HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-136-91 V
THE CORPORATION OF THE"TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
DN: NANTUCKE.GPA REPORT
General Purpose and Administration Committee /� .
Meeting: File# t"�i��s` Jam� �b•C"=�,.'�
Monday, June 17 , 1991 Res #
Date:
PD-136-91 DEV 90-025 By-Law#
Report#: Fife ##:
Subject: APPLICATION FOR REZONING, SITE PLAN AND CONDOMINIUM APPROVAL
PART LOT 29, CONCESSION 2 FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON
D. G. BIDDLE ON BEHALF OF HALCORP HOLDINGS LTD.
FILE: DEV 90-025 X-REF: 18CDM-90004
Recommend?Vomis respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-136-90 be received;
2 . THAT the Condominium application 18CDM90004, submitted by D.G.
Biddle on behalf of Halcorp Holdings Ltd. to permit a 152 unit
condominium complex be recommended for APPROVAL to the Region of
Durham subject to a site plan agreement to be executed between the
Owner and the Town; and
3 . THAT rezoning application Dev 90-025 submitted by D.G. Biddle on
behalf of Halcorp Holdings Ltd. to permit a 152 unit condominium
complex be APPROVED subject to "H" - Holding provisions;
4 . THAT the amending by-law attached hereto be forwarded to Council
for approval;
5. THAT an amending by-law removing the "Holding" Symbol be approved
at such time as the applicant has entered into a site plan
agreement with the Town;
6 . THAT a copy of this report and the amending by-law be forwarded to
the Region of Durham Planning Department; and
7 . THAT the interested parties listed in Report PD-136-91 and any
delegation be advised of Council's decision.
1 APPLICATION DETAILS:
1. 1 Applicant: D.G. Biddle
1. 2 Owner: Halcorp Holdings Ltd. /Nantucket Condominiums
1. 3 Condominiums : 38 - 1 bedroom units and 114 - 2 bedroom units
totalling 152 units .
A .2
1. 6
"1APE`R° E�r'L1E
n lis Is PRRI ON RECYCLED PAPER
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 2
1 .4 Rezoning: From " (Holding) Urban Residential Type Four ( (H)
R4) " zone to "Environmental Protection (EP) " and
"Holding-Urban Residential Exception ( (H) R4-11) "
as well as to permit a reduced building setback from
an "Environmental Protection (EP) " Zone.
1.5 Area: 3 . 32 hectares (8 .2 acres)
2 . LOCATION
2 . 1 The subject property is located in Part Lot 29, Concession 2,
former Township of Darlington, northwest corner of Highway No. 2
and Courtice Road (Regional Road No. 34) .
3 BACKGROUND
3 . 1 On March 1, 1990, the Town of Newcastle Planning Department
received a site plan application for a 152 unit condominium
complex and clubhouse. On April 2, 1990, the Region of Durham
forwarded notification to the Town that D. G. Biddle had made
application for 152 condominium units on behalf of Halcorp Holdings
Limited.
3 .2 On July 4, 1990, the applicant submitted a Minor Variance
application in an attempt to obtain relief from Section 3. 19 of
the Town of Newcastle Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 84-63, as
amended. Section 3 . 19 specifies that all newly constructed
buildings must be set back a minimum of 3 . 0 metres from an
"Environmental Protection (EP) " Zone.
On August 2, 1990, the Committee of Adjustment dealt with the Minor
Variance Application and deemed the application as not being minor
in nature. Therefore, in order to bring the proposal into
I
compliance with the Zoning By-Law, a rezoning application (Dev 90-
025) was submitted.
i
3 . 3 In order to meet the requirements of the Planning Act, a Public
meeting was held on September 17, 1990 .
� . . . . 3
I
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 3
4 EXISTING AND SURROUNDING USES
4 . 1 Existing Uses: Vacant Open space
4 . 2 Surrounding Uses:
East: Town Approved Plan of Subdivision 18T-86073 (east
side of Courtice Road)
West: Vacant Open Space
South: Black Creek and Roy Nichols Motor Sales on the south
side of Highway # 2 and Courtice Road
North: One Single Family Dwelling and Town Lands
5 OFFICIAL PLAN CONFORMITY
5 . 1 The proposed development is in conformity with the Durham Regional
Official Plan as the subject property is designated "Residential" .
