HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-238-86 _ TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT File # 30, 6
Res. #
By-Law #
MEETING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, October 20, 1986
REPORT #: PD-238-86 FILE #: OPA 86-41/D and 18T-86031
S1J&JECT: APPLICATION TO AMEND DURHAM REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN
FILE: 86-41/D
PROPOSED PLAN OF SUBDIVISION - FILE: 18T-86031
PART LOT 24, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON
APPLICANT: IVAN PERUN/BABY POINT INVESTMENTS
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAI' Report PD-238-86 be received; and
• Newcastle reccmmen s that
Official Plan Amendment application 86-41/D and Proposed Plan of Subdivision
18T-86031 be denied; and
3. THAT a copy of Council 's decision with respect to these applications be forwarded
to the applicant and the interested parties indicated hereto.
BACKGROUND:
In May, 1986, the Planning Department was advised by the Region of Durham of applications
submitted by Mr. Ivan Perun and Baby Point Investments to amend the Durham Regional
Official Plan and for approval of a Plan of Subdivision. The subject applications
propose the development of a fifty (50) lot estate residential subdivision on a 34 hectare
(84 acre) parcel of land located in Part Lot 24, Concession 3, former Township of
. . .2
REPORT NO.: PD-238-86 Page 2
* Darlington (see attached Key Map) . The subject site is designated "Major
Open Space" by the Regional Official Plan with the northeastern and
southeastern portions of the site being designated "Environmentally
Sensitive". The majority of the site is zoned "Agricultural (A) " by By-law
84-63, with the southeastern portion of the site along Black Creek being
zoned "Environmental Protection (EP)".
In accordance with Departmental procedure, the subject applications were
circulated to various departments and agencies for comment. As well , the
Region of Durham provided copies of comments received through their
circulation of the applications. The following is a summary of the comments
received for both the Official Plan Amendment application and Subdivision
application:
Town of Newcastle Public Works Department
"No objection, subject to the following conditions:
I. This Department6s standard requirements with respect to estate
residential subdivisions;
2. That the developer bear the costs (100%) of any works on Solina Road
which are necessitated as a result of this development;
3. That the developer contribute to the costs of reconstructing Solina
Road in accordance with Town Policy;
4. That the developer be required to provide street lighting along
internal roads and cul-de-sacs;
5. Drainage concerns throughout the proposed development area are
addressed and suitably dealt with to the satisfaction of this
Department."
Town of Newcastle Community Services Department
"The proposed estate lot subdivision is outside the Courtice Urban Area and
as such, our policy is to accept cash-in-lieu of 5% parkland dedication."
. . .3
v (b)
REPORT NO.: PD-238-86 Page 3
Town of Newcastle Fire Department
"No objection. Emergency fire protection would be from either Station #4 or
#1, which are located within an acceptable emergency travel distance. Water
for fire fighting would be supplied by Fire Department tanker trucks.
Consideration should be given to Planning Department Report 40-84 Fire
Protection Requirements for Rural Development."
Durham Regional Health Unit
"The above-noted subdivision is approved in principal by this Health
Department, subject to the following conditions:
I. Low-lying lots and lots where groundwater is encountered less than six
feet below the surface, will require the addition of granular fill
material .
2. Lots 12 and 13 have a considerable amount of land which is unusable as
it is an embankment. In view of this, Lots 11, 12, and 13 must be
redesigned into two lots.
3. A considerable number of trees in many instances will have to be
removed in order to provide room for the leaching beds.
4. With the exception of Lots 11, 12, and 13, the site plan and lot
servicing plan submitted by Henry Kortekaas & Associates, April , 1986,
Job No. 86SD350, must be followed."
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
"The site of the proposed amendment is situated on the beach of former Lake
Iroquois. A coldwater tributary of Black Creek flows through the southeast
corner of the subject lands. This reach exhibits good water quality and
brook trout populations. The area within the readily-defined forest edge on
the site is classified in Authority documentation as possessing the highest
level of environmental sensitivity for reasons of significant forest and
wildlife habitat, and hydrologic conditions. The areas of high water table
and seasonal standing water outside the forest edge have moderately high
environmental sensitivity since they contribute to base flow in the Black
and Farewell Creek systems.
