Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-79-79 CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT D. N. SmitliM.C.I.P., Director HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB 1JO TEL. (416)263-2231 REPORT TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING of June 11, 1979. REPORT NO. : P-79-79 SUBJECT: Proposed Official Plan Amendment - O.P.A. 77-13 Edward Whiting BACKGROUND: In June 1977, the above noted application was forwarded to the Town for comment. The proposed amendment affects Part of Lot 35, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington and requests a change in designation from Residential to Highway Commercial to permit the sale of trailers. Amendment 77-13 to the Durham Regional Official Plan i The present designation of this site is urban residential in both the Durham Regional and Darlington Township Official Plans. The "draft Urban Area Plan for Courtice" includes this area in a Special Commercial Study designation which reflects a previous study, undertaken by the Town, to examine alternative concepts for improving the area both visually and functionally. At the present time, Council has not yet addre- ssed the Townline study which was presented to the public on July 26, 1978. A staff report relative to this study was requested by Planning Committee resolution PD-385-78 but was never prepared pending completion of a plan f n� � 2 - for Courtice and the Ontario Municipal Board Hearings currently underway. Existing Zoning - By-law 2111, former Township of Darlington The present zoning of the subject site is Residential "R-3" which permits single family residential development. In that regard, the applicant would also require an amendment to the Zoning By-law to permit the proposed use. Results of Circulation The proposed amendment was circulated to various agencies for comment and their responses are summarized below: a) Town of Newcastle Public Works - no comment. b) Durham Regional Works Department - no objection. c) Durham Regional Health Unit - no objection. d) Ministry of Transportation & Communications - no objection. The proposed amendment was also publicly advertised on March 28, 1979 in the Oshawa Times, Canadian Statesman and the Newcastle Reporter in order to solicit public comment. The result of this adver- tisement was the receipt of seven individual letters of objection and one petition containing twenty-seven signatures, objecting to the pro- posed amendment. Upon review of these objections, it was determined that the major concerns of the residents were related to potential property de-valuation, visual impact and increased traffic and noise. STAFF COMMENTS: From the circulation of the proposed amendment, it appears that there are no major technicial objections to the proposal. However, the public input received indicates major concern about the potential impact f ^c3> 3 - of the proposed use upon the existing residential area immediately to the south. The site's relationship to adjacent land uses was examined within the context of the Townline Commercial Study. The Townline commercial area can best be described as "transitional" as it includes a mix of residential and commercial uses. This was recognized within the draft Urban Area Plan for Courtice by designating this area for further study. As discussed with Mr. Whiting, staff recommend that this application be considered after the adoption of the Courtice Urban Area Plan and upon completion of the "Special Commercial Study" as included within that document. Staff note that the Special Commercial Study will have regard for a number of items such as: • types of commercial uses permitted • residential uses permitted • internal traffic circulation • ingress and egress • landscaping and design Staff also note that the existing Townline Commercial Study will be used in the preparation of the "Special Commercial Study" and will be reported on through the Urban Area Plan process. The Courtice Urban Area Plan is dependent on the resolution of the Courtice Envelope referral to the Municipal Board under the Durham Regional Official Plan. - 4 - Staff recommend that no further consideration be given to proposed Official Plan Amendment application, O.P.A. 77-13 until such time as the Courtice Envelope referral has been resolved, the Urban Area Plan for Courtice is in place, and the Special Commercial Study complete. