HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-54-89DN: 20.
5 (c)
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT File #Res.
By-Law #
MEETING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, March 6, 1989
REPORT #:.pp_s4_89 FILE #: DEV 88-129-IX/REF: 88-105/N)
SUBJECT: REZONING AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION
APPLICANT: O.P. MCCARTHY & ASSOCIATES
PART LOT 12, CONCESSION lj, BOWMANVILLE
OUR FILE: DEV 88-129 (X/REF: 88-105/N)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration
Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-54-89 be received; and
2. THAT application to amend the Town of Newcastle Comprehensive zoning By-law
84-63, as amended, submitted by John Rice and O.P. McCarthy and Associates
Ltd., be referred back to Staff for further processing and the preparation
of a subsequent report upon receipt of all outstanding comments; and
3. THAT a copy of Council's decision be forwarded to the interested parties
attached hereto.
1. BACKGROUND
In November, 1988 the Town of Newcastle Planning and Development Department
received an application to amend the Town of Newcastle Comprehensive Zoning
By-law 84-63, as amended, as well as to enter into a Site Plan Agreement.
The proposed application submitted by O.P. McCarthy & Associates proposes a
150 unit Senior Citizens condominimum with 700 square metres of accessory
2
513
PAGE 2
commercial floor space. The applicant has also submitted an Official
Plan Amendment application, the purpose of which is to allow the
proposed commercial use. Should the principle of the
residential /commercial use be approved, the applicant will be required
to enter into a Site Plan Agreement.
1.2 The subject site is an irregular shaped parcel, approximately 1.05
hectares in size and is bounded by Church Street to the south, Scugog
Street to the west, Wellington Street to the north, and Silver Street
to the east. Adjacent land uses include residential on all sides, and
in addition, there is a church to the east, commercial and professional
offices to the south.
2. PUBLIC NOTICE
2.1 Staff would note for the Committee's information that, pursuant to
Council's resolution of July 26, 1982 and the requirements of the
Planning Act, the appropriate signage acknowledging the application
was installed on the subject lands and, surrounding property owners
were advised of the proposal.
3. PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
3.1 Although no formal submissions have been made by citizens in support
or objection to the proposal. Mr. E. Finlan has contacted Staff and
requested that the group's submission to a previous application be
forwarded to this file. The previous application (DEV 86 -48) proposed
a 77 unit condominium apartment. Staff were unable to locate the
submission made by the residents at the previous Public Meeting. In
any event, since the current application is substantially different
from the previous application, it would be advisable for the residents
to voice their concern or objection based on the current application.
...3
514
4. CIRCULATED AGENCIES
PAGE 3
4.1 Staff undertook a joint circulation of the Official Plan Amendment and
Rezoning /Site Plan applications. To date comments remain outstanding
from four (4) of the circulated agencies. These include Newcastle
Community Services, Regional Planning, Regional Public Works, and the
Public School Board.
4.2 Newcastle Electric Hydro Commission and the Separate School Board have
noted no objection the the proposal as submitted. Newcastle Fire
Department has noted a concern with the application as this represents
a population increase of approximately 300 persons.
4.3 The Town of Newcastle Public Works Staff note no objection to the
principle of development, but will require detailed engineering
drawings prior to making a recommendation. Staff further noted that
they could not support a high volume commercial entrance at the
intersection of Scugog Street and Church Street. Other comments noted
the applicant will be responsible for 100% of any works on Wellington,
Church and Scugog Streets which are necessitated as a result of this
development. The applicant would also be required to contribute to the
reconstruction of Wellington Street ($60,525.18).
4.4 The Staff at the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority had no
objection in principle to the proposal. Their comments noted the site
is subject to Ontario Regulation 161/80, consequently, permits must be
obtained prior to any filling or grading on these lands. They further
stated that additional information regarding elevations and major
storm overland flows through the site is required prior to comments on
the Site Plan being provided.
5. OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY -LAW INFORMATION
5.1 Within the Durham Regional Official Plan the subject area is
designated "Main Central Area ". Residential uses are permitted in the
77 ...4
I
REPORT NO.: PD -54 -89 PAGE 4
-------------------------- m---------------------------------- ----------- - - - - --
Main Central Area in conjunction with commercial development up to the
allowable floor space index of 2.50. The proposal has an index of
approximately 1.60, therefore, appears to be in compliance.
Notwithstanding, the floor space index is not binding on Council which
must be satisfied that the proposed density is in harmony with the
existing and future development in the Bowmanville Central Area.
