HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-30-88 DN: 30-88
f
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
�} REPORT File # ��
Res. #
By-Law #
PEEING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, February 1, 1988
REPORT #: PD-30-88 FILE #: DEV 87-96
SUBJECT: REZONING APPLICATION - J. STOOP
PART LOT 24, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TWP. OF DARLINGTON
FILE: DEV 87-96
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration
Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-30-88 be received; and
2. THAT the application submitted by J. Stoop to rezone a 6.0 hectare parcel
of land located in Part Lot 24, Concession 3, former Township of
Darlington, be denied as the proposal does not conform to the provisions of
the Regional Official Plan nor the approved policies of the Town of
Newcastle.
BACKGROUND AND COMMENT:
On November 17, 1987, the Planning Department received an application submitted by
J. Stoop to rezone a parcel of land within Part of Lot 24, Concession 3, former
Township of Darlington to permit the development of two (2) additional non-farm
residential _lots.
. . .2
\
REPORT 00. : PD-30-88 PAGE 2 ^
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The subject lands are designated as "Major {psu Space" by the Iky]iou of Durham
official Plan. The Regional Plan stipulates that the predominant use of lands
under this designation abaII be for agricultural and farm-related ooea unless
residential development proceeds in the form of iufilliug and that such is
recognized as a "Residential Node or Cluster" within the local municipality's
official Plan or Duuiug By-law.
8y-law 84-63, as amended, shows the subject lands currently within the
^>icuItucaI (&)« mnoe and the "Environmental Protection (EP)" zone. The "All
zone permits non-farm residential buildings and structures on Iota which
predate the current Zoning By-law or are located on lots created by severance
in 0000cdaooe with the policies of the Durham Regional official Plan.
In accordance with approved policy, the subject application was circulated to
various agencies and departments for comments. The following is o summary of
comments which have been received. The following departments/agencies had no
objections:
- Town of Newcastle Fire Department
- Town of Newcastle Building Department
- Region of Durham Health Unit
- Ministry of Agriculture and Fond
The following departments/agencies offered the following comments:
Town of Newcastle Public Works tmeot
"We have reviewed the above-noted application and have no objection provided
the Owner contribute to the resurfacing of Soliva Road abutting the severed
parcel."
Central Lake Ontario Conservation tbo l
n. . . .Conservation Authority staff will require that the creek, regional storm
flondDlaiu and valley aIo9ea between the tops of the creek banks remain in the
"Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. We will not, however, object to the
tableland of each lot, adjacent to 8olioa Road, being rezoned to accommodate
residential development.
In addition, Staff will not support this application uoIeoo the easterly limits
of the two (2) new lots are made concurrent with the westerly top of the creek
bank, and the remainder of the land to the east be retained by the applicant."
�
�>
REPORT NO. : PD-30-88 PAGE 3 ~-
_______________________________________________________________________________
Region of Durham Planning Department
"The subject property is designated "Major Open Space" in the Durham Regional
Official Plan. There is, in addition, an indication of "Hazard Lands" and
"Environmentally Sensitive Area". Section 10,2.1.3 of the Regional DIau
permits limited new non-farm residential development in the form of clusters in
areas designated "Major Open Space", providing the cIuoLeco contain the
characteristics described by the provisions of Section I0.2.I.3.
The subject property and surrounding area do not appear to satisfy the
provisions of the above-noted section. In particular, lot sizes are too large
and the cluster is neither a definable separate entity, uuc large enough on as
not to be considered as scattered or strip development. Accordingly, the
proposal for two additional lots would not appear to conform."
In addition to the above comments, the Planning Department received to
following comments from a Neighbouring property owner.
". . . . I would object to the above proposal. The proposal to create two new
2.5 acre Iota is NOT in keeping with development in the immediate neighbourhood
and would result in significant changes in the rural nature of the area. We
are also concerned about the impact of two new private wells and septic
systems, on the properties in the neighbourhood. . . .x
Staff have reviewed the application with regards to the provisions of the
Regional Official Plan and the Zoning By-law. There are policies in place to
recognize and delivate BocaI Clusters in the Regional Official Plan and through
existing DuIioy' which the Town has in place. Accordingly, the characteristics
of a Node or Cluster are as follows:
`/ (i) the cluster is recognized as o definable separate entity and is of a
size so as not to be considered as scattered or strip development;
(ii) the entire cluster' including ocena proposed for development, in
identified in the District Plan, local Official Plan, and/or
restricted area Zoning By-law. Once defined no further ezteuaiVuo to
the cluster shall be permitted;
(iii) the existing group of dwellings are on relatively small lots generally
being less than approximately 3 ha (7.4 acres) ;
(iv) new olOoteca shall be discouraged from locating on a Provincial
Highway or Type »&n Arterial road; and
ov(Y
B8P0BT N0. : PD-30-88 PAGE 4
_______________________________________________________________________________
(v) development within the cluster is compatible with the surrounding uses
and cuotocnm with the &gziuultozmI Code of Practice."
The Town also has its policy on how to identify a Node or Cluster. The
attachment to Report DD-180-86, which was presented to Council, outlined the
criteria which Staff examine:
"For the Dorgwaea of this policy, rural Nodes or Clusters are defined as areas
of rural non-farm related residential development which exhibit similar lot
characteristics and contain a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of olo (6)
existing residential lots for which building permits would be available and
within which iufilliug may occur op to a maximum of three (3) additional lots.
J\ rural Cluster shall be defined as areas bounded mu' at least three (3) sides
by natural or physical boundaries such as watercourses or public streets."
In addition to the foregoing, rural Nodes or Clusters shall not be permitted in
areas designated as "Permanent Agricultural Reoecve" by the Regional Official
Plan. In other designations Nodes or Clusters shall not be permitted in areas
located adjacent to active, agricultural operations. Where a Node or Cluster
is designated it must comply with the Agricultural Code of Practice and atbe
applicable pcuviaiuua of the Town's Zoning 8y-law.
Accordingly and in consideration of the above-noted comments, Staff are not in
a position to support the application doe to non-conformity with the Regional
official Plan and the approved policies of the Town of Newcastle.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
-------------------------- /-T---�-_ ril---
---------
-
T.T. Edwards, y .C.I.P. �wre �ff
izectoc of Planning Chief ive Officer
P80*TT8* 'ip
*Attach.
January 19, 1988
CC: J. Stoop
D.B. #3
B0WMD\0VILLD' Ontario
LIC 3D4
LOT 26 LOT 25 LOT 24 LOT 23
(Unopened ) CONC. — ROAD 4 (Unopened)
I
010-090-04900
(100.00 ac.)
� M
Z
O
0(0-090-04800
10.02 ac.) W
010-090-04700 U)
( 10.02 ac.) Ld
U
Z
10-100c.) 0
Q
010-090-04500
O
�C Q 010-090-04400
U Z (59.38 ac.)
oc
NASH ROAD
® SUBJECT SITE : 010-090-04600 ( 14.82 ac.
Dev. 87-96