The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPD-197-86 �ca> TOWN OF NEWCASTLE Y =' REPORT File # Res- �e- I -7( ' r^ � By-Law # (STING: General Purpose and Administration Committee DATE: Tuesday, September 2, 1986 REPORT #: PD-197-86 FILE #: 85-50/D SUBJECT: APPLICATION TO AMEND DURHAM REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN - BLAIR & ELSPETH McMULLAN PART LOT 9, CONCESSION 5, former Township of Darlington RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: I. THAT Report PD-197-86 be received; and 2. THAT the Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle reaffirms its recommendation that site specific Official Plan Amendment Application 85-50/D be denied; and 3. THAT the Region review the "Permanent.-Agr_iculture Reserve" esignation for this area in consideration of the land ownersh fragmented)afid onsirer a change in designation of the area to "General Agricultural " ; and 4. THAT a copy of Council ' s decision with respect to this matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham and the applicant. BACKGROUND AND COMMENT: * On July 22, 1986, the Planning Department received a letter (attached) from Mr. Blair McMullan requesting that the Town reconsider its recommendation to the Region of Durham that Official Plan Amendment application 85-50/D be denied. The application seeks to permit the establishment of a commercial kennel on a 4.2 hectare ( 10.39 acres) parcel . . .2 �CQ) REPORT NO.: PD-197-86 Page 2 in Part Lot 9, Concession 5, former Township of Darlington (see Key Map * attached). The Regional Official Plan designates the site "Permanent Agricultural Reserve". Within this designation , the use of land for any purpose other than agriculture and farm-related uses is not permitted (Section 11.2.2) . A kennel is not included within the Plan ' s definition of "agriculture and farm-related uses". (Section 11.2.3) Mr. McMul lan' s request arose as a result of Regional Planning Committee's consideration of the Official Plan Amendment application at its meeting of April 1, 1986. The Planning Committee considered a Planning Commissioner 's Report on the application which recommended denial of the application. The Report noted that the applicant' s proposal would have some difficulty in meeting the requirement in the Town' s Zoning By-law that the kennel be at least 300 metres (985 feet) from the neighbouring residences to the east and south across Regional Road No. 4. Planning Committee resolved to table the Commissioner' s Report to allow the applicant to contact the Town in regard to the 300 metre setback requirement. COMMENT The General Purpose and Administration Committee dealt with Mr. McMullan' s Official Plan Amendment application at its meeting of February 3, 1986 through consideration of Staff Report PD-29-86. The Report noted the provisions of the "A-14" zone of By-law 84-63 states that a commercial kennel shall not be located within 300 metres of a dwelling unit located on adjacent lands which are held under distinct and separate ownership. Staff noted that, although it would be physically possible to locate the proposed kennel on the applicant' s lot, it would have to be located a minimum of 240 metres (800 feet) from the applicant' s house in order to meet the 300 metre separation distance requirement. The Report recommended denial of the subject application; this recommendation was adopted by Committee and Council . At the time the Official Plan Amendment application was considered by Committee and Council , the provisions of the "A-14" zone, specifically Section 6.4.14, Subsection (a) , required the 300 metre setback. This . . .3 14 OP REPORT NO. . PD-197-86 Page 3 subsection however was deleted by By-law 86-41 which was approved by Council on March 24, 1986. By-law 86-41 dealt with a number of general amendments to By-law 84-63 and was appealed by the Region of Durham as the result of a proposed zone change on an unrelated property. The Region's appeal was subsequently withdrawn upon Council 's approval of By-law 86-63 which deleted the disputed zone change from By-law 86-41. As of the writing of this Report, By-law 86-41 has yet to receive final approval from the Ontario Municipal Board. Staff note however that, notwithstanding the 300 metre setback requirement, Staff Report PD-29-86 cited a number of other factors to support the recommendation of denial . The Report noted that, although the Regional Official Plan does not permit kennels within the "Permanent Agricultural Reserve", kennels are specifically listed as being permitted within the "General Agricultural " (Section 11.2.4) and the "Major Open Space" (Section 12.2.2) designations. The exclusion of kennels from the "Permanent Agricultural Reserve" is consistent with the Official Plan 's policy of preserving the permanent agricutural reserve for purely agricultural and farm-related purposes. This policy is demonstrated by Section 6.2.1 (b ) which places an emphasis on the creation of large blocks of permanent agricultural reserve void of non-farm related development. The Report further noted that the Official Plan' s policy of excluding non-agricultural uses from the "Permanent Agricultural Reserve" is reflected in By-law 84-63. Within the "A-1" ( "Agricultural Special Exception One" ) zone, which corresponds with the "Permanent Agriculture Reserve", commercial kennels are not permitted. Commercial kennels are, however, permitted within the "A (Agriculture)" zone, which corresponds with the "General Agricultural Area" and "Major Open Space" designations. By-law 84-63 defines a commercial kennel as a building where more than three (3 ) dogs are bred, boarded or trained for profit or gain. In contrast, a private kennel , which is permitted in the "A-1" zone, is defined as a building where more than three (3) dogs are kept, bred or trained for the personal recreational use of the owner of the land. Inasmuch as the subject property is zoned "A-1" by By-law 84-63, the applicant would also need to apply for a rezoning . . .4 REPORT NO.: PD-157-86 Page 4 should the Official Plan Amendment application be approved. The Report also noted that the subject property is flat with very little vegetative cover to act as a visual barrier between the subject lot and surrounding properties, although there is a thin line of bushes and trees on a portion of the boundary with the lot to the east. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment application conflicts with the intent of the Durham Regional Official Plan with respect to the use of land within the "Permanent Agricultural Reserve". It is therefore recommended that the Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle reaffirms its recommendation that site specific Official Plan Amendment (Application 85-50/D) be denied. Staff note, however, that in consideration of the fragmented land ownership patterns within this area, the Region may wish to reconsider the "Permanent Agricultural Reserve" designation for the area in favour of a "General Agricultural " designation. This would avoid a site specific amendment which Staff feel would be inappropriate in this instance and if approved, would also eliminate the need for a rezoning. ;Res,,pectfued, . Edwards, M.C.1 .P. Director of Planning JAS*TTE*bb *Attach July 30, 1586 cc Mr. & Mrs. B. McMullan R.R. #4 BOWMANVILLE , Ontario L1C 3K5 rn .� ----------------- CA .� --- D ----- ------ - ---- ---- = rn s n co Npo Ln rn RMOIK Igl1p 1w M ------- -. ------ - --D -----� ° to yX� 1 D CONCESSION 4 CONCESSION 5 T C X1.4. . 1' '3d F,r. ,.,�,:�..1 :i:i�'S;`1'p'' �'t' ..�,>. ;:},:.; '; ,u">t�,q:rh`'...'.t...�. .;y:'::i: '• � . i,•'..:�� 4 ti f S�ti« �µFh �•h?I?f..fF.,a.. --lh i i., }v+.',;l•y.,�• I. F1 h l':fJ. :l!f .1 F• ..., •r.. ,It r.rt.;. �.,.. .•.i.,,.._.•, 'f ..,:• .. . ,.t .. _...•1.;r'i: .. "}';:�`'. - .¢;,. ..pY r• .,fit:'--�~. ��•'��. I r"";. ,., U'�,Ij9:;i+l: n W� � .153-A � -rte , �ZA JUL ktw I N;