HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-17-82 i
I
w' o
� l
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT D.N. SMITH, M.C.I.P.,Director
HAMPTON, ONTARIO LOB 1J0 TEL. (416)263-2231
REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING
OF JANUARY 25, 1982.
REPORT NO: PD-17-82
i
SUBJECT: Objection to Rezoning By-law 81-154
A By-law intended to define group homes
and to specifically identify an existing
group home as a permitted use
RECOMMENDATIONS:
I
It is specifically recommended that:
1. This report be received; and
2. The following resolution be forwarded to Town Council
for adoption and for submission to the Ontario
Municipal Board along with By-law 81-154.
"Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Town
of Newcastle has approved By-law 81-154 in response to
Provincial and Regional requests to recognize "group
homes" within the Town's restricted Area Zoning
By-laws;
And whereas the effect of By-law 81-154 will be to
add a definition of "group home" and to recognize
an existing group home as a permitted use;
And whereas By-law 81-154 is considered to be in
conformity with 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 81-154, notwithstanding the objection
received and further requests the Ontario Municipal
Board to convene any required public hearing in respect
of By-law 81-15 t"at the earliest opportunity, and
further hereby authorizes Town staff and/or the Town
Solicitor to represent the Municipality at any such
hearing that may be convened."
r' ,.5(r
Report No. : PD-17-82 . . ./2 i
BACKGROUND:
The concept of community care in family-like settings and Provincial
direction to Municipalities specifically related to "group homes"
has been the subject of several earlier staff reports. Reports
P-36-80, P-90-81 and P-160-81, copies of which are available in
i
the Planning Department, outline the position of the Province and
the Region and describe the evolution of group home controls in
the Town of Newcastle.
The position taken by the Town, through the adoption of By-laws
81-152, 81-153 and 81-154 is viewed by staff as a responsible one.
By recognizing existing group homes as permitted uses in the zoning
By-laws and by incorporating a definition of group homes based on the
suggested Provincial definition, the Town has made a significant
step towards accomodating provincial objectives and providing requirements
which conform to the Durham Region Official Plan. In addition, by
requiring that aiy new homes must apply for rezoning, public notice
is ensured and residents and Council have the opportunity to address
community concerns on a site by site basis.
The definition of "group home" that has been incorporated in By-law
81-154 of the former Township of Clarke, as well as the other Zoning
By-laws in the Town, is based on the Provincial definition of
group homes. This definition has, however, been revised and, in
effect, made more restrictive by including a minimum distance
separation of 300 metres for all group homes as defined and by
stipulating that only one group home housing elementary or junior
high school aged children may be located within the area served
by any public elementary or junior high school.
COMMENTS:
The Town Clerk received one letter of objection during the twenty-one
(21) day circulation of By-law 81-154. The letter of objection
(copy attached) was received from:
Mr. Paul James Burns.
The major points outlined in Mr. Burn's letter have been summarized
below. OUr staff comments related to each of these points follows
I
Report No. PD-17-82 . . . ./3
directly. The summarized points and comments have been numbered
for convenience.
1. Mr. Burns is filing objection because he believes that
the Children's Aid Society has been operating a group home in
direct contravention of By-law 1592 and he feels that the amendment
is now being processed to "suit their purpose".
Prior to the preparation of By-law 81-154, which contains a definition
of group homes, there were no constraints or no restrictions in
By-law 1592 which would have specifically prevented or permitted
the establishment of group homes anywhere in the R1 RR, A or C zones.
The amendment has, by adding a specific definition, made the By-law
much more restrictive in this regard. The circumstances surrounding
the establishment of this home are unclear and staff are presently
of the opinion that if a use is not spefically permitted such use
is illegal. However, a single family dwelling is a permitted use
and at the time this use was established the interpretation may have
been that since the group home is, in effect, a single house-keeping
unit, it was permitted. The intent of By-law 81-154 is to remove
all doubt and to clearly permit this existing use. We also note
that this amendment was initiated by the Town and not the Children's
Aid Society as it appears Mr. Burns believes.
2. Mr. Burns has suggested that the subject amendment to allow
this type of operation to continue would directly affect the property
value of his residence.
This is a common contention amongst those opposed to group homes.
However, there is, to our knowledge, no evidence that this would
be the case. Studies conducted in other municipalities suggest that
there is no direct correlation between the existence of group homes
and depreciating property values.
3. Mr. Burns does not believe that the definition of "group
home" in the By-law is appropriate and he has provided an alternate
definition which would:
- limit occupation to six residents;
- require that the home be run by a full-time
I
receiving family or house parents;
- require a distance separation of one kilometre
between homes.