Due to the environmental sensitivity of the site and the presence of nearby
coldwater streams, Authority policy requires the submission of an
Environmental Impact Statement which indicates the manner in which
development could proceed while ensuring that significant environmental
characteristics are protected. The degree of environmental sensitivity
. . .4
REPORT NO.: PD-238-86 Page 4
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority - (Cont'd)
varies greatly across the site; by avoiding lot creation in some areas
potential impacts can be reduced.
The environmental study which has been circulated with the proposed
amendment identifies many areas which exhibit conditions suitable for
wildlife: good cover and food sources, seclusion and considerable
vegetative edge. Portions of the site are low-lying and support stands of
moisture-tolerant vegetation, thus providing an indication of high water
table conditions. This is confirmed by the soils investigation which
identifies a shallow perched water table in 8 of 16 test pits on the site.
It would thus appear that these wet, perched water table areas contribute to
base flow in the black and Farewell Creeks and to the sustenance of the
wooded areas in the northern half of the subject lands. No assessment of
the impacts of development on these aspects of sites hydrology has been
provided.
A review of the environmental study submitted by the applicant has revealed
a number of deficiencies. Based on the foregoing comments and our review of
the Environmental Study, we are unable to support proposed amendment 86-41/D
at this time. From the Authority's perspective, the site has potential for
estate residential development. The issues of forest cover, wildlife
habitat and site hydrology have yet to be addressed within the Environmental
Impact Statement format."
Ministry of the Environment
"Staff have reviewed the above mentioned application and recommend draft
approval be conditional upon:
1. Prior to final approval , the Ministry of the Environment is to be in
receipt of a Hydrologist's Report which ascertains the availability of
an adequate supply of potable water to service the development. The
report should comment on existing quality as well as a potential for
cross-contamination and well interference..
2. Prior to final approval , the Ministry of the Environment shall be
notified by a copy of the fully executed subdivision agreement between
the developer and the Municipality that the recommendations of the
Hydrologist' s Report, as approved by the Ministry of the Environment,
shall be implemented by requirements of the subdivision agreement."
Ministry of Natural Resources
"Black Creek, a significant Coldwater trout stream, traverses the
southeastern portion of the site. This watercourse and its associated
. . .5
REPORT NO.: PD-238-86 Page 5
Ministry of Natural Resources - (Cont'd)
valleylands are located in Block 51 of the proposed subdivision plan
(18T-86031) . The valley system in Block 51 is a heavily vegetated, forested
area which provides cover to the troutstream and helps to maintain its
coldwater significance. This vegetative cover also assists in reducing
erosion of the valley slopes and the subsequent siltation of the creek.
Black Creek is sensitive to water quality degradation. We therefore
recommend that Block 51 be maintained in the Major Open Space, Hazard Land,
and, Environmentally Sensitive Area designations. This is consistent with
effective fisheries management practices.
We have no objections to the estate residential designation on the remainder
of the property. Our concerns regarding on-site erosion and the potential
sedimentation of Black Creek can be addressed through the following
conditions of draft plan approval for the subdivision plan:
1. That the "Environmental Protection" zone be enlarged to include all of
the lands within Block 51 and that the municipality's zoning by-law
contain provisions which will have the effect of prohibiting all
buildings or structures, other than those required for flood and
erosion control , in Block 51.
2. Prior to any grading or construction on the site, the Owner shall erect
a snow fence or other suitable barrier along the rear of Lots 6, 7, 8
and 9. This barrier shall remain in place until such time as all
grading, construction and landscaping of the site are completed. This
barrier shall be maintained in order to prevent the placement of fill
or removal of vegetation :rnthin the—`.ill valley ands • Black Creek
Block 51 of the Plan.
3. Prior to any grading or construction on the site, the Owner shall
prepare a stormwater and erosion control plan which shall be acceptable
to the Ministry of Natural Resources. This plan will show all proposed
surface drainage works, and will describe the means to minimize soil
erosion and the direct discharge of stormwater flow into Black Creek,
both during and after construction."
Ministry of Agriculture and Food
"Staff of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food have reviewed the
above development proposal . Consideration has been given to the proposal in
terms of the goals and objectives of the Ministry and of the criteria and
policies outlined in the food Land Guidelines.
