9.0 metre width and 7.5 metre
curb radii. Until such time as the adjacent lands develop, the access as shown
is acceptable subject to the elimination of 6 parking spaces along the eastern
property line.
8.6 Comments still remain outstanding from the following agencies:
• Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
• Ontario Hydro
512
REPORT • 60 PAGE 6
9.1 The Courtice Sub - Central Area Secondary Plan seeks to ensure that development
occur in a comprehensive manner. This is especially significant for smaller
parcels to avoid piecemeal commercial development. Staff have met with the
applicant as well as the adjacent landowners to the west to discuss this matter.
The site plan as submitted by the applicant does not indicate a comprehensive
development concept.
9.2 A number of policies in the Secondary Plan seek to minimize the traffic problems
of the area. These are as follows:
• The Secondary Plan requires a consolidation of access points and
common internal traffic circulation. This is achieved through limiting
commercial entranceways to 80 metre intervals. Under this policy, lands
both to the east and west of the subject lands would receive an access
while the subject lands would not be granted an access. A joint
development concept with the lands to the west or the east would have to
proceed in order for the subject lands to obtain an access. The joint
access would be implemented by means of registered easements in favour
of the abutting property owners.
• An integrated system of private rear lanes having a minimum width of 7.0
metres is required to accommodate the movement of traffic, especially
commercial delivery vehicles, between developments. Again, the system
would be implemented by means of registered easements in favour of the
abutting property owners.
9.3 There are a number of design concerns which need to be addressed in the review
of the site plan application, including the following:
• coordination of site development with adjacent commercial lands;
• internal traffic circulation;
• location of loading spaces;
• privacy fencing; and,
• lighting impacts.
...7
513
REPORT NO.: PD-60-96 PAGE 15
These matters will be subject to further discussions with the proponent and
adjacent landowners.
9.4 As the purpose of this report is to satisfy the requirements for the Public Meeting
under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, and considering the number of outstanding
comments, it is respectfully requested that this report be referred back to Staff for
further processing and the preparation of a subsequent report.
Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by,
4�
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.,
Director of Planning
and Development
RH *FW *jip
26 April 1996
W. H. Stockwell
Chief Administrative
Officer
Attachment #1 - Key Map
Attachment #2 - Proposed Site Plan
Attachment #3 - Correspondence from Martindale Planning Services
Attachment #4 - Correspondence from Richard Olsen
Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision:
Birchdale Investments Limited
1050 Simcoe Street North
Oshawa, Ontario
L1 G 4W5
Attn: Randy Jeffrey
Richard Olsen
12 Bridle Court
Courtice, Ontario
L1 E 2131
Robert Martindale
Martindale Planning Services
23 Elizabeth Street
Ajax, Ontario
L1 T 2X1
George & Hortenzia Dorca
15 Bridle Court
Courtice, Ontario
L1 E 2131
F. & A. Scanga Holdings Ltd.
16 Griffiths Drive
Ajax, Ontario
L1 T 3J4
514
Attachment + 1
515
1°0
a
� QQ
W!o-
a
9g
Io'EI S4'SI 5�'L Io'gl9•s
w
1� o•sL w s'za g
� � I
3
S
W
J
Z
J
0 J`
W
4 W
"o
'N
d
Qpp� 9
mF 2
OS
o�
Z 1 N=
�0 �m
W 1� co
z
<
Q
0
w
F-
N
N
0
S
0
F� 3
r
� 1
S
a�
xl j
j0 y
ua e
o_
I --
J -�
o -
1B3d L9,L,+Z W I'olL
M „o£'69 oLl N -
I
I�-- H°nH W o'1
S
1°£ISLgI
J
£.6I
8
LA
I
o a
I
o
I
a
0
N
N
SL'g I o•9 SG
I Iofl
o°
Y
<
c
c C-
Z
C,
r
1»e o�•¢iz
w 1. S �7 „o£ ,SS ,61 N
da
d4<
0
u F
z
2
0
Z
11
0
a
MI
y
"�
Q
w
Y
0
Jf
W
'A
�
9
W a
s
au
Y
a
m
2
iJ
U
N
0
S
0
F� 3
r
� 1
S
a�
xl j
j0 y
ua e
o_
I --
J -�
o -
1B3d L9,L,+Z W I'olL
M „o£'69 oLl N -
I
I�-- H°nH W o'1
S
1°£ISLgI
J
£.6I
IiT
LA
C""
N
I o 9
I SL'SI
F 0
ul
SL'g I o•9 SG
I Iofl
o°
Y
<
c
SE'li' IG'aIGZIS'EI
Z
77
1»e o�•¢iz
w 1. S �7 „o£ ,SS ,61 N
N
0
S
0
F� 3
r
� 1
S
a�
xl j
j0 y
ua e
o_
I --
J -�
o -
S /.'8
7 -2v
0�ti
mw It
C TU<
�0
d �aQ
�J9
ssoQ
LQ14
7
a 9Wa0
WJ
Or
w 30.d
" a
4 N LA
7 2 CC
<FFOFO
� Jg�
oo��g
a
adOct0
N
o r N
<Y Z
a \�
� O
- z u
T
J
ul =
7
o u~i » o
ZO m'LL¢°
U z
3
a
a
0
a Z
N
W
6 U
6 �
W �
� LL
Q W
516
ment #2
1B3d L9,L,+Z W I'olL
M „o£'69 oLl N -
I
I�-- H°nH W o'1
N-ah --
1°£ISLgI
£.6I
C""
I o 9
I SL'SI
F 0
SL'g I o•9 SG
I Iofl
Y
<
<J �
77
da
d4<
u F
z
2
S /.'8
7 -2v
0�ti
mw It
C TU<
�0
d �aQ
�J9
ssoQ
LQ14
7
a 9Wa0
WJ
Or
w 30.d
" a
4 N LA
7 2 CC
<FFOFO
� Jg�
oo��g
a
adOct0
N
o r N
<Y Z
a \�
� O
- z u
T
J
ul =
7
o u~i » o
ZO m'LL¢°
U z
3
a
a
0
a Z
N
W
6 U
6 �
W �
� LL
Q W
516
ment #2
MARTINDALE PLANNING SERVICES • URBAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
Apr. 22, 1996
Mr. Richard Holy
Planner
Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance St.