The suggested alternate definition is apparently based on Mr. Burn's
opinion that:
Report No. : PD-17-82 . . .A
- the dwelling in question is only large enough to
house six children;
- a full-time receiving family should be "there" at
all times to provide constructive programs for
behavioral management for each childs needs.
i
The definition included in By-law 81-154 is based on a definition
that was the product of considerable study and discussion by the
Provincially responsible, Interministerial Working Group on Group
Homes. Although the definition in By-law 81-154 was modified to
include density provisions, staff cannot agree with the suggestion
to alter the number of residents permitted or to stipulate the type
of supervision deemed appropriate. The type of supervision and
programing for each particular group home should be determined by
agency experts working in the field. The Zoning By-law should
not, in our opinion, deal with these matters since these are determined
by Provincial Licencing requirements.
4. The objector believes that physically destructive,
mentally retarded, physically handicapped and extreme treatment case
children should not be allowed to live in a group home type setting.
Staff believe that this is a matter which should not be addressed
in a restricted area zoning by-law. Staff feel that such restrictions
would not be in keeping with Provincial objectives and would represent
discrimination against specific age or disability groups.
5. The objector has requested that the Children's Aid Society
inform all -the residents on his street of all existing and future
programs with specific reference to long term planning. He has also
requested that this home be used strictly for six month minimum
placements and not have the residents being changed every two months
or so.
Planning staff believe that the operation of group homes is the
responsibility of the operating agency and suggest that the objector
contact the Agency directly to discuss this type of concern.
i
I
i
i
I
i
i
I
Report No. : PD-17-82 . . ./5
6. In his concluding remarks, Mr. Burns has indicated that,
notwithstanding his objection, the existing group home has
functioned relatively well and he sees no real difficulties in
the future, provided that the same system and criteria presently
being carried on in this particular group home is continued and
i
the type of children currently there is maintained. He feels,
however, that the establishment of another group home in the
neighbourhood would disturb its harmony and balance.
Staff again emphasize that the "type of residents" and the programing
of activities is the responsibility of the agency affected. In
order to be considered a permitted use, a group home must be
licenced or approved under Provincial Statutes. Staff understand
that there are licencing requirements and other criteria set out
by Provincial agencies that deal with the maintenance and operation
of the homes under their jurisdiction. These Provincial departments
or agencies are directly involved with the mechanics of providing
community care or rehabilitation and should not, in our opinion,
be unduly restricted in this regard. Mr. Burn's concern about new
group homes has been addressed by the by-law and new group homes
would require further by-law amendments.
Staff believe that By-law 81-152 is in conformity with the Region
of Durham Official Plan, and that it respects both Provincial
objectives and the character of the Town's residential neighbourhoods.
As such, staff are recommending that, notwithstanding the objections,
By-law 81-152 be forwarded to the Ontario Municipal Board for
approval.
Respectfully. submitted,
X
T. T. Edwards, M.C.I.P.
Deputy Director of Planning
FA:mj c
January 13, 1982
I
P o,i
PtC'„C;;.IUt
_........_. _.. . . LOA-1 L.O
0"? Duce mb(;1•)
David W- Oalzes A.Ai.C.T.
TO= Clerk
40 TOmpc'i'ance Street
Bol'r'112anville, Ontario
L1C-3A6
RE: AMENDING OF BY-LAW 15`.)2. . .GPECIAL FWVIoSlojT, 1',17-LA VI
81 -154.
S IR:
Please tali(` Notice that I al:l objcctiut; to the: 1'urtiler
amending of schedule "A" of By-laj 1 j92, ad;l ing the
designation "Spocial Provision By-law 31-1 �1+,� to thu ranini
designation of the lands indicated as 'Special. Provision By-law
61 -154 on schedule "X" namely lot 22 conce:,,;.ion 1 al.l.o�;in� sa id
lands for m3u ail a group 11o,lle.
I a2n further objecting to the d;:f' u:.tions 2.2 p;l�u twc,
- telil ;.2. 1 "Grou f) I?oi.l( . I 1
Hy objectio_ls are as fol'l.0Vis:
1 . ) Since tilc soll.ill
half U Of taC Ual I r%tf riUi:i(` L:1rCt: and one
c.al•s at;o, The, Corporatiun Of 1.11:: f o�;:l Of' lTC.��castlu ,
.�f The �c :i_onal A1ul2ici rll-i.t;y Of' lllti NV,'," 0 �'
Ai,l Soc,Lu Uf 1.1111;' RC�Jull 7 ' / il(' Clllld 'C::S
the l C .,l�l'ia_UU.l ty, - a 11Group_.IiUI U.;i! ,l:l u L1 UC t ( Uil tl a JC Utl
of By-law 1592 as amended of ilc for:;:er Tut;tll.�lli "
Ccnd ur11 nu�'e cilouUu to i�uie ti: Oi
Allis 13y-.i -s �)_:u 'c;t io:! lc ;jal u allitaldi:a>
U1'J tU Ull it t11U.L1' pul'pUUC'. l
The ailiending of this By-law to allow ti2is
tyke of
operation to continue �,,ould directly a; 1'ect,".t1je ��rof)el'tY l
value of :,ly residence, ui✓ ii il:ll::�;ci'ial �,ly ad jacc�ll t f o` L e
said )r e� t�rw r ._qu�� ion and that of surroundi_ilg res_LrIerlc,:
futiirc
time of sale.
