Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout74-25r A5. MUNICIPAL PLANNING CONSULTANTS CO. LTD., April 17, 1974 400 Mount Pleasant Road, Toronto, Ontario. PN: 4440 THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE Consultants Report No. 3 DARLINGTON AND CLARKS BY-LAWS 1. TERMS OF REFERENCE On April 1, 1974, we were requested by Mr. Entwisle to review the Darlington and Clarke By -laws with respect to the differences in the minimum lot sizes. Of immediate concern is the difference between the minimum lot area required for a single - family house in the Agricultural Zones. Reference was also made in the letter to the problems faced by the Land Division Committee. 2. OFFICIAL PLAN Perhaps the first point that should be examined is the question of consent policies. The guidelines to be followed in considering whether or not a severance should be granted are found in the Official Plans. Both Official Plans set out fairly restrictive guidelines as to what conditions must be met before a consent can be granted, such as: - soil and drainage conditions must be suitable; - land must front on an existing public road; - access shall not create a traffic hazard. The Darlington Official Plan continues to state that "consents for non - agricultural uses should only be granted as infilling in, or adjacent to, existing groups of houses, hamlets or in areas desig- nated for such purposes ". The Darlington Official. Plan policy makes the By -lair not as le- nient as one would first assume. Thus, the only consents that may be granted - for non - agricultural (i.e. single - family purposes), are those for: (1) (a) a retiring bona fide farmer; (b) a bona fide farmer who has two horses as a result of farm con- solidation; (c) a bona fide farmer's son or daughter• who are engaged in the farm operation, or other full -time employees; (d) adjacent to, or infilling of, an established built -up area. The requirements of minimum lot size for the above are 37,500 square feet, or approximately three - quarters of an acre 3. GOVERNMENT POLICY Perhaps it should be pointed out at this time that Government Policy on consents for non - agricultural development in a Rural Area is as follows: A bona fide farmer, with a consent under Section 29 of The Planning Act, may be permitted to sever a parcel of land of not less than 1/2 acre: (i) for his own use upon retirement from farming; (ii) for a farm house made surplus through farm consolida- tion; (iii) for a son or daughter engaged in the agricultural operation; (iv) for a person engaged full -time in the agricultural operation. In addition, "infilling ", defined as being "a proposed lot fronting on a public street between existing non -farm residential buildings which are separated by not more than 450 feet, the lot being created having a frontage of not less than 150 feet" is also an established Government policy. 4. CLARKE'S OFFICIAL PLAN Clarke's Official Plan is very much the same as Darlington's and the Government Policies, in that, for non -farm residential de- velopment, not less than 2 acres are required for infilling, and infilling is the only vehicle available to permit non -farm residen- tial development in the Agricultural Areas. (2) 5. ZONING The 37,500 square feet minimum lot size for a house in Darling- ton's By -law does not mean that consents may be granted anywhere in the Agricultural Zone for that lot size, but rather that requests for consents that meet all the Official Plan requirements need only be 37,500 square feet in size as opposed to Clarke's one acre. It should also be noted that the granting of a consent is not synonymous with the issuance of building permits. 6. RECOMMENDATION If it is the wish of the Planning Advisory Committee to have the two By -laws in conformity with one another, then both the Official Plans and By -laws will require amending to bring Darlington's 37,500 square feet minimum lot area requirement for non - agricultural devel- opment up to Clarke's one acre. We would suggest, however, that the Land Division Committee be informed of the Darlington Official Plan Policy that consents be granted only where adjacent to an established built -up area, or as infilling as described earlier, and that they should inform appli- cants that the granting of a consent does not guarantee the issuance of a building permit. JWM /i a Respectfully submitted, MUNICIPAL PLANNING CONSULTANTS CO. LTD. r r ' (Ms.) Jean W. Monteith, B.E.S. (3)