Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-210-791 � E.. I V An I CORPORA FION OF TI --IE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Q.N. SMITH, M.C.I.P., Director HAMPTON, ONTARIO LOB 1JO TEL. (416)263.2231 REPORT TO PLANNING AND DIM.1-OPMENT COMMITTEE MELTING OF November 22, 1979 REPORT NO.: s . SUBJECT: P-210-79 Proposed Official Plan Amendment Schickedanz File: 75--32/ND BACKGROUND: On October 15, 1979, Committee considered Staff Report P-188-79 which dealt with the above noted matter.. Said report recommended that Report P-90-79, which was first considered on June 11., 1979, be lifted from the table and dealt with. This matter had been tabled previously at the June 11, 1979 meeting and July 5, 1979 meeting pending a submission by the .:applicant. On October 5, 1979, the Region requested the Town's comments since they were then prepared to deal with the matter. That request resulted in staff report P-188-79. As a result of Report P-188-79 Co"nittee adopted the recommendation of staff report P--90-79, However, at the applicant's request, Council referred the matter back to Committee in order to pei-wit the applicant to make a presentation to members of the Cum ltt:uu. 0 I Subsequently, sniff received a copy of a report prepared by the applicant's consultant which is to be presented to Committee at today's meeting. COrit`IENTS : Staff have reviewed the above mentioned report and have the follow— ing comments in respect of same: �. The consultant's report suggestil that designation of the subject lands will "round out" urban development in the BOwmanvil.le Urban Area and complement the development of the Correctional Institute lands to the north and industrial lands to the south. It is the staff position that this is not an entirely valid argument since the industrial areas are physically separated from the site by hazard lands and the hard edge of Highway 2. The Correctional Institute while located within the urban area is presently designated institut— ional with the future use as yet to be determined. The subject - lands are separated from the Urban Area by the soft edge of the Soper Creek, which was obviously intended to be the urban boundary north of Highway 2. Furthermore, the subject lands are identified as Class 1 agricultural land by the Canada Land Inventory. Designation of these lands for Urban Uses would, therefore, be contrary to the Town's and Region's intent of: re- taining prime agricultural land. An urban designation upon these lands could also place additional development pressure upon adjacent agricultural lands east of Training School Road. 2. The consultant's report indicates that the subject lands will be serviced by sanitary sewers which will drain to the Mearns Avenue Trunk. As indicated by staff report p-90-79, the Regional Works Department stated that they were unable to support the application due to the fact that sanitary sewers were not available and the site was outside the designated drainage area of the Super Creek 'Trunk Sewer System. Further— more, Regional Works had no plans to extend sanitary services into this area. Subsequent to those cotmnents from the Region, the applicant's consultants approached the Regional Works De— partment about deepening a portion of the Mearns Avenue Trunk Sewer. 'Phis proposal would permit gravity drainage of the subject lands, without further major sewer construction, in the event that the subject official plan amendment was successful. The Regional Works Department have verbally indicated their agreement, conditional upon additional costs incurred, being borne by the applicant and on the understanding that such an agreement would not in any way be construed as being supportive of their Official Plan Amendment application. Related to this agreement, G. The consultant's report states that water services will be readily available to the site. This is not refuted by com- ments from the Region, but again should be viewed only as an uptku if the need should arise for developing these lands, At the present time, or within the time horizon of the Durham Regional Official Plan, it does not appear that the need exists to designate or develop these lands for urban purposes. Pre- sently designated and committed lands within the urban area will., in all probability, far exceed the demand for housing within the foreseeable: future. 7. The consultant's report states that the natural slope of the site provides for satisfactory storm water runoff into the Soper Creek, Mille chis may be true, the Soper Creek has been identified as unvironmentally sensitive and of primary concern to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority as a trout habitat. Increased urbanization along this creek poses a threat to this sensitive area; and while a certain amount of impact is expected due to Presently designated residential areas, development of both sides of tine creek could compound the pro- blem. In fact, as sCated in report P-90--79, C.L.O.C.A. will not support this application until the applicant demonstrates methods whereby impacts would be mitigated. The applicant has not done so. CONCLUSION: Lased on the foregoing, and conclusions and comments expressed by staff report P-90-79, we cannot, at this time, support the designation of the applicant's land for future urban development. RLCOMLNl)AT I ONS : That the Planning and Development Committee recommend to Council We following: I. That this report be received; and that 2. Resolution PD -487-79 adopted on October 15, 1979 and originally reconunended to Council on October 22, 1979 be endorsed as follows: - 5 - "That the recommendation of Report P-90-79 be endorsed and the Region of. Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommends denial of: Official Plan Amendment No, 75-32/D/ND affecting part of Lot 7, Concession 1, former Township of Darlington, on the basis that it is premature." Respectfully submitted, TTE:lb D. N. Smith, M.C.I.P. November 9, 1979 Director of Planning 1,110 lo, CORI'C. RA l lON OI- 1-1-11_ l C_)WN OF NFWCfASTFE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT D. N. imi Clc M.C.I.P., pirrcior I IAMPTON, ON1 AR 10 U)13 IJO TEL. ( 416) 263.2231 REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CO,HMITTEE MEETING OF June 11, 1979. REPORT NO.: P-90-79 SUBJECT: Official, Plan Amendment Application File: 75-32/D/ND - Part Lot 7, Con. 1, former Township of D;cr1ington -- Schickendanz Developments Ltd. 13ACKCROUND: "1V subject appl icnt ion was originally Circulated to the Town for con Hunt in October, 1975, in accordance with the procedures for processing these applications at that time, fur.-ther requests were made of the applicant. Due to the applicant's apparent neglect of these requests the Planning Department considered the application abandoned and recommended a new application be ;submitted prior to further consid- ora tion . In November 1978, the applic;,nt requested that processing of this application be continued. At that time, staff reviewed the file and reconusendcd to ConunitLec that the Region be advised that we have no objection to the further processing of the application, provided that the application was recirculated for revised or updated comments. In accordance with that recommendation, the Region has recirculated the application and now roq"CILU Ilia TowH'N commeuCa relative to this matter. CONTENTS The subject site is located north of Highway 2, east of the Soper Creek, south of Concession Street and west of the Darlington Third Line consisting of approximately 45.7 ha (113 ac.). The site is presently designated "Permanent Agricultural Reserve" by the Durham Regional Official Plan and, therefore, an amendment is required to permit the proposed Urban Residential and Commercial Uses, The subject application was circulated to various concerned agencies and a notice published to solicit public input. The I.B.I. Group presently preparing; the Bowmanvill.e Urban Area Plan were requested to review this application during their preliminary investigations in order to ascertain its potential implications relative to servicing and presently commit ted or de,aig noted areas for urban growth, There was no response to the public notice and the result of the circulation are outlined below. However, the review by the I.B.I. group indicate:; that while the area, may at some time in the future form a .logiM ox(onsion to the nrbAn aro", present conmcittments and de,;i-pnrztions will V% adequately accommodate Bowmanvi.l.le's potential growth within the time. frame of chis �Oan Area ;'a&. Approval o; this ` proposal, therefore, may require additional caPIta.l expenditures and redesign for servicing; unless a tc dilocation of plant capacity, away from presently designated areas, is contemplated. ter— __r - ,.. - J - 'Gown or NPwcont le Pub! lc Work" - no cruwwnt. , Public SchoolBoard - no objection, however, a school site would be required within the ;area. SepaKice School Board;- no objection, C.L.O.C.A. -- Concerned about: the potential impacts upon the Soper —�-- Creek as a trout habitat. Require applicant to demonstrate methods by which impacts would be mitigated prior to official plan amendment and feel that: approval of proposed amendment would be premature. Regional Works - Cannot support the application due to the fact that sanitary services are not available and the site is outside of the designated drainage area of the Soper Creek trunk sewer system. Furthermore, Regional. Works has no plans to extend sanitary services into this area, "linisCry of Natural Resources - No objection to the principle of 'development on this site; however they are concerned about hazard land areas and potential impacts upon the Sopor Creek as a trout habitat. Ptinistry oC � ;ri.culture and_ Food - Object to the proposal due to the Fact that the situ is prime agricultural land currently In production. MY also feel that the Soper Creels is an ideal natural boundary between the Bowmanville Urban Area and elle adjacent rural. areas. Our ruvLcw of the comments received also indicate that aside from servicing; there are environmental and agricultural concerns to be considered. t I M I II<till'. Ln vL°w of the [Oct that largu amounts of land have currently been designated for urban development wLthin the Bowmanville area; and the fact that. this, development wi.11 occur over a relatively long period Of time; we arc: unable to support the application at this timp ' ltI;l;Ulilth;N1)ATI 0N: 'mat chic !'i:.innint Developnurnt Colmittee recommend to Cot lnC�..i the 17ul.l.o14 II 1. '['hat LIIIS repvx't be receivej; and that 2. I'he Region of Durham be advised that the Town of Newcastle recommends denial of Official Plan Amend- nment No. 75-3:'/D/ND; affecting fart of Lot 7, Concession 1_, former 1'ownshlp of DarlAnbton, on the basi:j that it is premature. TTG: LB rLuy 30, 1979 Respectfully submitted, 4Q0:qt 4 D. N. Smith, h,.C.I.P. Director of Planning.