Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-73-85 EF110 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 MAY 6, 1985 NOTE: Councillors are requested to Fin' their copy of the standard Subdivision Agreement to the meeting. REPORT NO. : PD-73-85 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: * 1 . That Report PD-73-85 be received; and 2. That the changes to the Town's standard Subdivision Agreement, contained in Attachment No. 1 hereto, be approved. BACKGROUND AND COMMENT: During the course of preparing recent subdivision agreements, a number of desirable wording changes have been identified. These changes are recited in Attachment No. 1 hereto by way of a brief explanatory note. Staff feel that these changes ay-e appropriate and are recommending their- endorsement by Council . Respect b ' ted, T.T. Edwards, M.C.I.P. Director- of Planning LDT*1'TE*j i p *Attach. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO STAFF REPORT PD-73-85 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS 1. Paragraph 1 "DEFINITIONS" - Staff are suggesting that a further definition be added to provide clarification with the intent of the agreement relative to references to the Town. The proposed definition is as follows: 1 .10 "Town" shall mean Council or any official designated by Council to administer the terms of the Agreement. 2. Paragraph 2.16 "PLAN APPROVAL" - This paragraph presently requires Council to recommend to the approving authority, be it the Region or the Ministry, that the plan be approved for registration. In actual practice, the Director of Planning is required to advise the Ministry or the Region of Durham when the conditions of draft plan approval have been complied with. At that point the plan can be approved for registration. In that regard, Staff are suggesting that the reference to Council be changed to Director of Planning to reflect past practice and eliminate any implied requirement for Council to formally clear the conditions of draft plan approval . This change would result in a reduced time element between clearance of the conditions of draft approval and registration of the plan of subdivision. 3. Paragraph 3.9 "MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE PERIOD" - Staff are suggesting that references tote Town o icitor• approving any financial securities be deleted to be consistent with the wording of Section 3.6 which has made this reference redundant. 4. Paragraph 3.12 "REQUIREMENTS FOR RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE" Staff are proposing to add a further condition relative o the release of a developer's Maintenance Guarantee and that is the submission of the "as built" drawings required pursuant to the terms of the agreement. This would ensure that the municipality has sufficient security to cover this requirement we note that, in many instances, receipt of the "as built" drawings has been delayed for as much as two years following completion. This, quite often, makes it difficult for the municipality to undertake any works that may be required or associated with the completed development and should ensure receipt of the "as built" drawings within a reasonable time frame. 5. Paragraph 3.15 "OCCUPANCY PERMIT" - As presently worded, this section requires a developer to post a Performance Guarantee in respect of occupancy of dwellings within the plan. It has been . . .2 Page 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO STAFF REPORT PD-73-85 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS Par•agr•aph 3.15 "OCCUPANCY PERMIT" (font'd) historically based upon an amount of Seven Hundred and Fifty Dol 1 ar•s ($750.00) per- lot to a maximum of Ten Thousand Dollar-s ($10, 000) . In an instance where the developer- defaults on the r•equi r•ements of the Agreement he for-feits the amount of Seven Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($750.00). Staff ar-e concerned, however-, that this would not sufficiently protect the municipality in the event of default and ar-e suggesting that this section be r-evised to r•equi r•e a lump sum Occupancy Deposit of Seven Thousand and Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) which may be reduced by the Town by an amount necessary to cor•r•ect a default relative to occupancy. In the event of such default, the developer would then be r•equi r•ed to r•estor•e the Letter- of Cy-edit to the full amount failing which further- building permits would be refused. 6. Par•agr•aph 4.5 "REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING PERMITS" Subsection (7) Staff ar-e suggesting that the wor s "and maintained in goo standing" be added following the word "deposited" to r•einfor•ce the aforementioned changes relative to Occupancy Permits, and to ensure that building permits would not be issued unless the occupancy deposit was in good standing. 7. Par•agr•aph 4.6 "MODEL HOMES AND ARCHITECTUAL CONTROL" Section la - Staff ar-e suggesting that as a condition of issuing a permit for- model home, that the developer- also be responsible for- satisfying the Town that the final grades of the lot will be appr•opr•i ate for- the proposed building and that that gr-ading complies with the over-all lot gr-ading plan. 8. Par•agr•aph 4.8 "REQUIREMENTS FOR AUTHORIZATION TO OCCUPY" Section - Staff ave suggesting that a time limit of twelve 12 months be added to ensure that a developer- does not neglect to do the r•equi r•ed lot gr-ading within a reasonable per-iod of time. 9. Par•agr•aph 5.7 "STAGING OF WORKS" - This section contains conflicting r•equir•ements and f ar-e suggesting that r•efer•ence to Council approval of the phasing plan be deleted and changed to the Director- of Public Works consistent with the wording contained in Line 3 of the same section. This, again, would eliminate an unnecessary r•epor•t to Council . 10. Par•agr•aph 5.10 "DAMAGES OR RELOCATING OF EXISTING SERVICES OR NEIGHBOURING WELLS" - Staff ar-e suggesting that the wor ink g of this section r•el ati ve to i nter•fer•ence of pr-ivate water- supplies be changed to r•equi r•e the establishing of a moni tor•i ng pr•ocedur•e . . .3 Page 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO STAFF REPORT PD-73-85 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS Paragraph 5.10 "DAMAGES OR RELOCATING OF EXISTING SERVICES OR NEIGHBOURING WELLS (Cont'd) similar to that developed for the recent Pollard Site Plan Agreement with a proviso that failure to monitor the water table would result in the Town taking the position that any occurences of interference with private water supplies would be the responsibility of the developer. This type of clause has been incorporated in various agreements, from time to time, and would be inserted on a discretionary basis depending upon the circumstances and the locale. 11. Paragraph 5.22 "REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION" - Staff are suggesting that the current requirement for a Council approval prior to issuance of Certificate of Completion be deleted since this is basically a technical review by the Director of Public Works or his staff and marks the point in time following which the works would go on to maintenance. Prior to any works being accepted by the municipality, Council approval is still required. This change is proposed mainly as a time-saving feature since the current agreement permits the phasing of the works which could result in numerous staff reports to Council and considerable delay to the developer depending upon the phasing Schedule. 12. Paragraph 5.28 "RESPONSIBILITY FOR DRAINAGE" - Staff are suggesting that this section be renamed Responsibility of Subsequent Owners" and that two (2) additional obligations of subsequent owners be added; that being the compliance with the terms of the agreement relative to issuance of building permits and the second being a discretionary one where fencing along reverse frontage lots is provided and the Town wishes to ensure the perpetual maintenance of the item. I r