HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-187-89FIINANMXSI�
✓y, 11 �, " ,,
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT File #60
Res. #
By-Law #
MEETING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: JULY 17, 1989
REPORT #: PD-187-89 FILE #: 18T-88071 (X-REF: DEV 887,7,6)
&J&ECT: APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT
NOR-ARM DEVELOPMENTS
PART LOT 9, CONCESSION 1, BOWMANVILLE
FILE: 18T-88071 (X-REF: DEV 88-7,61
qb--
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration
Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-187-89 be received;
2. THAT the application to amend the Town of Newcastle Comprehensive Zoning By-law
84-63, as amended, submitted by G. M. Sernas and Associates on behalf of Nor-Arm
Developments be denied;
3. THAT the Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommend DENIAL
of the draft plan of Subdivision 18T-88071, date revised June 1989; and
4. THAT a copy of this Report be forwarded to the Region of Durham and all
interested parties attached hereto be notified of Council's decision.
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 On September 7, 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. The application was
...2
1 n 9
0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
submitted by G.M. Sernas and Associates on behalf of Marotta Holdings
Limited. The applications proposed the development of 96 townhouse
units and a commercial block on a 7.82 ha (19.32 acre) parcel of land,
north of Highway No. 2, west of Mearns Avenue and east of Vincent Massey
Public School.
1.2 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. The Public Meeting was held on Monday,
December 12, 1988.
1.3 A number of residents appeared before Committee at the Public Meeting
voicing concern or opposition to the subject applications. The
objections were primarily related to the impact of the proposal on the
Environmentally Protected lands; other concerns noted noise and traffic.
Committee decided to amend the application by recommending to Council
that the lots intruding on the environmentally protected zone not be
considered, but that the remainder of the application be referred back
to Staff (GPA-775-88). Council, at their meeting of December 19, 1988,
upheld General Purpose and Administration Committee recommendation.
In the week between the Committee Meeting and the Council Meeting,
Planning Staff was presented with a petition against the development of
the lands zoned 'Environmental Protection'. The petition was signed by
residents of Orchard Park Drive and Peach Tree Crescent.
1.4 In April of 1989, Staff was advised of new ownership of the property and
received revisions to the proposal which essentially eliminated one (1)
lot and proposed minor revisions to the design of the Plan. Staff
informed the applicant's agent that any review of the revisions would be
consistent with Council's position as noted above. A representative from
G. M. Sernas and Associates appeared as a delegation at the May 8, 1989,
3
PAGE 3
Council Meeting and requested Council to rescind their previous
resolution as it pertains to the subject lands. Council Resolution
C- 341 -89 acknowledged the delegation and referred 18T -88071 to Planning
Staff for further review and subsequent report.
1.5 Further revisions have since been submitted in an attempt to satisfy
various agency concerns. To that end, the Plan design presently before
Committee /Council proposes 79, 6 metre minimum frontage street townhouse
lots; 8, 18 metre minimum frontage semi- detached /link lots (16 units),
for a total of 95 units and a 0.18 ha (0.45 acre) commercial block.
2. SURROUNDING LAND USES
2.1 Surrounding land uses are primarily residential in nature; to the south
is the Strathaven Nursing Home and an apartment building across Highway #
2 is the Bowmanville Mall; to the west is vacant land which has an
approved Site Plan for a townhouse complex; further north still, on the
west side is Vincent Massey Public School and Bowmanville High School.
To the north and east is existing and proposed residential development in
the form of Plans of Subdivision. The lands to the east include other
lands owned by the applicant subject to Subdivision approval (18T- 88076).
2.2 The site itself has approximately 56 metres of frontage and extends north
approximately 500m. The site is heavily treed and has a creek
traversing from the north to the south east corner. The property has
some depression and is more steeply sloped at the south then the north.
3. OFFICIAL PLAN CONFORMITY
3.1 In the Durham Regional Official Plan, the subject property is designated
'Residential', the proposed residential and convenience commercial uses
are permitted. However, there also appears to be an indication of
...4
� � � F-
'Hazard Lands' and 'Environmentally Sensitive Areas' on the subject
site. The Regional Plan describes 'Environmentally Sensitive' and
'Hazard Lands' as follows:
"Environmentally sensitive areas refer to those natural
landscapes including those lands and/or waters of inherent
biological sensitivity, such as those areas containing aquifer
recharges, headwaters, unique plants, wildlife, breeding or
over-wintering habitats, vital ecological functions, rare or
endangered species, or other combinations of habitat and
landform which could be essential for scientific research or
conservation education."
"Hazard Lands refer to lands having physical characteristics
such as poor drainage, swamps, organic soils., flood and
erosion susceptibility, steep slopes, instability or any other
physical condition which could cause property damage, loss of
life or damage to the environment if developed upon."