5 .2 The Town of Newcastle Official Plan also designates the property
as "Residential" . Schedule One of the Courtice Neighbourhood Plan
further defines the subject lands as "Residential High Density"
with a maximum density of 80 units per net residential hectare.
As the density of this proposal, calculated according to the amount
of available developable land, is approximately 58 units per net
residential hectare, compliance to the Neighbourhood Plan exists.
6 ZONING
6 . 1 The site is zoned "Holding - Urban Residential Type Four ( (H)R4) "
and "Environmental Protection (EP) " . Permitted uses in these two
zones are "Apartment Buildings" and "Conservation" respectively.
The density of an apartment building can not exceed 80 units per
net residential hectare and prior to the issuance of building
permits the "Holding (H) " category must be removed. Although
the proposal complies to the density requirement, it does not
meet the minimum setback of 3 . 0 metres from an "Environmental
Protection (EP) " zone as required in Section 3 . 19 of the General
Provisions of Zoning By-Law 84-63.
. . . .4
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 4
7 PUBLIC MEETINGS
7 . 1 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 .
In addition, the appropriate notice was mailed to each landowner
within the prescribed distance.
7 .2 At the Public Meeting, a citizen requested confirmation as to
whether it was mandatory for the applicant to satisfy the
conditions of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. The
agent representing the owner stated that all requirements of the
Conservation Authority will be adhered to.
7 . 3 As of the writing of this report, a written submission has been
received from a neighbouring property owner. Concerns noted in
this submission include: the height and proximity of the proposed
structures and the impact of shadows; the amount of traffic
generated by the development; preserving the existing foliage on
the subject lands; possible impact on the quality and quantity of
drinking water; and environmental considerations with regard to
flood levels .
In addition, frequent conversations have been had with the
neighbouring property owners during which the same concerns were
noted.
8 AGENCY COMMENTS
8 . 1 In accordance with departmental procedures, the application was
circulated to obtain comments from other departments and agencies.
At the time of writing, only one agency, being the Peterborough-
Victoria-Northumberland-Newcastle Roman Catholic Separate School
Board, stated they had no objection to the application.
8.2 A number of the responding agencies had no objections to the
application provided that their concerns are adequately dealt with.
. . . .5
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 5
For example, the Town of Newcastle Fire Department noted that
access routes can not be longer than 90 metres without a turnaround
facility, and hydrants shall be located within 90 metres of any
building.
8 . 3 The applicant has been requested to satisfy the Town of Newcastle
Public Works Department financially and otherwise, and provide
monetary contributions for sidewalks and the illumination of
Regional Road No. 34 . Secondly, the Works Department has stated
that prior to Town approval of storm water drainage, appropriate
approvals must be received from the Central Lake Ontario
Conservation Authority.
8 .4 In order to satisfy the Town of Newcastle Community Services
Department, a satisfactory landscape plan must be submitted,
contribution towards the cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication must
be made on the basis of 1 hectare per 300 dwelling units, and that
all lands located south of the required setback of 7 .5 metres from
the structures, excluding the storm water detention pond
facilities, be dedicated to the Town gratuitously as open
space/valley lands .
8 .5 The Region of Durham Planning Department has no objection to this
application provided that the boundary between the Residential and
Major Open Space/Hazard land designations is clearly defined on the
attached Schedule to the implementing Zoning By-law.
The Regional Works Department requested the applicant to provide
a road widening of 5 . 3 metres in addition to the servicing
agreement being approved prior to passage of the implementing
Zoning By-law. The 5 . 3 metre road widening has been shown on the
site plans, and the Works Department have reviewed a servicing
agreement and are satisfied.
8 .6 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority has no objection
to this proposal provided that the limits of the "Environmental
r, n . . . .6
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 6
Protection (EP) " zone are not altered. The Conservation Authority
is satisfied that all structures are located above the floodline,
however, they do ask that a minimum opening elevation of one foot
above the Regional Storm Flood elevation should be enforced either
through a site specific zoning by-law or in the associated site
plan agreement. It is noted that the hydraulic changes in the
tributary will impact a minimal portion of the Town of Newcastle
Lands in this area. The Community Services Department is aware of
this issue and the Conservation Authority is satisfied that the
Town is not opposed to these changes.
