HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-94-81 IV- a
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT D.N.SMITH,M.C.I.P.,Director
HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB 1.10 TEL.(416)263-2231
REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 25,
1931.
REPORT NO. : P-94-81
SUBJECT: Final Report of the Environmental Impact Analysis
for the Courtice Urban Area
Our File: 16.1.4
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully submitted:
1. That this Report be received; and
2. That the final Report of the Environmental Impact
Analysis for the Courtice Urban Area be accepted by
i
Council; and
3. That the Clerk advise Gartner, Lee and Associates
Ltd. of this resolution and thank them for their work
on behalf of the Town; and
4. That the Council in accepting the Environmental Impact
Analysis for the Courtice Urban Area, adopt the study
for use by Town Staff in:
a) Preparing Neighbourhood Development Plans for Neigh-
.
( , bourhoods 3a, 3b and 3c in the Courtice Urban Area
Plan; and
b) Evaluating specific development proposals in the
Courtice Urban Area; and
- 2 -
c) Evaluating the land use designations and policy
provisions of the Regional Official Plan and Amend-
ment 12 to the Darlington Official Plan with a view
to recommending possible amendments to those documents;
and
5. That Town Council advise the Central Lake Ontario Conser-
vation Authority and the Region of Durham of this resolution
noting that the staff of those agencies will be requested
to provide further assistance in the work outlined in Number
4 above, in order to further ameliorate the concerns in respect
of the environmental impact of the further development of the
Courtice Urban Area.
The Courtice Urban Area Environmental Impact Analysis has been
prepared in general accord with the provisions of Amendment 12 to the
Darlington Township Official Plan (The Courtice Urban Area Plan) .
Section 6 of Amendment 12 requires that the Town of Newcastle
conduct an Environmental Impact Analysis to examine the environmental
sensitivity of lands designated "Environmentally Sensitive" within the
Urban Area. Briefly, the plan requires that this examination describe
the bio-physical characteristics of the site, possible effects of develop-
ment, measures to mitigate negative effects, and areas requiring protection.
Plan policy states in effect that the suggested land use in the Plan will
be reviewed and where necessary modified in light of this environmental
analysis.
Iy-Ca1
- 3 -
Section 6.4.2 (1) of Amendment 12 states in part that the
Environmental Analysis should be prepared to the satisfaction of the
Town of Newcastle, the Region of Durham, the Central Lake Ontario Con-
servation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources.
Input on the terms of reference for the study was solicited
from the Region of Durham and from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation
Authority. A group with representation from all agencies noted above met
as technical advisors throughout the preparation of the report.
Comments reviewed from these agencies following circulation
of the draft report, indicated a general satisfaction, with the possible
exception of the Conservation Authority. Authority staff have expressed
concern with various aspects of the study. A copy of their comments and
related correspondence from Town Staff is attached.
LX-gional Planning Staff provide"' comments on the first: draft
of the study and at that time expressed concern with the lack of comment
on the routing of Adelaide Avenue. The final report has addressed that
concern in that specific recommendations in respect of the routing of
Adelaide Avenue have been included in the text.
In accordance with the Official Plan requirements, this report
will be read to evaluate specific development proposals and will be used
as a basis for review of the Urban Area Plan. This study will also be
used as a basis for the preparation of a Development Plan for Neighbourhood
J, as OULTinea in amenamenu T2.
The land areas that this study concentrates on are described as
Neighbourhoods 3a, 3b and 3c in the Courtice Urban Area Plan.
4 -
COMMENTS:
The study addresses the Official Plan requirements in that
it describes the physical and biological setting and identifies the
sensitive characteristics of each of the three Neighbourhood areas.
Potential impacts of development within each Neighbourhood area are
predicted.
The report contains a suggested Planning concept which reflects
the sensitive properties of the study area and relates them to the land
use designations within the Courtice Urban Area Plan. The Planning con-
cept suggests that Residential areas can cover much of Neighbourhoods 3a
and 3b where the sand and till plains are "high and dry". There are,
however, special study areas, particularly in Neighbourhood 3c where
shallow water table conditions exist and where more detailed study is
required to define the levei ot development.
Open Space areas, as outlined on the Concept Plan, occupy a
band across the northern boundary of the study area, and extend south
into the centre of Neighbourhood 3b. These lands provide a buffer to the
sensitive open space areas to the wrth and are suggested primarily to pro-
tect special vegetation and wildlife attributes found in the study area.
Environmental hazard lands relate to the valleys and floodplains
of drainage courses in the area. No development is suggested in these
areas and extreme care must be taken in permitting development adjacent
to them.
In addition to the concept plan brifly outlined above, the
report presents planning suggestions and measures to mitigate develop-
ment impacts on sensitive areas.
V (a)
- 5 -
In their final summary statement, the consultants have
suggested that "development can proceed over most of the planning
area provided that the levels of density adequately reflect the environ-
mental and engineering concerns of the area".
Respectfully submitted,
i
FA:lb D. N. Smith, M.C.I.P.