3.2 The Durham Plan further notes that the extent and the exact location of
such environmentally sensitive areas shall be determined at- the tifrte of
dev(---loT,x-(ie-nt- application. It further notes that Council shall endeavour
to retain in a natural ,--,tate, wherever possible, the areas identified as
environmentally sensitive. Provisions within the Durham Plan allow
development in environmentally sensitive areas, to the extent that the
type and magnitude is compatible with environmental conditions. Section
1.3.9 of the Region's Plan requires a study be undertaken by the local
Council prior to approving any development applications within the
environmental sensitive area. The study, in cooperation with the
Conservation authority, should satisfy Council and the Region with
regards to the following issues:
NNW"
REPORT NO.: PD- 187 -89 PAGE 5
a) the type and degree of sensitivity of the environmental
conditions;
b) the compatibility of the proposed development with the
environmentally sensitive area(s);
c) the need for and the definition of mitigating measures to cope
with the sensitivity of the environmental conditions;
d) the location, amount and type of development; and
e) the location and extent of those sensitive area(s) which should
be preserved.
In addition, the Regional Plan provides policies by which to assess
applications for the erection of buildings or the placement or removal
of fill of any kind on Hazard Lands (Section 1.3.4).
3.3 In the Town of Newcastle Official Plan (Bowmanville Major Urban Area),
the subject property is designated 'Main Central Area' and Low Density
Residential' with indications of 'Hazard Lands' (Schedule 7 -1). The
lands within the 'Main Central Area' designation are further defined as
'Medium and High Density Residential' on Schedule 7 -2. Development
within the 'Medium and High Density Residential' designation shall exceed
30 units per ha. The 'Low Density' designation allows for a maximum of
301 units per net residential ha. Schedule 7 -3 identifies a small
portion of the subject site as being environmentally sensitive. The
Town's Plan requires any development proposal within lands identified as
being environmentally sensitive be examined through the preparation of
an Environmental Impact Analysis, to be conducted by or under the
direction of the Town. The analysis shall be undertaken in accordance
with the provisions of Section 7.2.4.2(ii) and shall be to the
satisfaction of the Town, the Region, the Central Lake Ontario
Conservation Authority and Ministry of Natural Resources.
...6
PAGE 6
3.4 The Town of Newcastle Official Plan allows for development or
redevelopment of 'Hazard Lands' subject to the regulations of Central
Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Durham Regional Official
Plan. (It should be noted that the Conservation Authority's regulations
for 'cut and fill' does not apply to the subject lands). However, the
Plan further states that 'Hazard Lands' shall be primarily for the
preservation and conservation of the natural land and /or environment. It
also notes that the extent and exact location of such lands shall be
identified in the Zoning By -law in consultation with Central Lake Ontario
Conservation Authority. The Town of Newcastle Comprehensive Zoning
By -law 84 -63, as amended, recognized the majority of the subject property
as being within the Environmental Protection (EP) zone.
3.5 The application proposes an overall density of 39.8 units per net ha.
This density would appear to comply with the 'Medium -High density'
designation, but would not be in conformity with the 'Low density'
provisions. In addition the proposal must comply with the neighbourhood
11C' population target of 2800 people. Staff have calculated a maximum
14.3 units per gross ha to be the maximum number of units accepted per
proposal based on the population target and land area in the
neighbourhood. This application proposes 14.91 units per net ha. This
would be slightly above permissible level.
3.6 The question of compliance to the density provision (Medium -High as
opposed to Low) is further determined by the zoning schedule. The 'Main
Central Area' on Schedule 7 -1 is bounded by the Low Density and Hazard
Land to the east. The extent of the Hazard Lands are further defined by
the 'Environmental Protection' zoning in the Towns' Comprehensive Zoning
By -law 84 -63, as amended. As the majority of the site, save and except
a portion zoned "(H)R3' is zoned 'Environmental Protection (EP)', it is
determined the site is within the 'Low Density' designation. In
consideration of the above, the proposal does not conform to the Offical
Plan provisions as the density equals 39.85 units per net ha. well in
excess of the maximum permitted 30 units per net residential ha.
...7
121- c
4. CIRCULATED AGENCIES
The original application was circulated by Staff at the Region to
various agencies and departments for comments. The Town of Newcastle
Planning Staff, in turn undertook an internal circulation to departments
within the Town. Regional Planning Staff undertook a limited
circulation of the revised application. Agencies included the Town of
Newcastle, Regional Public Works, Central Lake Ontario Conservation
Authority, and Ministry of Natural Resources. Town Planning Staff also
completed a revised circulation to internal departments.