8 . 7 The Ministry of Natural Resources had no objection to this
application provided that the "Environmental Protection (EP) " zone
remains so zoned. In addition, the Ministry has noted that a
number of conditions must be met prior to registration of the
condominium agreement.
8 . 8 The Ministry of Transportation Ontario requires all access be
restricted to Courtice Road, and that all structures located within
180 metres of the centre point of Highway No. 2 / Courtice Road
intersection obtain permits from the Ministry of Transportation.
8 . 9 The Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education had some
concerns with the proposal since the Courtice North Public School
is presently over capacity. It was also asked that sidewalks along
Courtice Road be provided. As Committee is no doubt aware, the
responsibility for providing education facilities rests with the
respective School Board and the Ministry of Education.
9 STAFF COMMENTS
9 . 1 Staff have investigated the Citizen's concerns and note that in
regard to the location of the entranceway, the Regional Works
Department has stated that access must be provided to the subject
lands and due to the configuration of the frontage along Courtice
Road, the entrance as proposed is the best location.
. . . .7
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 7
The proposed height of the building and setbacks provided are in
accordance with the applicable provisions of By-law 84-63 . In
regards to the effect of shadowing, the owner has provided "Shadow
Drawings" depicting the extent of the impacts shadows would have
on the neighbours property (Attachment #3) . From these drawings,
it is apparent that during the winter solstice, December 21, at
3:00 P.M. at a building height of 7 . 6 metres (25 feet) , the
neighbours shed and a small portion of their home will be in
shadow. According to the zoning of the subject lands, buildings
of scale similar to that of an apartment building could be erected
on site. Notwithstanding this, the applicant has proposed a
development possessing a lesser height and density than that which
is presently permitted on the lands .
The neighbour suggested that perhaps the club house could be
situated closer to their property line rather than a three (3)
storey condominium complex. Staff is of the opinion that the
clubhouse is likely to generate more noise and traffic than a
residential unit and therefore it's current location is
appropriate.
The applicant has submitted an acceptable landscaping plan
including additional screening and privacy fence along their
northern boundary at the neighbour's request and the applicant also
agreed to retain those trees deemed valuable including those maple
trees which the neighbour identified.
With respect to the concerns regarding potential well interference,
Staff would note that the site plan agreement will contain
provisions which state that if the water quality or quantity is
altered as a result of this development, the developer will be held
responsible for providing water to affected citizen/s . In
addition, the Region has a policy dealing with well interference
resulting from development.
9 .2 Staff note that by way of the attached by-law, if approved, an
increase in the "Environmental Protection (EP) " lands will occur.
As these lands are within the limits of the flood plain and can
. . . .8
4_,
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 8
not be developed, hence they are to be dedicated to the Town of
Newcastle, free and clear of all encumbrances . An exception to
this is the sediment control pond situated in the western portion
of the subject site. This pond is a requirement of the Ministry
of Natural Resources and is to remain on those lands owned by the
condominium authority. The exact delineation of the lands to be
dedicated to the Town will be determined prior to site plan
approval.
9 . 3 This application complies to all pertinent density regulations and
zoning provisions with the exception of the 3. 0 metre minimum
setback from an "Environmental Protection (EP) " zone. The
provision of this requirement in By-law 84-63 is for the benefit
of the respective Conservation Authorities .
The applicant has submitted the appropriate engineering studies
and has satisfied the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
that a setback from the "Environmental Protection "zone is not
required.
9 .4 Staff note that a property appraisal has not yet been submitted.
An appraisal is required to allow Staff to determine what the cash-
in-lieu of parkland dedication shall be. A Site Plan Agreement can
not be completed until this information has been received.
Further, all applicable municipal levies and the cash-in-lieu of
parkland dedication and other Town's requirements will be
incorporated within the site plan agreement and collected
accordingly.