According to the Canada Land Inventory on a scale of 1:50,000, there are two
soils classes on the property. To the north , the soils are Class 5 with a
wetness limitation. This area of Class 5 soils which is wooded is not being
developed by this Plan of Subdivision. The remaining property has an
. . .6
REPORT NO. : PD-238-86 Page 6
Ministry of Agriculture and Food - (Cont'd)
agricultural capability rating of Class 3 with fertility and moisture
holding capacity limitations. The present land uses are idle farm fields
with some bush. The land is level to very gently rol li ng.
Surrounding land uses are mixed. To the west and south are a number of
rural residences with small agricultural holdings. To the south-west and
south-east are two gravel pits. To the east is a horse farm occupying 60
acres.
The development will occupy 34 hectares, the majority being Class 3
agricultural soils. The Food Land Guidelines state that Estate Residential
proposals should be permitted on lands of low agricultural capability, well
removed from agricultural uses. As the development is not on poor
agricultural soils nor well removed from agricultural activities, we
conclude the proposal does not comply with the policies of the Food Land
Guidelines."
The following agencies indicated no objection to the subject proposal :
- Town of Newcastle Building Department
- Northumberland and Newcastle Board of Education
- Peterborough-Victoria-Northumberland and
Newcastle Roman Catholic Separate School Board
- Ministry of Transportation and Communications
- Ontario Hydro
Section 10.3.2.3 of the Regional Official Plan requires the submission of a
detailed Engineering Report confirming an adequate supply of potable water,
and adequate soil and water table conditions on each lot satisfactory for
the effective operation of a private waste disposal system. A Soils Report
submitted by the applicant indicates that the topsoil on-site contains an
appreciable amount of organic matter, and is underlain in the northern
portion of the site by sandy silt and in the southern portion by silty fine
sand. These subsoils are generally moist and are characterized by high
water erodibility and frost susceptibility. The Report states that the site
is generally suitable for the proposed development, and that the wet raw
land conditions can be largely alleviated by the improvement of the site
grading and stormwater management. The Report also notes that special
. . .7
.C� obi
REPORT NO.: PD-238-86 Page 7
treatment for footing construction will be required due to the frost
susceptibility of the subsoil , and that, due to the high erodibility of the
sand, the immediate sodding of bare sand surfaces would be required.
The Report states that, based upon a review of Ministry of the Environment
well records for the area indicates, there is sufficient groundwater
available for the proposed development. The Report further states that the
permanent groundwater regime generally lies below the investigated depth of
2.9 metres. Groundwater seepage was observed in the test pits in the
northern portion of the site and adjacent to Black Creek. The Report
attributes this seepage to run-off infiltration trapped in soil voids, and
notes that the Soil Moisture Profile displays a decreasing moisture value
with depth.
The applicant also submitted an Environmental Analysis as required by the
Regional Official Plan (Section 10.3.2.2) . Planning Department Staff have
reviewed the Study with an eye to comments provided by C.L.O.C.A. The Study
identifies a number of vegetation grOUPS on the site and states that the
proposed plan will have little impact on the various vegetative
associations. C.L.O.C.A. has noted, however, that the proposed plan
indicates residential building lots and roads in some areas identified as
being sensitive. The Study states that the site contains no significant .
wildlife habitat; C.L.O.C.A. directly disputes this statment by noting that
the Gartner Lee Environmental Study portrays the site as exhibiting
significant wildlife habitat. The Study also identifies a concern with
erosion on-site and increased sedimentation in Black Creek. Staff note that
the viability of this proposal will need to be confirmed. As indicated
earlier in this Report, C.L.O.C.A. has concluded that the issues of forest
cover, wildlife habitat and site hydrology have yet to be adequately
addressed within the Environmental Study.
Six letters with a total of ten (10) signatures have been submitted in
objection to the proposed subdivision. The concerns of the residents are as
follows:
. . .8
REPORT NO.: PD-238-86 Page 8
- impact on adjacent farm operations
- urbanization of the rural areas
- precedent established if development permitted
- impact on Black Creek and on wildlife
- impact of 50 wells and septic systems on ground water supply
- increased strain on community services
- increased traffic and noise
COMMENT:
Section 10.3.2 of the Durham Regional Official Plan provides criteria by
which estate residential developments are to be evaluated. In general ,
these criteria require that the proposal maintain the character of the
natural environment and be located in a scenic, well-vegetated area of
rolling topography, that it not be located on lands having high capability
for agriculture, that it not unduly restrict the use of adjacent properties
for agriculture, and that it not create undue adverse effects on lands
identified as being environmentally sensitive .