The following agencies noted no objection to the proposal
- Ministry of Transportation
- Separate School Board
- Public School Board
- Newcastle Hydro
- Regional Health Department
- Ministry of Agriculture and Food
Ministry of Environment has yet to comment.
4.2 The Town of Newcastle Public Works Department Staff noted no objection
in principle to the application, subject to various conditions of
approval. The applicant is required to conform to any storm water
management requirements imposed by the Public Works Department; that the
proposed Court 'B' right -of -way be located completely outside of the
established flood plain; and that all standard requirements apply.
4.3 The Community Services Department review of the application also
received no objection subject to conditions. The applicant will be
required to extend the Open Space (Block 89) to include a maximum area
from the top of the bank; that Block 89 as adjusted be dedicated to the
Town gratuitously as Open Space; that the portion of Block 89 between
lots 68 and 69 be developed to provide a safe and usable access point
for vehicles to enter the ravine; and that the 5 percent land dedication
requirement be accepted as cash -in -lieu.
...8
REPORT No.: PD-187-89 PAGE 8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.4 The Town of Newcastle Fire Department noted the application represents
an approximate increase in population of 285 persons and although the
site falls within the recognized response area of Station #1,
Bowmanville, it should be noted that this site along with the continued
growth in the Bowmanville area will, in time, have an effect on the
level of service this station is able to maintain. They further noted
compliance to the Fire and Building Codes should be adhered to prior to
any building permit being issued.
4.5 Regional Planning Staff's comments on the rezoning application noted the
subject property is designated 'Residential' in the Durham Regional
Official Plan which permits residential and convenience commercial uses.
They also noted there exists indications of Environmentally Sensitive
Areas and Hazard Lands on the subject site, and noted Section 1.3.9
requires the preparation of a study prior to the approval of development
applications in Environmentally Sensitive Areas.
The Comments further noted the designations of the site in terms of the
Towns's official Plan, that being 'Low Density Residential' and 'Main
Central Area - Medium and High Density Residential'. Again there are
indications of 'Hazard Lands and Environmental Sensitivity,. Further
reference was made to the requirements of an environmental impact
analysis.
4.6 Regional Public Works Staff's review of the application noted no
objection in principle, noting full municipal services are available.
Conditions of approval include the granting of a 12 metre easement
between Street 'A' and Royal Pines Court (18T-88076), effectively
eliminating lots 43 and 44.
4.7 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Staff have provided
comments on the most recent revisions and note the plan is acceptable
subject to conditions of approval. The comments review the changes which
have been proposed noting which lots still intrude below the regional
storm flood line. They note that it may be possible to raise these
levels by filling to an elevation above that of the flood line.
However, it should be noted that the existing flood line abutts several
proposed lots, across the valley, in 18T-88076. therefore InX �i
,11ing
would be permitted to create only negligible increases. 1-� 1() K
?15
. 0 �� i ;•
PAGE 9
4.8 The Ministry of Natural Resources comments reflect the revisions dated
April 1989. However, their comments have remained unchanged, that is
they object to the plan in its current form. Written Comments on the
most recent revision were not available at the writing of this report.
However, verbal comments indicate that the proposed revisions, narrower
street and lot depth, do not satisfy their concerns and they still
object to approval of the proposal. The subject site is traversed by a
tributary of Soper Creek. The main branch provides a migration route and
habitat for a number of fish species. Therefore, the tributary should be
protected from sedimentation from development activities. Ministry of
Natural Resources Staff feel the existing protective designation and
zoning should remain in place. The comments also identified all the
'problem' lots. Those extending beyond the top of bank into the
valleylands and those lots on steeply sloping ground. They further noted
that due to the number of concerns, they do not feel mitigative measures
will resolve their concern.
5. STAFF COMMENTS
5.1 Upon reviewing the application, the agency comments and the proposal's
conformity with both the Region the Local Official Plans, Staff have
identified several concerns with the applications as presented. The
design of the proposal, although providing the maximum use of the
subject parcel for the applicant, creates concerns for Staff in terms of
the design. The proposed Street 'A' is a dead -end street
greater than 450 metres in
length, with approximately 75 units fronting on it and has no provision
for an emergency or secondary access.