5.2 The lands are presently designated "Main Central Area" in the Town of
Newcastle Official Plan and are further defined in Schedule 8 -2 as
Medium and High Density Residential. Commercial development is not
permitted and therefore is subject to this Official Plan amendment
application. Development within these areas is permitted to exceed a
density of 30 units per net residential hectare, but shall be subject
to conformity to the population targets of 3000 persons within the
designated Bowmanville Central Area.
5.3 The present zoning of the lands is "Urban Residential Type Four -
Holding ((H)R4)" and "Urban Residential Exception (R1 -12) ". The
"R1 -12" zone permits single family dwellings, semi - detached
dwellings, duplexes and converted dwellings. The ((H)R4)" zone will
permit the development of an apartment building up to a density of 80
units per hectare provided the "(H) Holding" symbol is removed by
by -law subsequent to the owner enters into a site plan agreement with
the Town.
6. STAFF COMMENTS
6.1 Staff note that the applicant is in the process of compiling further
supporting documentation for the proposal, including a Traffic Study.
The Sound Attenuation Study previously submitted for application DEV
86 -48 has been resubmitted and is currently under review.
...5
PAGE 5
6.2 In reviewing the application, Staff have concerns as to the design of
the proposal and the overall irregular configuration of this
property. It appears that proposed building is being sited to fit the
irregular-shaped property as opposed to proper siting in consideration
of the entire land parcel bounded by Wellington Street, Scugog Street
and Church Street. The sketch attached to this report indicates there
are three (3) isolated parcels abutting the subject property. The
application proposes to surround three (3) residential lots completely,
creating a situation of conflicting uses. Any redevelopment of the
subject property should take into account of an overall development
scheme for the entire block so as to prevent piecemeal and uncordinated
development and to alleviate future land use conflict.
6.3 Staff also have concern with some of the setbacks proposed from the
residential/commercial complex to the existing residential properties.
Specifically, under the "R411 Zone of By-law 84-631 the following
requirements must be met:
a) 7.5 metres setback on all yards
b) 1.5 metre planting strip between any commercial and residential
zone
c) no commercial entrance within 7.5 metres of any side yard
boundary to a residential zone
d) no commercial parking is permitted with 1.5 metres of a
residential zone
e) loading space and enclosed refuse container is requirement for
commercial development
In addition to the foregoing, other requirements of the by-law will be
evaluated when more detail site plan information is provided by the
applicant.
6.4 Staff will require more detail for Site Plan in terms of floor layout,
dimensions for the buildings, elevation drawings of the building from
all sides. A separate landscape schedule detailing vegetation type
and dimensions, walkways, fencing, illumination etc. must be provided
as well.
517 ...6
REPORT NO.: PD -54 -89 PAGE 6
6.5 Staff further note that, to date, no input has been received from the
Regional Works Staff with respect to site servicing capacities. Until
comments are received detailing the servicing feasibility of the
proposal, Staff will not be in a position to make any recommendations.
6.6 To allow further evaluation of the proposal, we would require more
information as to how the proposed senior complex would be managed;
whether privately or through a public agency. In addition, information
should be provided for the type of tenants which the applicant intends
to attract to the commercial component of the proposal.
7. RECOMMENDATION
As the purpose of this report is to satisfy the requirements of the
Planning Act with regards to a Public Meeting, and in consideration
of the comments outstanding and the various concerns outlined above,
Staff recommend the application be referred back to Staff for further
processing and a subsequent report.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning & Development
CP *FW *jip
*Attach.
February 23, 1989
CC: O.P. McCarthy & Associates
11 Church Street
Suite 404
TORONTO, Ontario M5E 1M2
Mr. Ed Finlan
Chairman of Concerned Citizens
136 Wellington Street
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario L1C 1W1
Mr. John Rice
65 Concession Street West
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario L1C lY7
�I
Lawrence
Chief Ad
I
otseff-e®®®-f®®.er-
�'strative Officer
519
�r e e 1 3:9 • — „--- -- _. ; , _.._ .:..� ......_
?>
C�
goo '�. • :' �'� _ u
Chu ch Stree)t
9 tto•s IP
` •:� :� •. SOS
Id
9p.0 /ii;- f \� �''_✓ .�!' ,03.5 3. '
!�' ' ��: ep S Imo✓ � .. .� �
Key AIwp
n f
.itt•9 ''
520