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning and Development Committee recommend to Council the following: i 1. That this report be received; and that 2. The Region of Durham be advised that the Town will consider Official Plan Amendment application, O.P.A. 77-13 further at such time as the Regional Official Plan has been approved as it applies to Courtice, upon com- pletion and adoption of the Courtice Urban Area Plan and on completion of the "Special Commercial Study", as included within the proposed Courtice Urban Area Plan. Respectfully submitted, TTE:lb D. N. Smith, M.C.I.P. May 22, 1979 Director of Planning -11010M DEALER all. MOTORS 1, 111111, 1D 1428 KING STREET EAST M A, ONTARIO--LIK 1A4 PHONE 723-1176 � J APR 20 070 PLANNI? ,.1 AN] April. 18, 1979. TVIN Planning Director , Planning Development Dept . , HAMPTON , Ontario . HE: Written Submission , Qeeting April 15 , 1979 . Jear Mr . Smith, I am the owner of the property on the South West corner of King Street east; and Darlington Blvd . , Part of Lot U , Con . 2 , having a .frontage 177 .3 feet and a depth of 375 .4 feet now known as Schedule I-1B Special Commercial Study Area . I purchased this property April 13th, 1972 for intentions of a commercial develepment . As you are aware of I have made an application for amendment to zoning by-law change for purpose of a Trailer Sales Outlet . However if there is a heavy public rejection to this , I am prepared to agree to a adequate commercial facilities to accommodate the needs of the urban area as I believe that most adjacent property owners are in agreement. So as written above , please be advised that my imput for the meeting April 25 , 1979 , in my opinion is an excellent plan for convenient commercial facilities by inlarging the existing commercial use to the special commercial study area marked out on Schedule I-IB. � This in my opinion would be a incentive for existing commercial users to expan and upgrade their facilities . Adequate well designed off street parking and loading , landscaping etc. I will attend the meeting April 25/79 and most interested in ! your opinion . I Thanking you in advance , Yours truly , \ E. Whiting . J � March 30} 1979 �;'�> � Town of Newcastle Pt7 197 Planning and Developement Department Hampton, Ontario Dear Sir. Re: Amendment No. 7713 for the Former Township of Darlington and the Durham Regional Plane Intent of Amendment - to amend the above Official Plans or part of Lot 35} Conc. #2 former Township of Darlington from "Residential" to "Highway Commercial" to permit a Trailer Sales. We, the undersigned, who are residents of the area affected � by the above amendment object very strongly to such an amendment due to the adverse effect this would have on property values in this area. In an area of homes valued from $60—$0®000 there are enough eyesores without adding another. There is sufficient area properly zoned for such businesses without further additions. We feel that proposed amendment No. 77-13 is not in compliance with proper planning principles and should not be allowed. -- - NamTe- Address 1. 7 ✓l • e • • •gym - �J • • J �. 01 i ♦�.+'f`.a`-;.�i i♦ �• • o (•� a �i i`- i �L •/�♦��e�t ! �• •�.?�s�``o� ��\ f. L' i. Z. • • ,e i e i\o/� o `♦ ♦ fe,,' �' t...70� • of '� � ��.f,.•o�,C�;..- ti��,l i 1 a G'-,� / .r ) `o t � e.- •"•"•. ! / I /. m --�e' e ;L_� o • c - -.`♦ • d ♦r,,�,m•.VO�•fD`: ,� -GG��J--^` L.�-t( - o ♦—'o o •� Y • o o` m e e • G e � -%L i f. L C C .•._...:; , , •e /) l.o le a i• •_ a "e `"i • •.- .ei • ui.-�m e�`e ati �.it_ C�L_ �_.�--i�.:a® �4'),1�1 �� �; � • • o, o m o e e o • e • • o • .• a • o o , • a ♦ I ♦ o o e o o • e e • o • a ' e m • m • o oa m e re e • o • o • l o `•o < � � f l t.� �. �. 1. G l_.�'- �, i. t, � e e ♦ a o o • ie„ o o • • of • o 1 t i m • m ♦ e s • • • • • • e( 1 ' 6 • • 66 S t/ Town of Nowcnstle Planning and uevelopeNnnL DepLumant Hampton, UHLario War Sir: Ae : nmandment ko. 77 •10 for the Former Township A DarlinFton and the ourhbm Wlonnl Flbn. MenL of mmundman6 — Lo amend the above of Lot 35 , Gonc, Y2 r foiner Township of Oarlington from "Residenuinl" to "Highway Connercinl" to permit a TrAler ales. Nei the undersigned, who are residents of the area affected by the above amen,:ment object very strongly to such an amendment due to the adverse effect this would have on property values in this area. In an area of homes valued from A60-80.000 there are enounh eyesores without adding another. There is sufficient F; area properly zoned for such businesses A hout further additions. Ve feef that proposed rmendmenL Ko. VY-13 is of in comnliance with proper planninr principles and shoQld not be allowed. 