May 11, 1981 Director of Planning
LAKE O
2
gTfON �`�
CENTRAL, LAKE ONTARIO CONSERVATION AU'THORIT'Y
1650 DUNDAS STREET,EAST, WHITBY, ONTARIO. UN 2K8 (416)579°0411
REF NO.
May 6, 1981 .
HAND DELIVERED �� �
Corporation of the Town of Newcastle,
Planning and Development Department,
Municipal Building,
Hampton, Ontario,
LOB 1JO
Attention: Mr. T. T. Edwards , M-(.1 P
Current Operations Planner
Dear Mr. Edwards :
Subject : Final Report ,
Courtice Environmental Analysis
Your File Number: 16. 1 .4
The above noted report , prepared by Gartner Lee Associates Limited , dated
April 1981 has been reviewed. The following comments are offered for your
consideration.
After reviewing the final report , we find that most of the concerns raised
in our letter of 96 February 1981 pertaining to the draft report have not
,- bees addressed. �OV3 ral important recommendations made to the consultant
by the Town on 1:110 df-fift report , also expressing our concerns , have not
been incorporated h1 to the final report . Our impression, subsequent to a
accommodate def me
land uses in ameodfiw[it 12 to the Darlington official plan and ignores a
c v i l~i ca l policy of the anw-ndmerl t :
''Land uses defined within the Urban Area Plan and subsequent
Neighbourhood Developments Plans shall be reassessed and alternative
land use concepts analysed , in light of the Environmental Impact
Statement , . . . ."
I
I
_
tswTnxL LAKE ^n0 CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Corporation of the Town of Newcastle May 6, 1981
Attention: Mr' T. T. Edwards
Page 2
arid 06]oct |vc 6. 4. 1 :
''To identify, conserve arid protect lands with environmentally
suns | iivc character|sL |cs arid the ro|e of these lands as components
of the environmental system as a whole and the viability of the system
| Lself."
In conflict with these prov|sinns , we note the following on page 33 of the
final (and draft) reports , regarding map 6, Planning Concept :
''This map integrates both physically and biologically sensitive features
and portrays suggeste6 planning categories selected to reflect environ-
mental conditions and to corres d as closely ibl with those
LatecIories contained In Amendment 12.''
Based on the above , we do not feel that the environmental study has as yet
fulfi lled the Terms of Reference under which the project was to be completed.
In the final report the consultant proposes a route for Adelaide Avenue
wh|ch does not concur wi th Jotai )o6 fiolJ s u t di --
es �unu uctog by the AuLhority
in the summer of 1977 in an attempt to provide a satisfactory environmental
alignment for the Region of Durham. Our route was chosen to minimize impacts
on significant wooded areas and avoid most areas of organic soils , areas of
high water ta6|o, pot-ids and swamps ' and areas of existing residential develop-
ment .
We cannot agree with the consultant ' s proposed alignment for Adelaide Avenue
since it conflicts with our detailed investigations ` and furthcr , because the
proposed route |n the final report passes through Open Space, Environment/
Hazard and Special Policy areas and essentially avoids areas the consultant
directly recommends for residential development . The suggested alignment
east of Trull 's Road is unclear in the report , however ' if it is to extend
due east , which may be |nforred, an area of beaver activity documented on
map 5 of the report will be directly affected .
The issue of the optimum route for Adelaide Avenue through the study area
may be largely academic at this point since the extent of environmentally
acceptable development has yet to be determined.
We trust the above comments will be given due consideration by the Town.
Yours very truly ,
W| l ) lam Fry'
Resources Planner-..
WF/k} L
TOM
CORD ORA HON, 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
May 11, 1981
Mr. W. Fry
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
1650 Dundas Street East
WHITBY, Ontario
LIN W
Dear Sir:
Re: Final Report - Courtice
Environmental Analysis
Our File: 16 .1.4
Thank you very much for your comments on the final report
submitted by Gartner, Lee Associates Ltd. noted above. Following
on your comments and our discussion of May 7, 1981, we are largely
satisfied with the results of the Study, recognizing that you have
some outstandfug concerns in respect of the "thrust" of the final
report, and more particularly in respect of the routing of Adelaide
Avenue.
It In my hope, Lhat' through the preparation of Neighbourhood
Development Plans within the Environmental Analysis Study Area that
we can furthor address your concerns, and that joint recommendations
can be prepscod for consideration of our respective jurisdictions
relative to pomsible official plan amendments to the Durham Regional.
Plan and Amendment 12 to the Darlington Official Plan.
As on discussed, we will be recommending to Town Cauncil
that the "GOUGHr Lee Study" be accepted by the Town and used as a
"Wil1w im — "NOL"a0VU, MULainel in Ene reglonal
Neighbourhood bOvelopment Plans. T reiterate that we will not limit
ourselves to (A'W mot terial contained in the Gartner, Lee Study, but will
also rely on the Conservation Authority to supplement that information,
'
Mc. W. Fry - 2 - May ll. 1981
L will (ocwurd a copy of our staff report on the Study
to you wicblu the oeoL few days. We will recognize your concerns
in that report .
Jo not hesitate to uonLuoL mu if I can be o . any
assistance.
Yours very truly,
D0S;lb D. N. Smith, M.C.I.Y.
Director of Planning
C.C.
D. Co`me