The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPD-139-83 CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT T.T.EDWARDS,M.C.I.P.,Director HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB 1JO TEL.(416)263.2231 REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 1983 REPORT NO. : PD-139-83 SUBJECT: OBJECTIONS TO BY-LAW 83-104, BEING A BY-LAW TO REZONE CERTAIN LANDS IN PART LOT 5, CONC. 7, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF CLARKE - W. TURANSKY CLERK'S FILE: 60.35.187 PLANNING FILE: DEV 83-2 RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following : 1 . That Report PD-139-83 be received; and 2. That the following resolution be adopted by Town Council and submitted to the Ontario Municipal Board i along with By-law 83-104. "WHEREAS the Council of the Town of Newcastle has approved By-law 83-104 to amend Restricted Area By-law 1592, as amended, of the Township of Clarke, as a result of their consideration of an application for such an amendment submitted by the respective property owner; AND WHEREAS the effect of By-law 83-104 will be to change the zone designation of the land subject to By-law 83-104 from "A-Agricultural " to "Agricultural subject to Special Exemption 15" to acknowledge the size of eight (8) lots of record and to permit the construction of a single family dwelling on each lot ; is .. .2/ l ' REPORT NO. : PD-139-83 Page 2 AND WHEREAS By-law 83-104 has been approved in conformity with the applicable policies of the Durham Regional Official Plan; BE IT NOW THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Town of Newcastle hereby requests the Ontario Municipal Board to approve By-law 83-104 notwithstanding the objection received, and further requests the Ontario Municipal Board to convene any required public hearing in respect of By-law 83-104 at the earliest possible opportunity; AND FURTHER HEREBY authorize Town Staff and/or the Town Solicitor to represent the municipality at any such hearing that may be convened." BACKGROUND: On February 10, 1983, the owner of the lands affected by By-law 83-104 applied for an amendment to Restricted Area By-law 1592, as amended, of the former Township of Clarke. The purpose of the application was to recognize eight (8) lots created in 1971 by simultaneous conveyance of abutting lands as lots of record and to permit the construction of a single family dwelling on each lot. The proposed By-law amendment would allow a Special Provision By-law for the subject lands to acknowledge the size of the lots and to permit their development . i The application was circulated by Town staff and comments received during circulation were detailed in Report PD-69-83. The staff recommendation contained in Report PD-69-83 was that a By-law amendment be forwarded to Council for approval upon payment of the Town' s lot development charges. Staff Report PD-69-83 was endorsed by the General Purpose and Administration Committee at its meeting of May 2, 1983 (Resolution #GPA-392-83) , and subsequently approved by Council on May 9th , 1983 (Resolution ##C-318-83). . . .3/ REPORT NO. : PD-139-83 Page 3 On July 11 , 1983, Council approved By-law 83-104 (Resolution #C-552-83). On July 27, 1983, By-law 83-104 was circulated to the property owners within one hundred and twenty (120) metres of the land subject to the rezoning, with the period for submission of objections closing August 22, 1983. During this period, Planning Department staff were made aware that three of the property owners within the designated radius of the subject property did not receive a copy of By-law 83-104. As a result, the Town Clerk circulated By-law 83-104 to these property owners on August 31 , 1983 with the period for submission of objections closing September 22, 1983. COMMENTS: As a result of the Clerk's circulation of By-law 83-104, one letter of objection was received. However, the objector subsequently withdrew the objection to the By-law. The Town also received a letter from the Solicitor for Mr. * J. Vanhaverbeke and Kurt and Ursula Gelder (attached) . Mr. Vanhaverbeke owns land across the road allowance between Lots 4 and 5 from the subject lands, while the Gelders own * land directly to the north. (see attached key map) The letter indicates that these parties , while not objecting to the rezoning, wish to express a number of concerns. These concerns generally relate to possible conflicts between their existing agricultural operations (fish farm and tobacco farm) and future residential uses on the subject lots. The parties requested the Town to take appropriate steps to ensure that the buyers of the lots are aware of these concerns. . . .4/ REPORT NO. : PD-139-83 Page 4 Staff note that the parties indicate that they are not objecting to the rezoning. However, because of the concerns expressed by the parties , staff have some difficulty in treating the letter as one expressing no objection. Staff contacted the solicitor, requesting that he send a letter specifically indicating whether or not an objection was being filed; however, he indicated he wished the letter to stand as submitted. Staff are of the opinion that the letter submitted on behalf of Mr. Vanhaverbeke and the Gelders, should be treated as an objection to By-law 83-104. Staff conducted a survey with respect to how the existing agricultural operations relate to the lots subject to the rezoning. Staff note that a dense row of trees along the eastern side of the road allowance