1W ane Address •/� r" rC ,Y !♦ •J/ �_�'� `•L•.6 r�'•e`. 1 b �'D'Z. Ll A- NO tM April 2 , 1979 Region of Durham Planning and Development Committee Hampton Dear Sir : Regarding Lot 35-Concession 2 , changing from "Resential" to "Commercial" , I am in full agreement with the rest of my neighbours and strongly oppose this move , changing this above mentioned property from residential to commercial . Respectfully , 1 Darlington Blvd S . I i i i t App 19?� PLANNIN , „ ^,Rf,Mi'Mf (3y'�' ��5��'IE , March 30 , 1979 �� C Region of Durham Planning and Development Committee Hampton Dear Sir : Regarding the property of Lot 35 , concession 2 , ammendment No . 77-13 , changing from "Residential” to "Highway Commercial" . Living immediatly south of this above mentioned property , we strongly oppose this recommendation . We are part of this lot . At the time of purchasing our property ( 8 years ago) , we were well informed that only part of his lot is commercial and the back half , adjoining our lotline is residential . Buying our home at that time , it was the most important matter to us , living beside a residential property , instead of commercial . ! The reasons being : excess noise , over-flow of traffic , excess , lighting , garbage and the devaluation of our property . Also , the past 8 years has proven to us , that the owner of this concerned property , has never respected his residential neighbours by keeping his residential--plus his commercial lot in respectable order . There always has been complaints about high weeds and garbage and fire-hazardous , unused buildings . Again , we strongly oppose and we trust in our by-law enforcement , to respect the wishes of the residential tax payers over one possible shrude operator . Respectfully , I 8 Darlington Blvd S . i i APR April 1 , 1979 Region of Durham Planning and Development Committee Hampton Dear Sir : Ammendment No . 77-13 , (Lot 35 , Concession 2) . Regarding changing this particular lot 35-concession 2 , from "Residential" to "Commercial" . I strongly oppose to this . I hope my neighbours and my wish is therefore respected , that this lot stays residential as is . Respectfully , i 5 Darlington Blvd S . LA.-Z..r,.- .� •�. .2,,...� i i ,X 1 1 �I lf � r' r, !. - r 1, ._, l , ,• � „ ) . � �� • , , , / ,, J i ,. �i; -- l � I i C . 2 y —i '2n. 21 \ J ddb �_ _ NINT L Zrl- Cc 1 7 J APR A 1979 Region of Durham Planning and Development Department Hampton Dear Sir : Regarding amendment No. 77-13 . Lot 35 , concession 2 . Fortunatly for all of us , we just have read your notification in the Oshawa Times about this proposed change . We purchased our property , 3 Darlington Blvd S . , last summer, which is directly across from this property in question . We are still in progress of improving this property to our standards . We have not yet moved in . Up to this date , we have put in anexcess of approx . $20 , 000 , on top of the purchased price of approx . $80 , 000 . We are very shortly ready to move in and we will still plan to continue to do even more alterations . It is our strongest demand as tax paying citizens of this community , that in case this proposed Plan would sneak throup;li , without us residents having the chance -to defend this type of move , then we offer the -township to buy up our property , so we can buy somewhere else to live in peace , which we intended to do so in the first place . Our last established resident , was expropriated due to the erection of Darlington Nuclear Power Station. Our new found home in this beautiful residential street (Darlington Blvd S . ) , we do not wish to be inconvenienced again , to look at a commercial site from our front window. (Trailors or any kind of gommereia.l business ) with all the unnecessary action connected with commercial living . It is my understanding that the rest of my neighbours living immediatly close to this property (Lot 35 cone 2 ) , are also strongly opposed to this zoning change . We are all willing to carry our fight 'i farther if necessary , to keep finally commercial development away from our doors.:aps . Respectfully , 3 Darlington Blvd S ,