10 CONCLUSION
10 . 1 The applicant and owner have satisfied the Ministry of Natural
Resources, the Conservation Authority, and have done their best to
relieve the neighbours concerns . Based on the above comments,
Staff recommend that this condominium application and by-law be
approved. A by-law to remove the "Holding" symbol will be
forwarded to Council upon the owner's execution of the Site Plan
Agreement. r_ � Z . . . .9
J I
J
REPORT NO. PD-136-91 PAGE 9
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
Franklin Wu, M.C. I .P. Lawrence Kotseff
DIrector of Planning Chief A i strative
and Development Officer
HM*FW*cc
Attachment #1 - Location Sketch
Attachment #2 - Site Plan
Attachment #3 - Shadow Drawing
Attachment #4 - Amending By-law
6 June 1991
Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision:
Halcorp Holdings Ltd. D.G. Biddle and Associates
1748 Baseline Road 96 King St. E.
Group 10, Box 7 Oshawa, Ontario
R.R. #2 L1H 1B0
Bowmanville, Ontario
L1C 3K3
Mr. & Mrs . Tuerk Richard H. Gay Holdings Ltd.
Group Box 18 P.O. Box 2065
Box 22 97 Athol Street E.
R.R. #6 Oshawa, Ontario
Bowmanville, Ontario L1H 7V4
L1C 3K7
I
Attachment # 1 Location Sketch
SUBJECT SITE
LOT 30 LOT 29 LOT 28
i (H)R3 EP R1 I M
El
I F I V
I (H)R2-3 ^' O WLSTMORF
H)C R1 1 A
NASH ROAD fi
I R1 (H)RI ,
I RI R4 w N
EP Z
o O
(H)R4 R1
0 �� W
� 0: -__-- _- 5.5 (H)Rl
J Z
( J C� C55 0
R,
I Rt !
EP
0
0 50 *0 zoo 300
KEY NEAP
Dev. 918CDM90-004
o
a I
o
N 154.
c
N 72°37 'E 84I ■ 0
F}. FENCE�INE
Of
mmmm
G \
BL n
IX A IYE7AY
/ BLOG N ByO M
44 I 0
2 mom G B G
N I W
U z
_ I 0
W N BLQG p lax- —
` I 0
� v
w
N tK
v
�E I �"t
BLDG 0 - oEcK
z co I �
8LD
L1111T OF FLOODPLAIN
Z 1
N 81°40
N 72°Z,a'4r• 2z y
BL CIZL ,
K I NC S H l CHWA Y N0. 2 --
A nrr
v�
�' }Cat
tk '
;7 $ as•}%r Y!.fi t-j{:•�,f�,„�.-ia.%L��.'L
if
�{r •'4 .f% 'YS".d1V=S i' fi'.r t..;41.:.�,y.i<,.'ry`-•t
, 5},:yy(�.t,'cwl`;• ('f y`f`a7�,,ilr..+t .�i.;,fL",i[ q/ e?
~i'�k-tt•N,� *4 t�'lf,.f \ ��}Sti�t`''"'�-
q�t tM :'k'y aStY�,�.,��,3?' `��'A't�tLj!l•r(p>.
tT1! �,a•�P•76..
1�S F't �i;��AY�{t '�ti,t`t1,��,,+4t�TM:<,.n Attachm n
A��. !•.�t�',rj tir F..£�7`�.'✓� � ;�r '�. 1' �. r`yr.>'3h:r.:{41"
Y, c. 9{^in'�;3'-'.tj�.�•`�l'iT�'f�'`;'tr' {r?.+.��;'t"t C�y�'� rai had t
.Kf'" ..Si� twC.$��i. �}'�""3'; 'c .`��'�.jy:7�...fi;;� .C•t."E'��`�•�/ DrawI
.5 r,Y7 S 1 i.tl t t 2 w4 i
�t 3y a e tjtCzi��r�-I'
r;
� Ft -r.rt Yet yrA c3 Y i'�.Y t-� c'•'.'x1;5
7r�5)�,J-�tla�4i<'11 1*��,�fx i i L>'!}����f�1(°st`Jf�•f t�'!w� Kc` '�
j i,7%.r J•"r�� ..:5t�:�' rftiS`5`� C.'Y�, e�'•. •rl�� �,�'•fi.kr- ..
-'�r•;,�: F >• �;-h•S�' �����t•�• i' �,r'r�ftJ� f�..'Ls ;j..rt; .� ..
i. �t'4' d.°- a 4��1��`,���til�t��•.�N',d �� �[. �` ar
r ci�.lt�n-
r�Fb"•f,�fikr''��`'A .•+s`r3�f t,;i'�•)f' {.�."X.r�7„i��� a,,t�'',•'.c.