effectively screens Mr. Vanhaverbeke's tobacco farm from view from all but the most northern of the lots subject to the rezoning. The actual farm buildings are visible from this lot , but are set back well from the road. The Gelder's fish farming operation is located on the lot immediately to the north of the northernmost lot. However, the Gelder' s lot is well treed which would help to screen the fish farming operation. As well , there are signs located at the intersection of the road allowance and Regional Road 9 and in front of the Gelder's property indicating the presence of a fish hatchery. The Gelders and Mr. Vanhaverbeke have also indicated that odours and noise resulting from their agricultural operations maybe of concern to future residents of the subject lots. Although these aspects could affect all of the lots, it would appear that the most northern lot would be affected the most. However, the agricultural operations REPORT NO. : PD-139-83 Page 5 are existing and the general area is zoned "Agricultural " by By-law 1592 of the former Township of Clarke and designated "Major Open Space" by the Durham Regional Official Plan . In Staff's opinion , only the most northerly of the lots subject of the rezoning, could be adversely affected by the existing agricultural operations. However, because of the presence of the previously mentioned signs and the fact that the tobacco farm is visible from the lot, it is likely that any purchaser of this lot would be aware of the existence of the agricultural operations prior to purchasing. As well , because the area is designated for agriculture and other I agricultural operations are visible from the subject lots, it is also likely that the purchasers of the other lots would be aware that the lots are located in an agricultural area. Notwithstanding this likelihood, the potential does exist for land use conflicts to arise possibly interferring with agricultural operations. Although the subject lots were legally created, Council is under no obligation to rezone to permit residential uses. Based upon the objections received, Council would in fact be justified in repealing By-law 83-104, thus preventing any possible conflicts. Staff's prior recommendation for approval was based upon the fact that the lots legally existed and the unlikelihood of the lots being consolidated into an agricultural parcel . Staff were also attempting to provide the simplest solution to the apparent paradox surrounding creation of the lots and the designation of them for agricultural purposes. REPORT NO. : PD-139-83 Page 6 a Staff are therefore recommending that By-law 83-104 be forwarded to the Ontario Municipal Board for approval . Respect 1 itted, T.T. Edwards, M.C. I.P. Director of Planning JAS*TTE*jip Sept embe r,,?,Ol- 1983 *Attac h f ,f Applipa�6t: Mr. W. Turansky R.R. #1 KENDAL, Ontario LOA 1HO Objector: Mr. David McGregor McGregor & VanNest 35 112 King Street West P.O. Box 9 NEWCASTLE, Ontario LOA 1 HO I Y� a(�) KEY MAP FORMER TOWNSHIP OF CLARKE LOT I LOT I LOT I LOT I LOT OT 1 LOT i LOT I LOT 1 LOT ' LOT I I I I 10 I 9 8 7 ( 6 I 5 I 4 i 3 I 2 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I I I I I I GELDOR I I i I , SUBJECT SITE VANHAVERBEKE I i i j ! I fit , I I KiNDA I I I O I I I I I I I I I I i ! I I t ► i I i I I I i i I I I I I i I I I I i t I I i 0 250 500 1000M 500 MacGregor & Van Nest BARRISTERS SOLici roRs&NOTARIES PUBLIC J David MacGregor, 8 A LL 13 Commercial H11111"'i j5 :Katy SI W PU 8-9 No., LOA tmo AUG i�:w 4 It,,10,'4 7 J Kingsley Van Nest, BA.LL.B TG'V#� (,Y- P14b J'_Y t In""9 Si EA., 14! C BOWIfidnviiit. oww- L IC 3KJ 4 1 u 62 s Please Reply To., Newcastle Office File No. 83290 August 19th, 1983. Corporation of the Town Of Newcastle, Office of the Town Clerk, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario. LlC 3A6 Dear Sirs: re: Restricted Area By-law No. 83-104 To Rezone Lands Situate at Part Lot 5, Conc. 7, Clarke am the solicitor for J. Vanhaverbeke and Kurt & Ursula Gelder, landowners within 120 meters of subject property. Mr. and Mrs. Gelder wish me to express their concern that they were not notified of this application and had to learn of the matter from neighbours. My clients, while not objecting to the application, wish me to express the following concerns: Mr. and Mrs. Gelder: They operate a fish farming operation and the smell from this activity may cause problems with new neighbours. 'In addition, pumps are running regularly and noise may be bothersome. Mr. J. Vanhaverbeke: Mr. Vanhaverbeke operates a tobacco farm. Irrigation Pumps run regularly at all hours of the day and night. The noise level may be bothersome. All parties also carry on agricultural operations and the smell of the manure and machinery operation are also potential areas of conflict with "residential" neighbours. My clients wish to make it very clear that they do not wish trouble with their new neighbours as a result of the above and request the Town take appropriate steps to ensure property buyers are aware of the above. In 2. Corporation of the Town of Newcastle - 2 - August 19th, 1983. passing, I might point out that registration of these concerns on title is insufficient, as Agreements to Purchase are invariably signed prior to the title being investigated. Trusting this is satisfactory, I remain, Yours very truly, MACGREGOR & VAN NEST J. a JDM:m c.c. Mr. and Mrs. Gelder Mr. J. Vanhaverbeke ACID, Br:.............. ORIGINAL TO: COPIES TO: ♦....•rr►•r.r�.rrrt I