HomeMy WebLinkAbout74-526_11
REPORT ISO. 3
REPORT ON COURTICE DAIRY BARN OBJECTIONS
The attached notice of objection, signed by 50 residents to by -law
74 -�2, has been referred to the Planning "dvisory Committee, I find
many of the objections to be well founded, but the Committee are
already aware of my views on this proposal so I will not repeat them
here. The municipality must now prepare answers to these objections
for the OMB if it still wishes to proceed with approval of this
by-law. The applicant in this case retained the services of his own
planner who recommended this proposal to Council. I think that the
next logical step in these circumstances, if Council still wishes to
proceed, is for the applicant and his planner to prepare a response
to this notice for submission to this Committee.
I recommend that this notice be forwarded to the applicant for reply
with the assistance of his planner if desired.
hespectfully submitted,
1
George F. Howden,
Planning Director,
�1 TO: J. M. Mcllroy, A.M.C.T.
!� Clerk
Town of Neawcaotle
J R
40 Temperance Street
BounAanville, Ontario.
L,1C 3A6
NOTICE OF OBJECTT014S
C_�J
By -law No. 74-42, Site Plan - Part Lot 34, Concession
2 Totiathip of Darlin ton
We the undersigned object to the approval of Bylaw
No. 74-42 passed on the let day of April, 1974 allowing the uae
of the property on part of Lot 34 , Concession 2 in tho Township
of Darlington as a "Dairy Barn Store" for the following reasona:
1. The use of this location for a Dairy Barn outlet is
contrary to the Official Plan for the Township of Darlington
in that it will depreciates the market value of the residential
properties immediately adjacent to the subject land.
2. This re- zoning is a "spot zoning" and is contrary to
proper planning principals There the existing land uce around
the subject site is residential. Any re- zoning of the subject
lands should be done on the basis of a co- ordinated approach
to tha land use in the entire area and not in isolation. The
.value of the existing residential land immediately adjacent to
the subject site would be depreciated unless a commercial re-
zoning was also included for the surrounding lands.
3. The lot sizq for the pro -)osed sito plan is
not large enough under the existing commercial zoning by --law
to accommodates the use described in the by -law. The minimum
- 2 -
A size and ant back roquiromant® normally u®od for a G -1
)n® would not permit this dovelopment even if it wero zonod
ale
i
A
AY 3
r�
All of which is respectfully gubmitted this 11th day
r,
of April, 1974.
i
/�i ' t�/P 't".� �' ,
Y;S i
i ,
.f
J
1 14'
4� {
a �
I/--- Xl�/
f _`rtr
/r�G L ((,�c � f,,•, � � �>
r
1
r �
j } J t�at�
�` 1 __{ / • ®., ' sir t _(` �...
i
a,
l I f I
I
+/ I
MIA LL
p ,
J
i
— 4 —
/
' ( ' l /t ' ' ' +\ r'
11
I '