Bowmanville, Ont.
L1C 3A6
Dear Mr. Holy:
30.0
Attachment #3
APR 2 4 1998
MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINUI
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Re: Rezoning Application DEV 96 -010
Birchdale Investments Ltd.
1422 King Street E., Courtice (Part Lot 22, Registrar's Compiled Plan 713)
We are writing on behalf of F. & A. Scanga Holdings Ltd. and Fernande Jacobelli, owners of a
.69 acre property immediately to the west of the subject site, and municipally known as 1420 King
Street East. As you are aware, our clients have recently submitted a rezoning application which
would permit the development of a 6061 sq. ft. commercial project thereon.
In the summer of 1995, my clients commenced discussions with Mr. Randy Jeffrey with respect to
a joint development scheme encompassing both of these properties, utilizing a common entrance
from Hwy. No. 2. Discussions were held with Planning staff at the time, and it was confirmed (by
way of your memorandum of Sept. 13, 1995) that the position of the Department was that these
two parcels "must develop jointly due to overall site development considerations ".
However, Mr. Jeffrey subsequently terminated the discussions and advised that he would be
submitting a rezoning and site plan application for his site alone, with a separate access to the
highway instead of the mutual driveway that had been comtemplated previously. We understand
that the public hearing for his applications will be held on May 3, 1996.
Our main concern is that, by designing a completely stand -alone project for his own site, Mr.
Jeffrey has precluded the possibility of achieving the intended comprehensive development scheme
for both parcels. In particular, we would refer to Section 8.2 of the Courtice Sub - Central Area
Secondary Plan, which states as follows:
The Municipality will seek to ensure that smaller parcels are incorporated into
comprehensive development schemes. To achieve this, the Municipality may
require that proponents prepare comprehensive design plans to demonstrate
that development proposals do not negatively impact the development potential
of adjacent lands.
23 ELIZABETH STREET, AJAX, ONTARIO LIT 2X1
PHONE: (905) 427 -7574 • FAX: (905) 427 -2328
517
2
We would suggest that by submitting this project in isolation, Mr. Jeffrey is taking a "piecemeal
planning" approach to the development of the Courtice corridor which would result in a series of
small, disjointed buildings and an excessive number of entrances, thereby .aggravating existing
traffic problems in the area. We believe that it is contrary to the intent of the Official Plan of the
municipality as noted in your Sept. 13, 1995 memorandum.
On April 17, 1996 my clients submitted a rezoning application for 1420 King Street E. which is
based on a comprehensive development scheme (see attached drawing) that provides for a mutual
entrance and a large, multi -unit building flanked by two freestanding restaurants. In our view, this
proposal implements the requirement of the Secondary Plan, unlike the proposal for 1422 King
Street.
It is our intention to address Council at the May 3 public hearing on this application. We trust that
our comments will be taken into account in the preparation of your staff report for the meeting.
Should you require any clarification, please do not hesitate to contact the writer.
Yours very truly
MARTINDALE PLANNING SERVICES
Urban Planning and Development Consultants
L
Ro A. Martindale
Principal
Encl.
C.C. N. Scanga
G. Genge
1119
t 8E
i
O %ION, vYU z a LJ
� 61 rn v �
e®�
I
IP_ L-.--.--.--.--.--.--
�— I ri. E
I) I I I off
w o
�N�v I
qt
s
E ' W
I�
d
3
� NM
F My •�
b
1 E
WICL'09 ' M.00,VGLIH
519
Mr. Richard Holy, Planner
Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville L1C 3A6
Subject: Planning File: DEV 96 -010
Attachment #4
April 23, 1996
Clerk's File: D14.DEV.96 -010
Can you kindly table these comments with the GP &A committee for May 6, 1996.
I am in support of the application. I would ask, however, that the Committee
consider the following comments:
1> As this area of Courtice gets built up, traffic control will eventually be needed
at the intersection of Hwy 2 and Varcoe Rd./Darlington Blvd. Traffic lights would
be logical. Would it not be better to install them in anticipation of need, rather than
waiting until the number of right -angle collisions warrants that corrective measures
be taken? (after all, this is a planning exercise) I understand the jurisdictional
problem. Is it possible for the Committee to communicate this to Regional Works?
2> A few of my neighbors on Bridle Court are concerned with lighting levels at
this proposed building and /or parking lot, and wish that any on -grade or above -
grade lighting in this development not be intrusive. Can this be reviewed.
3> In the event of an application for development to the immediate west of Bridle
Court, to the east of Townline, I would ask that a walkway from Bridle Court to
any development not be permitted, as many of us on the street do not want
excessive pedestrian traffic past our houses.
Can you please keep me informed of any developments in these areas.
Yours truly,
fia"
Richard Olsen
12 Bridle Court?I
LIE 2131
'MPAP,111W11
52