HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-52-84 4
C C,RPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
T.T.EDWARDS, C.I 6,6'3-2231
HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB 1J0
REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 20,
REPORT NO. : PD-52-84
SUB COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION - A 86/83
JEAN MARGARET BROOKINGS
281 LIBERTY STREET NORTH
APPEAL OF COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the
following :
1 . That Report PD-52-84 be received; and
2. That the appropriate Town staff and/or
solicitor be authorized to represent the
Municipality at such hearing of the Ontario
Municipal Board on March 30, 1984.
. . .2
Page 2
REPORT NO. : PO-52-84
BACKGROUND:
An application was received by the Committee of Adjustment
on November 3, 1983 to permit the expansion of an apparent
legal non-conforming use by constructing a sixteen by
twenty-six portable dock.
rville , Barrister and
Thomas Somme
Staff confirmed with Mr. on November 8, 1983,
Solicitor on behalf of Mrs. Brooking
that the application as submitted to construct a portable
deck, could not be considered by the Committee of Adjustment
in its present form.
Within the requirements of the Planning Act, the Committee
of Adjustment does not have jurisdiction d all agdw with the
creation or the permission to construct a
building, as relating to a non-conforming use.
Mr. Sommerville was advised that should his clients wish to
continue with this application, an amendment would b
required, thereby indicating that the proposed construction
will be as an addition or an enlargement to the existing
structure. Furthermore, confirmation in writing was
requested to be submitted to the Secretary/Treasurer of the
Committee of Adjustment no later than noon on
1983, preferably as early as possible, in order that the
notices may be corrected prior to circulation. Mr.
Sommerville acknowledged the requested change, noting that
the Committee did not have jurisdiction tosthat ahletter
application in its present form, and indicated
would be prepared and delivered to Town office , Tuesday
afternoon, November 8, 1983.
. . .3
V(J)
Page 3
REPORT NO. : PO-52-84
Mr. Sommerville was advised that the amendment as requested ,
did not reflect Staff's position on the application , rather
it permitted the Committee of Adjustment to have legal
jurisdiction to hear the application .
Subsequently thereto , an amendment to the Committee of
Adjustment application was received thereby acknowledging
the request for an addition/enlargement to the existing
premises.
The following comments were prepared and submitted for the
Comittee member's information.
"CONFORMITY WITH INTENT OF OFFICIAL PLAN PROVISIONS:
The subject lands are Bowmanville
both the Durham Reg
Urban Area Official Plan.
business is not a io
designation. Sectiondiscretion,ttheRCouncil off the aarea
an
states that at their expansion,
municipality may zone to permit the continuation,
or enlargement of existingu0nstheopresenthusesuof existing
uses have no adverse effect
surroundings lands, or the gewmanvillenU�ban the
Areaprovisions
has
of the Plan. Similarly,
policies whereby the provisions l i tof to assl an byhl aw not limit
the authority of the municipality
of permitting the extension or enlargement
at bi lddings frthe
structures which are being legally used
passing
of the Zoning By-law for a purpose which does not
conform with the land the use designation nville this
asaa.
Section 4.2.2. within uses throughout the Bowmanville
general rule, non-conforming
Major Urban Area in time,tsshoauUdecease
confo exist so that the
land affected may revert
intent of this Official Plan and In special e instances
dough the
Restricted Area Zoning By-law.
however, it may be desirable to permit the extension or
. . .4
Page 4
REPORT NO. : Po-52-84
enlargement of a legal non-conforming use in order to
avoid unnecessary
hardship providing the application is in
conformity with the policies th1Staffsection
has attached ensure
to the
general welfare of the community.
f the provisions with respect to
this report , a copy o
non-conforming uses as contofnDdrhamhofficial Plan for
Urban Area Plan and Rego
Committee's information and consideration in respect to the
application as submitted.
CONFORMITY WITH INTENT OF ZONING BY-LAW PROVISIONS:
The subject site is presently zoned under two zoning
within By-law 1587. The front portion of the
categories
property abutting Liberty Street is within the R-General
all the rear portion of the property is
Residential Zone, royal of the variance as
within the A-Rural Zone. The approval
to expand the legal
requested would permit the app
non-conforming the construction of an addition to the
existing structure.
STAFF CCOMMENTS:
Section 44 within the Planning Act states that the Committee
of Adjustment upon the application of the Owner of any
or structure affected by by-law that is past under
building or a predecessor of such sections, or any
Section ut or ze b the Owner, may despite any
person authorized in writing Y
other act, authorize such minor varianbuild�ngt or storucture,
of the by-law in respect of the land ,
or the use thereof, as in its sepof1 the land, building di ng the
or
appropriate development , or opinion of the Committee, the
structure provided that in the op ose of the by-
law and the Official
general intent and purp
Plan are maintained. In addch an application o o rwheremany�oned
above, the Committee upon such that the by-law was
land, building or structure d the daur purpose prohibited by
passed, and was lawfully used for a p p
the by-law, may permit the enlargement or extension of the
building or structure, provided that the use that was made
or struccture on the day the by-law was
of the building application to the
passed, continued until the date of the app
Committee.
In consideration of the p provisions of Section a 44 within cthe
ur
that pursuant to the pr staff
Planning Act , the Committee of aAdr Adjustment would have
jurisdiction to consider
would note that the Committee is to have regard that in the
. ..5
REPORT NO. : PD-52-84 Page 5
opinion of the Committee, the General intent and purpose
of the by-law and of the Official Plan are maintained.
It is staff's opinion that the policies of the Official
Plans provide a more appropriate procedure by which
consideration can be given to the expansion of a legal non-
conforming use which does not comply with the Official Plan
policies. As noted above, Council , at their discretion , may
zone to permit the continuation, expansion or enlargement of
existing uses provided that such existing uses have no
adverse affect on the present uses of the surrounding lands
or on the implementation of the provisions of the Official
Plans.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Refusal , as the proposed extension to the non-conforming
use, in staff's opinion, does not maintain the general
intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plans."
A motion was presented, that permission be granted to expand
a legal non-conforming use by the construction of an
addition to the existing building of a sixteen by twenty-six
foot dock. The motion as presented, did not receive
sufficient support - tie vote, motion lost, therefore,
application was denied.
An appeal was submitted on behalf of Mrs. Margaret Brookings
and subsequently forwarded to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Notice was received by staff from the Ontario Municipal
Board that a hearing has been set for March 30, 1984.
In consideration of the above, staff requests Committee's
consideration and recommendations regarding attendance at
such hearing.
Respe ul mitted, cc : Dr. P, Zakarow
282 Liberty Street North
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario L1C 3Y6
T.T. Edwards, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning
Applicant : Mrs. Margaret Brooking
LDT*TTE*j ip 281 Liberty Street North
February 13, 1984 BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
L1C 3Y6