The proposed subdivision is located on a scenic well-vegetated site and in
this respect, would appear to conform to the requirements of the Official
Plan. The site has been identified by C.L.O.C.A. as being environmentally
sensitive in terms of signficant forest cover and wildlife habitat, and
hydrogeologic conditions. The Authority has stated that the site is
suitable for estate residential development but that, inasmuch as the degree
of environmental sensitivity varies greatly across the site, potential
impacts can be reduced by avoiding lot creation in some areas. The
Authority has stated however, that they are unable to support the proposed
amendment at this time and have requested that further information be
provided on the potential environmental impact.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Food has noted that, although the present
land uses of the site are idle farm fields with some bush, the majority of
site has an agricultural capability rating of Class 3. The Ministry has
. . .9
REPORT NO. : PD-238-86 Page 9
also noted the presence of small agricultural holdings in the areas and in
particular, a horse farm directly to the east. The Ministry has states
that, for the above reasons, the proposed development does not comply with
the policies of the Food Land Guidelines.
Staff share the concerns expressed by area residents with respect to the
proposed development. The issues of environmental impact and the impact on
adjacent farm operations have already been addressed in this Report. As
noted in Staff Report PD-226-86 which was considered by Committee on October
6, 1986, Staff are concerned that estate residential developments results in
greater pressures on the Town for the extension of urban type services and
places development pressures on existing agriculture operations. In this
respect, the subject proposal is not located in close proximity to an urban
area or hamlet and would establish a new focus of development pressures.
Staff also reference the number of lots being proposed. With regard to the
impact of 50 new wells and septic systems on the water table in the area,
Staff note that the Regional Health Unit has indicated no objection to the
proposed development subject to a number of conditions. As well , the
Ministry of the Environment has recommended approval conditional upon
submission of a Hydrogeol ogi c Analysis.
However, based on the objection of the Ministry of Agriculture and
C.L.O.C.A. and the general concerns as outlined by Staff Report PD-226-86,
it is Staff' s opiniion that approval of this proposed development would be
inconsistent with the intent of the Durham Regional Official Plan. It is
therefore recommended that the Region be advised that the Town recommends
that Official Plan Amendment application 86-41/D and Proposed Plan of
Subdivision 18T-86031 be denied.
Respectfu u ed,
T.T. Edwards, M.C.I.P.
Director of Planning
JAS*TTE*j ip
*Attach.
October 7, 1986
CC: Attached List /
REPORT NO. : PD-238-86 Page 10
L.T. Salmers, Q.C.
P.O. Box 2096
55 William Street East
McLaughlin Square
OSHAWA, Ontario
L1H 7V40
Mr. Ivan Perun
R.R. #1
HAMPTON, Ontario
LOB 1JON
Henry Kortekaas & Associates
82 Sherwood Road East
PICKERING Village, Ontario
L 1V 2B4W
Mr. Robert Mason
R.R. #3
BOWMANVILLE , Ontario
L 1C 3K4((
Mr. & Mrs. Freeman John Ashton
Group No. 7, Box 10
R.R. #3
BOWMANVILLE, Ontario
L 1C 3K40(
Ryan and inn Geboers
R.R. #3
BOWMANVILLE , Ontario
L1C 3K40(
Justine Geboers
R.R. #3
BOWMANVILLE , Ontario
L1C 3KO
Mr. & Mrs. W. Aldsworth
R.R. #3
BOWMANVILLE , Ontario
L 1C 3K4((
Bernice Cameron-Hill & Frank L. Hill
Group 17, Box 5
R.R. #3
BOWMANVILLE , Ontario
L 1C 3K40(
J BROAD ALLOWANCE (.Not Open)
O
° 18T-86031
CD
IO<T�./NLO p1/P.A�+L/CeKI'
LOT ; 24
Q
CONC. 3
o°
f
c 1
� ® Z
Q
z ®® �� "
O o
(n 1 ® '` � ® z
W
'_d
...ey. -- ..-.or..... Pf 141111,tee 1 39 a7 250 23
CC
Q I
ca�v 3 0
NASH RQAQ
COLAM
H{yy
N 2
KEY PL.A/�/
TOWN of NEWCASTLE Formerly Township of Darlington