HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-256-89'1
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
MEETING General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: October 23, 1989
REPORT #: PD -256 -89
FILE #: DEV 89 -076 (X /REF:
File #6o._35,5q_(
Res. #
By -Law #
2.2.2(6)
SIEJECT: REZONING APPLICATION - MARES AND SINGER
PART LOT 29, CONCESSION 2, FORMER TWP. OF DARLINGTON
OUR FILE: DEV 89 -076 (X /REF.: 2.2.2(6)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD- 256 -89 be received;
2. THAT Application to amend the Town of Newcastle Comprehensive
Zoning By -law 84 -63, as amended, submitted by Lennis Trotter,
on behalf of Joe Mares and Morris Singer, be referred back to
Staff for further processing and the preparation of a
subsequent report pending receipt of all outstanding comments;
and
3. THAT a copy of Council's decision be fowarded to the
interested parties attached hereto.
1. BACKGROUND:
1.1 In June of 1989, the Town of Newcastle Planning and
Development Department received an application to amend the
Town of Newcastle Zoning By -law as well as to amend the
Courtice Neighbourhood Plan and enter into a Site Plan
...2
REPORT NO.: PD-256-89 PAGE 2
Agreement. The subject application submitted by Lennis
Trotter on behalf of Joe Mares and Morris Singer proposes the
development of a 1489.5 square metre, 8 unit, commercial
plaza. Should the principle of the commercial plaza 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
.53 hectares (1.3 acres) in size and is located on the south
side of Highway No. 2, west of Courtice Road. Adjacent land
uses include Roy Nichols Motors to the east, vacant land to
the south, and scattered residences to the north and west.
2. PUBLIC NOTICE
2.1 For the Committee's information, pursuant to Council's
resolution of July 26, 1982 and the requirements of the
Planning Act, the appropriate signage acknowledging the
application was erected on the subject lands and the
appropriate notice was mailed to each landowner within the
prescribed distance.
2.2 Staff would note for the Committee's information, however,
that the signage was vandalized on the weekend of September
24, 1989. The applicant re- erected the sign on the subject
property at the request of the Planning and Development
Department only to have the sign vandalized a second time in
early October. Nevertheless, the Planning Department is of
the opinion that the applicant has fulfilled the public notice
requirements prescribed by the Planning Act since notice was
mailed to each landowner within 121.92m (400 feet) of the
subject property.
2.3 As a result of the Public Notice process, the Planning and
...3
r-,
•j
Development Department has received a written submission from
an area resident expressing an objection over the proposed
zoning by -law amendment. The resident raised concerns
regarding the fragmented nature of the development along
Highway No. 2, the availability of municipal services to the
subject property and the compatibility of the proposed plaza
with the surrounding area.
3. OFFICIAL PLAN CONFORMITY
3.1 Within the Durham Regional Official Plan, the subject lands
are designated "Residential ". Residential uses are intended
to be the predominant use of lands so designated. As of the
writing of this report, the Durham Regional Planning
Department has not responded to the circulation of the
proposed development. Therefore, the Town of Newcastle
Planning Department, at this time, has been unable to
determine the conformity of the proposal to the Durham
Regional Official Plan.
3.2 Within the Town of Newcastle Official Plan the subject lands
are designated as a "Special Purpose Commercial" node.
Special Purpose Commercial uses are intended to serve the
needs of the residents on an occasional basis with services
and facilities which consume larger parcels of land and
require exposure to traffic. In principle, the proposal
appears to conform with the Town of Newcastle Official Plan.
However, the Town of Newcastle Planning and Development
Department would require more detailed information on the
proposed uses /tenants in order to determine the conformity of
the proposed development to the Town of Newcastle Official
Plan.
...4
4. ZONING BY -LAW CONFORMITY:
4.1 Zoning By -law 84 -63 zones the subject property "Holding -
Urban Residential Type One ((H)Rl) " which permits single home
detached dwellings, semi - detached dwellings, duplexes, certain
occupations and places of worship. As commercial operations
of this nature are not permitted in the current zoning, the
applicant has applied to amend the Zoning By -law accordingly.
5. AGENCY COMMENTS:
5.1 The Town of Newcastle Planning and Development Department
undertook a joint circulation of the Neighbourhood Plan
Amendment and the Rezoning /Site Plan approval applications.
The following provides a summary of comments received to date
relating to this proposal.
5.2 The Town of Newcastle Community Services Department has
reviewed the proposed zoning by -law amendment and has no
objections to the proposal conditional upon the applicant
providing 2% cash -in -lieu for parkland dedication.
5.3 The Town of Newcastle Public Works Department has reviewed the
subject application and recommends that the application not
proceed until such time as a set of Engineering Drawings have
been submitted in order to address engineering concerns such
as on -site grading, drainage, entrance construction and storm
water management.
5.4 The Durham Regional Works Department has reviewed the proposal
and also finds the application to be premature on the basis
that no servicing proposal was submitted with the application.
Furthermore, the Durham Regional Works Department notes that
municipal water and sanitary sewer services are not available
to the subject property and require major trunk extensions.
...5
5�,
L,11 11,11111,111111 ' 11flWSRI I I ►o, •
5.5 The Ministry of Transportation has reviewed the subject
application and notes that the frontage of the subject
property is substandard by Ministry guidelines for the
issuance of a commercial entrance permit which is required
under the "Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act."
A minimum frontage of 31.5 metres is required under Ministry
of Transportation guidelines, whereas the subject property has
a frontage of 27 metres.
5.6 The balance of the circulated agencies which provided comments
regarding the subject application were the Town of Newcastle
Fire Department and the Town of Newcastle Building Department.
Neither of these departments provided objectionable comments
regarding the proposal. Ontario Hydro, the Central Lake
Ontario Conservation Authority, the Public School Board, the
Separate School Board and the Regional Planning Department
have all yet to provide comments with respect to the subject
application.
6. STAFF COMMENTS:
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 previously in this report, the Planning and
Development Department recommends the application be referred
back to Staff for further processing and a subsequent report.
Respectfully submitted,
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning
and Development
WM *FW *jip
October 5, 1989
1-, 7
J
Recommended for presentation
to t mmittee
L renc Kotseff
Chief istrative
Officer
REPORT NO.: PD-256-89 PAGE 6
INTERESTED PARTIES TO BE NOTIFIED OF COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL'S
DECISION:
Joe Mares and Morris Singer
26 Millgate Crescent
WILLOWDALE, Ontario
M2K 1L6
G.M. Sernas & Associates
Consulting Engineers & Planners
110 Scotia Court, Unit 41
WHITBY, Ontario L1N 8Y7
George and Margaret Gouldburn
Box 7, Group 18
R.R. #6
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
L1C 3K7
7 F-
Dev. 89�076 9 2s2a2(6)]
536