The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPSD-118-05 q~n REPORT PLANNING SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, October 3,2005 Report #: PSD-118-05 File #: PLN 34.2.4.1 By-law #: Subject: PROPOSED BOWMANVILLE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN (PHASE 2) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT report PSD-118-05 be received for information; 2. THAT the proposed Heritage Conservation District Plan be referred back to Staff for further review and consideration of comments received at the Public Meeting; and 3. THAT any interested party or delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: O~~~ av . Crome, MCIP, R.P.P. Director of Planning Services Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer IUFUDJC/sn CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET. BOW MANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1 C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 REPORT NO.: PSD-118-05 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 In May of 2002 Report PSD-048-02 was presented to Council for information purposes explaining the steps and procedures involved in designating the area bounded by Concession Street, Wellington Street and Liberty Street as a Heritage Conservation District under the Ontario Heritage Act. An open house was held on June 11, 2002 to obtain the input of the affected property owners. A questionnaire was distributed as well as a request for volunteers to sit on a Heritage Conservation District Steering Committee. th 1.2 On September 30, 2002 Council approved initiating the study of the area pursuant to Section 40 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. A study area By-law 2002-150 was passed as recommended through Planning Services Report PSD-091-02. The proposal was to proceed in two phases, the first being the preparation of a HDC Background Study, and the second being the preparation of a HCD Plan. The District Steering Committee was formed in December of 2002 and has assisted with the study process since that time. 1.3 The residents and community have been kept informed of the proposed district’s progress. A total of three newsletters have been issued and a number of open houses have been held. Prior to accepting the HCD Study and proceeding on to Phase 2, the preparation of the HCD Plan, public delegations were heard at a meeting with the General Purpose and Administration Committee and Council in the spring of 2004. 1.4 In May of 2004 Council accepted the Phase 1 Study, which detailed the heritage character of the area on a street by street basis, and approved proceeding with Phase 2 of the study which has been the development of the HCD Plan and accompanying architectural guidelines. 1.5 The District Steering Committee have been intimately involved in the preparation of this HCD Plan and guidelines and while there is not consensus among the committee on how implementation should occur they generally agree that the recommended architectural guidelines are a good tool for the residents. 1.6 When Council approved proceeding with Phase 2, they committed that no action would be taken on the HCD designation, that alternatives were to be explored and that a public meeting regarding the alternatives was to be held. The purpose of this report is to have the public meeting so that the comments can be referred back to staff for a further report. 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED HERITAGE DISTRICT PLAN 2.1 The Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District Plan has been prepared based on designation of the neighbourhood as a Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. Designation has to be formally approved by Council by by-law to bring the Plan into force. REPORT NO.: PSD-118-05 PAGE 3 2.2 Based on the planning tools that are available under the laws of Ontario there are different alternatives to district designation; however, none of the alternatives would provide the same degree of heritage conservation as designation. An analysis of the different planning tools available and a critique of their applicability to accomplishing the goal of heritage conservation is included in the HCD plan as Appendix 8. 2.3 There are three basic alternatives for implementation that the District Steering Committee agreed should be presented. The difference between the alternatives is the enforceability of the architectural guidelines. They are: 1) Status quo with the recommended architectural guidelines This alternative would not change anything other than providing the recommended architectural guidelines to residents and having the Municipality provide comments on designs when building permit applications are submitted. The guidelines are not enforceable. 2) Demolition control and recommended architectural guidelines This alternative would require a demolition control area by-law be enacted, which would require an applicant for a demolition permit to have their building permit in place. Essentially it safeguards from having vacant properties in the area and maintains housing units. A demolition control by-law cannot require that the architectural guidelines be followed. 