HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-64-83 V a��l
I
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT T.T.EDWARDS,M.C.I.P.,Director
HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB 1J0 TEL.(416)263-2231
REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
MEETING OF APRIL 18, 1983
REPORT NO. : PD 64-83
SUBJECT: OBJECTION TO BY-LAW 82-181 , BEING A BY-LAW TO
REZONE CERTAIN LANDS IN PART OF LOT 25,
CONCESSION 6, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON,
BEING BLOCK 10, PLAN M-746 - R. B. DAVIS
CLERKS FILE: 60.35.174 PLANNING FILE: DEU 82-22
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the
following:
1 . That Report PD-64-83 be received; and
2. That the following Resolution be adopted by
Council and forwarded to the Ontario Municipal
Board together with By-law 82-181 .
"WHEREAS the Council of the Town of Newcastle
has approved By-law 8,1,.,-181 to amend Restricted
Area Zoning By-law 2111 , as amended, as a
result of their consideration of an application
for such an amendment submitted by the property
owner;
AND WHEREAS the effect of By-law 82-181 will be
to change the zone designation of the lands
subject to By-law 82-181 from "D-Development"
to "Special Provision By-law 82-181 " to permit
the development of two (2) single family
residential lots created by Land Division
consent ;
,1U'�
aid
Report No: PD-64-83 . . ./2
AND WHEREAS By-law 82-181 has been approved in
conformity with the applicable policies of the
Durham Regional Official Plan;
AND WHEREAS the request for the development of
the land subject to By-law 82-181 for
residential purposes is in compliance with
Amendment #1 of the Solina Hamlet Plan;
BE IT NOW THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Town of
Newcastle hereby requests the Ontario Municipal
Board to approve By-law 82-181 , notwithstanding
the objection received, and further requests
the Ontario Municipal Board to convene any
required public hearing in respect of By-law
82-181 at the earliest possible opportunity;
and
FURTHER hereby authorizes Town Staff and/or the
Town Solicitor to represent the Municipality at
any such hearing that may be convened."
On July 19, 1982, the owner of the lands affected by By-law
82-181 applied for an amendment to Restricted Area (Zoning)
By-law 2111 , as amended, of the former Township of
Darlington. The purpose of the application was to rezone
Block 10 of Registered Plan M-746 in order to permit the
creation of two (2) additional residential lots. Block 10
originally had been reserved for future residential
development; however, would be permitted for future
development subject to compliance with the following:
- staging policy with respect to building permits within
the Solina Hamlet development plan;
- terms of the approved Subdivision Agreement;
- an amendment to Solina Hamlet Plan;
- an amendment to Zoning By-law 2111 , as amended.
I
I
Report No: PD-64-83 . . ./3
Mr. Davis (Owner) submitted a severance application to the
Land Division Committee (LD 223/82) in order to create the
proposed lots and received approval of same on August 30,
1982, subject to the required rezoning and amendment to the
Solina Hamlet Plan. This decision was considered final and
binding on October 7, 1982 as no appeal had been lodged
against the application within the required time frame.
At the Committee meeting of September 27, 1982, the General
Purpose and Administration Committee considered Staff Report
PO-154-82 and endorsed the recommendation which was to
approve the rezoning and the amendment to the Solina Hamlet
Development Plan at such time as Regional Council had
considered the amendment to the Hamlet Plan (Resolution #
GPA 1082-82) . Staff had been advised that on November 10,
1982, Regional Council had no objection to Amendment #1 to
the Development Plan. On December 13, 1982, the General
Purpose and Administration Committee endorsed the
recommendation of Report PD-208-82 (Resolution # GPA
1287-82) which recommended Council 's approval of the By-law
amendment and the amendment to the Development Plan.
COMMENTS:
As a result of the Clerk 's circulation of By-law 82-181 , one
letter of objection was received. The letter dated February
* 8, 1983, a copy of which is attached, was submitted by Mr.
G. A. Sumara and signed by nine residents of the area
adjacent to the lands affected by the rezoning. The
objections submitted by the residents are as follows :
I
"there is currently not a need for any more building lots in
the area, since existing lots either have not been sold or
are up for resale.
I
i
i
Report No: PO-64-83 . . ./4
- the area in question is extremely low-lying and is almost
always saturated with water. For this lot to be useful
extreme amounts of fill would have to be brought in and this
would most certainly increase the water flow into adjacent
lots. As an example of how low-lying this area is, last
August three large four wheel drive tractors got stuck for
three (3) hours in this same area.
- without an immediate need for this lot, is there an
advantage to making a commitment when the question of water
and septic services really hasn 't been proven out with the
existing subdivision."
Staff note that the Subdivision Agreement registered on
title for Plan M-746 has reserved Blocks within this Plan
for future development, subject to various conditions being
satisfied. Block 10 is one of the potential development
Blocks within this Plan. Staff note that the development of
this area is to proceed in accordance with the Subdivision
Agreement , in which case such concerns as on/off site
drainage, lot grading, placement of fill , protection against
damages to existing wells and septic systems, etc. , have
been addressed. It is staffs ' opinion, the concerns raised
by the residents in this area would be covered by the
enforcement of the Subdivision Agreement.
Staff would note, for Committee 's information, that the
concerns of eight (8) of the objectors have been clarified
in consideration of the contents of the Subdivision
Agreement, and therefore, have formally withdrawn (see
* attached) their objections.
In light of the above comments, staff would therefore
recommend that By-law 82-181 be forwarded to the Ontario
Municipal Board for approval .
Res p tf ubmitted,
T. T. Edwards, M.C. I.P.
Director of Planning
i
K LOT*TTE*mjc
ruary 23, 1983