Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-5-89 DN: 2. 5(e) J) "° " ,p . TOWN OF NEWCASTLE File # REPORT Res_ # .= —- By-Law # MEETING: General Purpose and Administration Committee DATE: Monday January 9, 1989 REPORT #: PD-5-89 FILE #: SUB,ECT: SUMMARY REPORT OF ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING APPEAL BY TOWN OF NEWCASTLE FROM THE DECISION OF LAND DIVISION COMMITTEE LD 119/88 (MELVILLE) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD-5-89 be received for information. 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 In March 1988, the Durham Region Land Division Committee approved the Mellville's consent application to divide a 5014 square metre parcel into two equal halves, each contains an existing dwelling on the south side of Highway # 2, opposite the Bowmanville Zoo, adjacent to Soper Creek. 1.2 The Town Council subsequently appealed the decision and an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing was held on December 9, 1988. 2. . . � ^m(°) REPORT 00. : PD-5-89 P&QD 2 _______________________________________________________________________________ 2. TOWN'S EVIDENCE 2.1 Under the direction of the Town Solicitor, the Director of Planning gave evidence before the Board stating that the proposed severance does not conform to the intent and policies of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Town of Newcastle Official Plan and the intent and general purpose of the Zoning By-law. Notwithstanding the existing dwelling are legal non-conforming uses, the Official Plans and By-law do not allow land severance to perpetuate and/or legalize legal non-conforming uses. 2.2 Under aobDeoua a planner from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority gave evidence to the effect that the subject property is totally situated in the middle of the flood plain of Soper Creek and stated that severance would perpetuate the existence of dwelling units within a flood auaceptable area. It is the intent that these undesirable uno-onufncmiug uses cease to exist over time. 3. APPLICANT'S EVIDENCE 3.1 Mr. & Mrs. MeIlville' owner of the two dwellings for about two years, proposed to sever the lot into two halves in order to enable them to sell both of the proposed lots. They do not reside in the existing dwellings which are presently rented out. Mc. MelIvilIe further gave evidence that be has no prior knowledge that the property is in the floodDIaio when be acquired it two years ago and suggested to the Board that the severance does not alter the fact that there will always be two (2) dwellings on this property. 4. DECISION OF THE BOARD 4.1 In a verbal decision, the Board accepted the Town's planning evidence and allowed the appeal by the Town of Newcastle. 5'(e) REPORT 0O. : PD-5-89 PAGE 3 _______________________________________________________________________________ Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation to the Committee ------------- Franklin Wu' M.C.I.P. Lawrence E K toeff Director of Planning 6 Development Chief Admioi cative officer Dw* 'ip *Attach. December 13, 1988