5.2 Staff noted that the Ministry of Natural Resources objected to the
proposal. Staff are aware that these comments are not based on the most
recent revision, and written comments on the revised Plan were not
available at the time of writing this report. However, verbal comments
from the Ministry of Natural Resources Staff indicated that the revised
plan, dated June 1989, would also appear not satisfactory in terms of
their concerns as outlined in the previous comments. Zn addition, the
Planning Act, the Durham Regional Official Plan and the Town of Newcastle
Official Plan all note that when reviewing development applications
regard shall be had for matters of a provincial interest. 12 17 / 7
P 0 0 *
----------- ------ - - - --- --------------------------------------------------------
5.3 It is further noted that in a June 1978, Environmental Sensitivity
Mapping Project prepared for the Central Lake Ontario Conservation
Authority, by Gartner Lee and Associates depicts this tributary of the
Soper Creek, in relation to the proposal, as being of 'High Sensitivity'
at the south end, and the 'Modeate Sensitivity' as you proceed north up
to Concession St. The report details the importance of the 'High
Sensitivity' area, and notes alteration of one part of the environmental
system may negatively influence others. It further states in most
highly sensitive areas, detailed site-specific study will be required to
better define the physical and biological factors and interrelationship
among them. Generally, intensive land uses or uses with a high
potential of environmental impact could be incompatible.
5.4 In terms of the official Plan, the proposal would not appear to be in
compliance with the 'Low Density' provision of a maximum 30 units per
net residential ha. In addition the lands have been identified as being
'Hazard Lands' and having some 'Environmentally Sensitive Areas' in both
the Durham Regional official Plan and the Town of Newcastle Official
Plan. Both Plans contain provisions requiring a study (Environmental
Impact Analysis) be undertaken to determine the extent and exact
location of the 'Environmentally Sensitive' lands. Such a study has
not been produced to support the subject application.
5.5 Both Plans also contain policies which state that 'Hazard Lands' shall
be primarily for the preservation and conservation of the natural land
and/or environment. The Gartner Lee study referenced previously echoes
the same thoughts, as does the Town's Comprehensive Zoning By-law, the
lands being zoned 'Environmental Protection (EP)I, which prohibits
structures except for flood protection.
5.6 In conclusion, given all the above-noted concerns with non-conformity
to the Town and Regional official Plans, and the Ministry of Natural
Resources objection to the proposal, Staff would recommend the
application be denied.
0
U
REPORT NO.:
-----------------------
Respectfully submitted,
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning & Development
CP*FW*lp
*Attach.
*July 7, 1989
PAGE 11
Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
------------------
Lawren c Kotseff
I I
Chief d inistrative Officer
INTERESTED PARTIES TO BE NOTIFIED OF COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL'S DECISION
Nor-Arm Developments
1110 Sheppard Ave. E.
Suite 500
Willowdale, Ontario M2K 2W2
Hendry Investments
252 King St® E.
Apt® 601
Bowmanville, Ontario LlC 1R1
Joane Draper
15 Peachtree Cres®
Bowmanville, Ontario
Linda and Barry Draper
23 Orchard Park Drive
Bowmanville, Ontario
R. Bourke
21 Orchard Park Drive
Bowmanville, Ontario LIC 3K8
Mrs. Sophie Pirdie
19 Orchard Park Drive
Bowmanville, Ontario LlC 3S8
Mr. M. Nimigan
280 King Street East
Bowmanville, Ontario LlC 1P9
LlC 4K9 Mrs. Joan Butlers Admimistration
Strathaven Nursing Home
264 King Street East
Bowmanville, Ontario LlC IP9
LlC 4B1
G.M. Sernas and Associates
110 Scotia Court, Unit 41
Whitby, Ontario LIN 8Y7
1219
-91
Pam .+���
Ro,
V F4 02!L
;���� �4ri,r0ou'l
�A•. . , Ausaskias s:
IS
gig s�saM�
SL
wn 0.4
IRA
taftZ1*9i4t.
�*q
�ccAs �x �
:FAQ
�i�wil.. F %N,, N6 ��
LOT 10 LOT LOT
-. _ ..................... . . . -.
. �Y.:i• ' t :•:::'::• ::•'•
t.
1'.
.J•
: ; ` :.
}: :f !, : �y popu laSion :.
:n }
v c: N
s ! 2 0 0
v S
u f v'
: !X•
W
Nover
r .
,
SUBJECT SITE
HWY N2
♦�`'r , U)
_ ar 7 1 may. -+ •r �'J C"� t) ,�
...ism
n, Q L j y 'rm _) X• U
v C�..G('��f i T� x • t�� c- t
M• f c t
`m t _ r u
J �
Y a
c 3 3
•ITT t+ < j
f '
C3.
°`i.�,.>
population ;.r;� ��ti� y •��.�.
O
��`�• ;, *fit M i�� t Ic �, /
, .� �
�►'iCi�'t - tL�..� r �� �� �i r1tjG
BASELINE ROAD
0 100 200 300m
KEY MAP
100
i
A 9;�-
Dev. 8.8�96
12 2-2 ,"W"C'