I al:l JIure those li1CIII1JC2';3 021 Cc Ln1C;J_l. '.1, i1Ut NJLSii tU 1
See anything like this happen to ti1C rosidcnts of tit.Ls
imi,iediate ne:ijibourliood let alone nci ;ilbuul'huod„
.should this By-lay:, have af.i'ect d l :luitlsclves.
I
Coll t. i
Crap`'
To:
t
t
i
I
i
I
,tn
2.
.2. ) On the question of the dufluition or "Group Homo"
2.2 Definitions 2.2. 1 "Group Hone" page two of
amending By-law number $1--154: Zwould have the
By-law amended to read:
"Group Home" shall mean a single housekeeping
unit in a single family dwelling in which no more
thA fii X_ re i Beni sr shall be permitted and be run
by a full time receiving family or house parent
model, and live as a family under responsible
supervision consistent with the requirements of the
residents. Group homes shall be licenced and approved
under Provincial ;Statutes and shall not be per,j to d to
ate
loc ijill jt onye 111 p;;. tx�,.of anotr er° ; emu ho�nel.,
Furthermore,y only one group h6j'.fe housinj; elementary
or junior high school aged children May be located within
the area served by any public cicmoatary or junior hiJi
school.
Regarding the li.1tation on the number of residents
and being; under the supervision of full tjEo parent
models, or a recolvin, family, I vjottld, cubi.iit �:tu
f.oll ow.in�:
1 . ) The said dwell iai in question is onij a four b' nruoj
home. Those badroo:. o ape only la.', + noi.lah to honU (,
six children of i ordabl y.
0. ) A full t:_l.ie: live) in raccivinb fc.iOly of houcu parent
model with constructive_
wanaL;!h J ov eacL A LM
L ;,ics. '1'ii U �rt�uld co ilorl 465 bottur .f._i_L ja W ,;: 1
new gi�bc�u3i3t3�ad .at_.Iav, c,
Z would request tile., children in his acoup ho;,lc: be
such that they can use t. roue n ituat:i.uds to learn
socializing Aills to find their own identity and be
respoiralble for their actions.
I ;could not want to see children that arc:
Physically destructive
Tienta11y
Pliysxcal ly °h��ndi c.a � )cd
Lxta cii t ` att� °rii. "c �U r�: A. Psycotic
� h -Be Psycopathnc
is this tJ pc of group hr uu, not hn this aul jhbourhood.
This typo, of child would not , in my v:iuw, bcncf ;t
Now this type of Group home in Qat the amount bnd j
Proper came for this type of need can only be ;.tut in I
an ins"ut:i_Onal setting npresaly designed to aflord
the care required. This type of child would al6o in:,c�l'urc:
with, and possibly ruin any attuzyt fop rho o;hor
children tO Uroiress and made their ;lay into An ;, Lin
stream, of ,c_i.cty.
f
i
coat .
This nei ahbourhood now has a large nu„ ber of
very You)-IL; children. lay attumpLin to place children
with the affore mentioned probleiils in this group horde
I feel there would be a great potelit_Lal for tile
disruption of tho otlier cllildrell tJ LL11:1.11 til:itl nc.:LL;libourhvod.
Regarding the possibility of -this By-law coruning into
force, I would request of Tile Regional Mun.iciLr'.lity Of
Durham--Childrens Aid Society, that they infori:a all
residents of this street , an explanation, in writting
outlinning existing pro alas :L11 foi ce and futui c; pr ogram
to be�rl�lelnented with specific refference to long °.
planning; would °furtherrequest this teri�l"
group hbfib be,_-
used rts r:i°cjly for six- 11,ontlj°--11,inij-un pTacbiit0 rr�s °end n�
have .the._-residents being changed every two -month's- o so
Up to this pchint this particular G1,0 tip hoi:te has
functioned reasonably well as it is currently set up.
This group home is also staffed with full time live
in parent models.
The children presently there do not display problems
destructive to the neighbourhood or coiimuriity at large.
As of June of 1932, T am inforiiied the present house
Parents will be leaving. I would appreciate in lr.nowi.n,
if the Childrens Aid Society for ;,110 Regional liunicipality
Of Durham are prepared to carry on tine save type of paliiity
and criteria for the children of this L;rvup home.
Provided the sai.le system and criteria presently being
carried on ill this part"cular group hoi.ie zuid the type of
children currently {;ilr:rc-, 1r1c>uld be ;;ua.rcliltecd. to con{;inizc:,
we see no real ,lif'i'icul l ies ill l h� ftt{ are: however, tliu
establishi:ient of another group 11orac: ill th,_, n::i�libourliood
would didturb its hari,louy L111d baJ.a:icc .
Resp.u,cju]_1.y_�,
EAU L :C ; 'urn
c.c. file,
i
i