4 L-•. '�3Y
;ti �`�°,S T .'� U./ ``i•.ti`}�� t:r. ty�x. ,..yi. � . :4yY`1,f f"l'). },
1ti.ir 41
p t ti ,.
�ct•a",� t t; 14tf' y ,tit �1x'�,.{{r�-''l� 'S��`�+J����1
'�r,�rt.*-S��;t?". r.' � ��. �'�rd,tcy°'fi'4 y t:�',• ��•r;4<sw-'�:
L'ii'Yi 3- �'��l�J�'�;�r�4�.S'f`'<11�q'Yrl��,`L `:T CS _ =�'s+31f• '•
.��^t r rt y, S+E<'r,� k:�P `':tia'?l- '�97 •�.iY��y-!{}•�?'�}4.
.'fly+ ,f� i'•• L' Y �rJ�'`'`,[�+,4�'�'£ t"*��. � ,:'L°St;3''�3
y�.F�; e''�,{%�s �t?,r,,.,•�.r.:%�,;.
,i� Y� .•tlk
't •'yv'• !�'�+ 'L"AaJ..`{[c'�if
ri',�7#Lti+Tt+X �"y c�,3 T t�K :555i�`rn�'{"'
��{;;�,!�C'�"F����(? ��'rr�,gb}�+� c'4j}f:ti'��'•+ i+f�r;�l�r
f��^S r,',,5;73<"0'' �''s - s �'r}'•iy1;:,E,.,r�
'4Y°: 'y7
Y.�{i!��• -jt•�3�"tta-5. ,.' Yi.; ..�:;,S ,f`,.. ;;��l�q ..gym--t't[ L.
!.7-.;ry+AS>'7�* `•.,�'`y L• '�},�'�'rr i-f:.�' tty�i r`4..?jEJ>•
rid ce i tS.S v .. yr�4} 4j :'itY
,�3-Ai�•`:ti
+ k :if�;i: 7''w 22?' .�,;' t•,.t�i�f�' Jr.`'-''' �Ij
'tlti+,i y5i•,r'
a..
i
DNt HR4—EP
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
BY-LAW NUMBER 91-
being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the
Town of Newcastle.
WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle deems it advisable to amend By-
law 84-63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle to implement the rezoning
application DEV 90-026 and to permit a reduction from the required building setback from an
"Environmental Protection (EP)" zone.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THE the Council of the Corporation of the Town of
Newcastle enacts as follows:
1. Section 16.1"Urban Residential Type Four (R4)"zone is hereby amended by adding thereto,the
following new Special Exception 15.4.11 as follows:
"15.4.11 Urban Residential Exception (R4-11) zone
Notwithstanding Section 15.2, and 3.19a, the lands zoned"114-11" on the Schedules to this by-
law shall be subject to the following zone regulations:
a. Density (maximum) 58 units per net ha
b. Interior side yard 7.5 metres
where the interior side yard abutts
an Environmental Protection(EP) zone nil
C. Parking spaces (minimum) 187
d. Rear yard 7.6 metres
where the interior side yard abutts
an Environmental Protection(EP) zone nil
2. Schedule "6" to By-law 84-63 as amended, is hereby further amended as per Schedule "A"
attached hereto by changing the zone designation from:
"Holding - Urban Residential 'lope Fow• ((H)R4)" to "Holding - Urban Residential
Exception ((Ii)R4-11)" and
"Holding Urban Residential Type Four ((H)R4)" to"Environmental Protection(EP)".
3. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of this By-law.
4. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions
of Section 34 of the Planning Act.
BY-LAW read a first time this day of 1991.
BY-LAW read a second time this day of 1991.
BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 1991.
MAYOR
CLERK
JJG�J
This is Schedule to By-law
passed -
VAN/ .. , ,//'r.%/ �.• r
,•� ,�,i ///,., f1i /
gp
�/,i
:/
/�/� '. /MEN * / /%!/.ff��i-
��`•' f%'�•,�//iii /'/�i//!'� -
i�/✓ rte . f': . �,...;
REP
'RIM,
i w
LOT 30 LOT 29 LOT
^ta:rua:��• 7
.yaic.'u�siraa
L
) r.
-.•.
RI
RI R4 I,
! _ •
•
0 50 100 ., �\
• viii, ::-__' f:�►