HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-136-84 4
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT T.T.EDWARDS,M.C.I.P.,Director
HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB UO TEL.(416)263.2231
REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
MEETING OF JULY 16, 1984
REPORT NO. : PD-136-84
SUBJECT: BY-LAW 84-79
J. CHOW
Part Lot 13, Conc. 1 , Bowmanville
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the
following :
1 . That Report PD-136-84 be received; and
2. That By-law 84-79 be forwarded to the Ontario
Municipal Board for approval and that the Board
be requested to convene a hearing at the
earliest possible date.
I
.. .2
I
REPORT NO. : PD-136-84 Page 2
BACKGROUND AND COMMENT:
On May 28, 1984 Council approved By-law 84-79 to rezone part
of Lot 13, Concession 1 , Bowmanville, to permit the
development of the site for an eating estblishment. The
subject lands are designated Main Central Area Commercial by
the Bowmanville Official Plan and the proposed use conforms.
In response to the Clerk 's circulation of By-law 84-79 three
objections were received. Two objections were submitted by
neighbouring residents and the third by a developer owning
neighbouring lands.
The objections can be summarized as follows :
1 ) traffic hazzards due to the proximity to
the Scugog, King & Queen Streets
intersection
2) litter
3) property devaluation
4) need
5) servicing adequacy
Planning and Public Works staff, through the course of site
plan approval , are satisfied that a traffic hazzard will not
exist. In addition, the site plan agreement includes
specific provisions with respect to garbage disposal and
containers, as well as maintenance.
With respect to property values, staff have not been
provided with any evidence to confirm that their properties
will be devalued. Staff note that two of the subject
. . .2
I
i
I
REPORT NO. : PD-136-84 Page 3
properties are located within the Commercial designation of
the Main Central Area and may therefore be expected to have
slightly higher property values given the higher order of
uses permitted. The third property is within the low
density residential component of the Main Central Area and
is afforded a certain protection against intrusion of
commercial uses without the benefit of an Official Plan
amendment and rezoning.
The issue of need is not one which staff have addressed
inasmuchas the proposed use is permitted by the approved
Official Plan.
The final objection in respect of services has, in staff's
opinion , been resolved and is not an issue. We would
comment, however, that other development propsoals in this
vicinity which have been denied due to servicing constraints
were of much greater magnitude and could not be accommodated
by the existing system. In this instance, a method of
servicing which was acceptable to the Region was developed,
thus permitting the proposal .
In view of the foregoing, staff recommend that the by-law be
forwarded to the Ontario Municipal Board without amendment
and that the Board be requested to schedule a hearing in
respect of same at the earliest possible opportunity.
Respectful ed,
T. T. Edwards, M.C. I.P.
Director of Planning
TTE*bb
July 5, 1984
i