3) Heritage Conservation District designation This alternative allows the Municipality to control demolition of heritage buildings, provides for enforceability of the recommended architectural guidelines either through an HCD advisory committee or LACAC, and permits the delegation of approval for minor alterations to staff. The Municipality is to follow the guidelines for its properties and streets. Planning applications, such as minor variances, consents, and rezoning, must also conform to the Plan and its guidelines. 2.4 Should the area be designated as a Heritage Conservation District, heritage permits would be required for certain alterations, additions, removals and demolitions. These requirements are set out on the Permit Requirement Chart on Pages 15 and 16 of the Plan. It should be noted that rarely is a heritage permit required where there is not already a need for another type of permit. Permits are only required when the alteration would be visible from the street. Any alteration to the interior of a building would not require a heritage permit. The impact on the home owner would be minimized as much as possible with regard to the approval process. REPORT NO.: PSD-118-05 PAGE 4 3.0 OPEN HOUSE AND PUBLIC MEETING 3.1 Residents have been informed of the Heritage Conservation Plan by a newsletter that was distributed in early September. In addition each household and property owner (if they do not live in the neighbourhood) were provided with a final draft of the Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District Plan during the week of Sept 12 to 16. The final draft and appendices have been available on the municipal website. On st September 21 an Open House was held at the Clarington Beech Centre to explain the Heritage Conservation Plan, explain the planning tools that had been evaluated, respond to the questions that had been raised in May 2004 and present the alternatives. Seventy nine people attended the open house. 3.2 Notice of the Public Meeting was given through advertisements placed in the stth September 21 and 28 2005 editions of the Canadian Statesman. Notice was included in Newsletter No. 3, which was distributed in early September by personal delivery, and by personal mail with the copies of the HCD Plan. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 4.1 Two LACAC members have sat on the HCD Steering Committee and the LACAC have been informed of the project’s progress. The LACAC has been provided with a complete copy of the draft HCD Plan and the majority of the members attended the st September 21 Open House. The LACAC will be advising Council on the proposed District when all public comments have been submitted for review. th 4.2 The District Steering Committee are meeting on September 27. 4.3 The purpose of this report is to facilitate the public consideration of the proposed Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District Plan. Attachments (previously distributed under separate cover to Councillors): Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District Plan Appendix 8 – Planning Tools Interested parties to be notified of Council’s decision: Members of the District Steering Committee Members of the LACAC REPORT NO.: PSD-118-05 INTERESTED PARTIES LIST Name Company Address City Province Postal Code Andrew Kozak 86 Concession Bowmanville, Ontario Street West L1C 1Y9 Mavis Carlton 119 Cove Road Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3K3 Doreen Fletcher OBNA Executive 59 Concession Street Bowmanville, Ontario West L1C 1Y7 Bill Humber OBNA Chair 15 Beech Avenue Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A1 David Reesor 152 Wellington Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 1W1 Laverne 26 Concession Bowmanville, Ontario Morrison Street West L1C 1Y5 Rick James 55 Centre Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 2Y2 Marijke 58 Division Street Bowmanville, Ontario Cunningham L1C 2Z7 Dr. Richard Liddel 24 Lowe Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 1X5 Kim Goyne 74 Temperance Bowmanville, Ontario Street L1C 3A9 Adrian Short 67 Temperance Bowmanville, Ontario Street L1C 3B1 Johanna DeBoer 28 Rhonda Bowmanville, Ontario Boulevard L1C 3W5 Karina Isert 7639 Leskard Road Orono, Ontario L0B 1M0 Jennifer Knox 6325 Enfield Road Hampton, Ontario L0B 1J0 Andrew Kozak 86 Concession Bowmanville, Ontario Street West L1C 1Y9 Clayton M. 31 Parkway Bowmanville, Ontario Morgan Crescent L1C 1B9 Karin Murphy 2515 Concession Orono, Ontario L0B 1M0 Road 4 Victor Suppan R.R.#1 Enniskillen, Ontario L0B 1J0 David Reesor 152 Wellington Bowmanville, Ontario Street L1C 1W1 Cathy McKeever 19 The Bridle Path Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3W1 Don Brown 3880 Metcalf Street Newcastle, Ontario L1B 1L9 Johanna DeBoer 28 Rhonda Bowmanville, Ontario Boulevard L1C 3W5 Cathy McKeever 19 The Bridle Path Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3W1