HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-185-89DN: Teenin
101171 f ` e ki I 00111"WARM
REPORT File #_6L.,3
Res. #
By-Law #
MEETING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, July 17, 1989
REPORT #: PD- 185 -89 FILE #: DEV 89 -33
SLRJECT: REZONING APPLICATION - JAKOB TEENINGA
PART LOTS 9/11, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON
DEV 89 -33
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration
Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD- 185 -89 be received;
2. THAT the application submitted by Jakob Teeninga to amend the Town of Newcastle
Comprehensive Zoning By -law 84 -63 to permit the creation of one (1) non -farm
residential lot be denied.
3. That the applicant be so advised.
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 On March 14, 1989, the Planning Department received an application from
J. Teeninga on behalf of S. L. Delaney to amend By -law 84 -63. The
application would seek to amend the current "Agricultural (A)" zoning to
permit the creation of one (1) non -farm residential lot.
1.2 On Monday, June 19, 1989, a Public Meeting was held to address this
application, hence fulfilling the requirements of the Planning Act. At
the time of this meeting, comments had not yet been received from the
Durham Regional Planning Department, Durham Regional Works Department
and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority.
r f ...2
REPORT 0O.: PD-185-89 PAGE 2
2.1 The subject property is located on Concession Road 4^ west of Meazms
Avenue, being Part Lot 9, Concession 3, former Township of Darlington.
2.2 The existing land uses adjacent to the subject property are as follows:
to the north: one (l) non-farm rural residential lot and agricultural-
pasture lands (49.750 acres)
to the south: agricultural - cultivated lands and forested lands (84
acres) and an abandon Railway Right-of-way.
to the east: agricultural-pasture lands (45 acres)
to the west: agricultural-pasture lands (9.2 acres) and one (l) non-
farm rural residential lot.
3. PUBLIC NOTICE AND 8D8MIG8IO0G
3.1 Pursuant to Council's resolution of July 26, 1982, and the requirements
of the Planning Act, the appropriate oignage acknowledging the
application was installed on the subject lands. In addition, the
appropriate notice was mailed to each landowner within the prescribed
distance.
AS of the writing of this report, no within submissions have been
4. OFFICIAL PLAN CONFORMITY
4.1 The subject property appears to be situated within the 'Major Open Space'
designation in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Residential development
in areas so designated is limited to minor internal iufilling and/or
minor additions to existing development provided that such development is
recognized as a Residential Node or Cluster in the local municipality's
uVoiug By-law.
...3
' r/7
] D 31
PAGE 3
It appears that this application does not conform to the Durham Regional
Official Plan.
5. AGENCY COMMENTS
5.1 In accordance with departmental procedures, the application was
circulated to obtain comments from other departments and agencies. The
following departments/agencies in providing comments offered no objection
in the application as filed.
- Town of Newcastle Fire Department
- Regional Health Services Department
- Regional Works Department
- ministry of Agriculture and Food
5.2 The Town of Newcastle Public Works Department offered no objection to the
proposal, however, requested that the applicant be required to satisfy
all the requirements of the Department, financially and otherwise.
5.3 The Town of Newcastle Community Services Department offered no objection,
however, requested that the applicant contribute 5 percent cash-in-lieu
of parkland dedication.
5.4 Durham Regional Planning noted that the subject property is designated
"Major Open Space" in the Durham Regional Official Plan and that any
non-farm residential development may be permitted in the form of new
rural clusters. The Region believes that defining the 1.32 ha parcel as
a cluster does not conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan policies
concerning clusters since the proposed cluster is not a definable
separate entity.
...4
X64
REPORT 0O.: PD-185-89 D&QE 4
5.5 Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority notes that a small tributary
o[ Soper Creek flows through the north-west corner and abuts the Western
boundary of the property in question. Although, this particular water
course has not been included in Central Lake Ontario Conservation
Authority's Flood Plain mapping Project, the authority does request that
any flood plain lands on the subject property should be appropriately
zoned to reflect their hazardous nature.
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority suggests that the flood plain
should be determined based on Regional Storm or 100 year storm flows,
whichever are greater. In addition, written permission must be obtained
from Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority prior to any alteration
of the water 000coe or construction within the flood plain.
5.5 The following agencies have not yet provided comments:
- Ministry of Natural Resources
G. COMMENTS
6.1 Staff in reviewing the proposal with respect to existing Official gIau
policies would note the Section 10.3.I.3 of the Durham Region Official
Plan would require o cluster to be recognized as a definable separate
entity and be of a size so as not to be considered as scattered or strip
development. Staff do have concerns with respect to the conformity of
these provisions. As noted above, the Durham Regional Planning
Department has these same concerns.
6.2 Staff notes that Section 10.2.I.3 of the Durham Regional Official Plan
otceooeo that development of new ouu-fnon residential uses should be
discouraged unless they are located in those areas identified as hamlets.
The applicants property is not located in an identified hamlet.
...5
�
� U./
6.3 Additionally, Staff notes the lands are heavily wooded and depressed from
the road elevation. The comments of the Conservation Authority reveal
that part of the property appears to be within the Soper Creek flood
plain and that these lands should be appropriately zoned.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Given the above noted information, Staff would respectfully recommend
that the application for a single residential rural cluster be denied.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
-------------------------- ---------------
m E Kotseff
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P. Lawrence
Director of Planning & Development Chief A i istrative officer
HM*FW*lp
*Attach.
July 4, 1989
INTERESTED PARTIES TO BE NOTIFIED OF COUNCIL AND COMMITTEE'S DECISION:
Mr. Jakob Tenninga
R.R. #5
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
LlC 3K6
/- -
\,
Dev. 89�03�al