Loading...
2001-081 To Rezone East Part of Lot 11, Concession 6, Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly Township of Oro), County of Simcoe, (Inn at Hardwood) '" ~ l' "'.. , ~. . e THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE BY-LA W NO. 2001-81 A By-law to Rezone East Part of Lot 11, Concession 6, Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly Township of Oro), County of Simcoe (Inn at Hardwood). WHEREAS Zoning By-law 1997-95 was enacted to regulate the use of land and the character, location, and use of buildings and structures within the Township ofOro-Medonte; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte deems it appropriate to further amend By-law 1997-95, as amended; AND WHEREAS this By-law is in confonnity with the Official Plan of the Township of Oro- Medonte; AND WHEREAS authority is granted pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 c. P. 13, to the Council of the Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte to exercise such powers. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Schedule "Al2" of By-law 97-95 for the Township of Oro-Medonte, as amended, is hereby further amended by rezoning those lands shown on Schedule "A", attached hereto, &om the Private Recreational Exception (PR *96) to the Private Recreational Exception Holding (PR *96* 142(H)) Zone. 2. That subsection 7 of By-law 97-95 be and is hereby amended by the addition of the following subsection: "7.142 *142 - EAST PART OF LOT 11, CONCESSION 6 (FORMER ORO) Notwithstanding any other provision in this By-law, a 25 unit accommodation facility is pennitted on the lands denoted by the symbol * 142 on the schedules to this by-law. The accommodation facility may include a separate residential accommodation for the owner/operator. Accommodation Facility - Means a premises that contains a maximum of 25 rooms or efficiency units that are rented on a temporary basis to the public for accommodation purposes; a maximum two of which may be donnitory style rooms; and which may contain an accessory dining area, fitness centre, and meeting rooms. An efficiency unit is a room that contains limited kitchen facilities (exclusive of conventional oven facilities)." 3. Schedule, "A", attached, fonns part of this By-law. 4. The Holding Provision shall not be removed &om the subject lands until such time as a Site Plan Control Agreement is executed and registered on title. The Holding Provision may be removed in phases to allow for the development of specific components of the facility, as detailed in the Site Plan Agreement. 5. This By-law shall take effect and come into force pursuant to the provisions of and regulations made under the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 c. P. 13. '" '" . ., "'1 II . BY-LA W READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME, THIS 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2001. BY-LAW READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001. THE CORPORATION UF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE 1 ~, ;i? .1 t;, ,,' fI ,"", " ~ /l._ Jt t:"",! Mayor - Ian Beardl .. '-: , .. . . .. SclJeduJe 'A' to B)'.L:I"' 2001-81 This is SclleduJe lA' .0 n;y-Lu\\' 2001-81 )J;assed tbe 19th du)' of Septa:nber, 2001 IUu)'or Clerk Subject Property /"\ _Lands to be rezoned from Private Recreation Exception 96 (PR*96) zone to Private Recreation Exception 96 and 142 Holding (PR*96*142(H)) zone 300 o 300 Meters +, s TO"'JIshi)) of Oro-Medonte NOTE: BY-LAW 2001-81 REPEALED BY OMB DECISION/ORDER NO. 0174 DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 2003 COpy ATTACHED 11 0174 lti Ontario Ontario Municipal Board , Commission des affaires municipal~s de I'Ontario I RECEiVErr, ~~~k-\ I PL011017" FFR 10 ~n03 ORO-M!DONTE TOWNSHIP "vi' ISSUE DATE: Feb. 5, 2003 DECISION/ORDER NO: . The Corporation of the County of Simcoe has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, against Zoning By- law 2001'-81 of the Township of Oro-Medonte . OMS File No. R010213 APPEARANCES: Parties Counsel County of Simcoe (County) Marshall Green MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY RONALD J. EMO ON 'JANUARY 20, 2003 AND ORDER OF THE BOARD As noted in the most recent Decision/Procedural Order #1429 (issue~ October 23, 2002) over the past year, the Board has been very responsive to the changing positions of the Parties, particularly Ms Gates, in an attempt to avoid an estimated five day hearing involving extraneous, yet related, matters such as the extent of the leachate "plume" extending from the County's Landfill #11 under the lands of the Harwood Hills (HH) outdoor recreation area. Decision/Procedural Order #1429 set today for the commencement of an estimated five day hearing on the merits of the County's appeal of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law 2001-81. The Procedural Order also provided that, because of the "on again-off again" nature of this case, any party wishing to withdraw would do so prior to November 30th, after which, the hearing date would be peremptory. By letter of November 29th, Mr. Tang, counsel to Janet Gates, advised that his client would not be participating in the hearing. With Oro-Medonte already having opted to not defend its own by-law, the County was the only party present at today's sitting. As noted previously, in the Procedural Order #0449 (issued March 12,2002), Ms Gates had been desirous of building a 26 room dormitory residence on lands leased from the HH. To accommodate Ms Gate's proposal, the Township of Oro-Medonte (Township) enacted Zoning By-law 2001-81, which has been appealed by the County. The HH resort surrounds an active County land-fill site (#11). J loK-~ , ,." I -2- PL011017 In today's sitting, the only evidence heard by the Board was that of June Little, a , senior (staff) County land-use planner. Ms Little noted that because the original application seeking a zone. change to permit the proposed dormitory had been made in 1997, prior to the new Oro-Medonte and County Official Plans, the planning regime against which Zoning By-law 2001-81 should be 'tested' would be the Provincial Policy I Statements (PPS),and the old (1988) Oro Official Plan. From this perspective, Ms Little directed the Board to PPS 1.1:3 (g), which I paraphrase to read: e. Long term economic prosperity will be supported. by planning so that major facilities such as waste management systems and sensitive land uses are, appropriately designed, buffered and/or separated from each other to prevent adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants. The Board understood from Ms Little's response to its query, that sensitive land uses included residences such as the proposed "Inn at Hardwood". Ms Little related the various environmental studies submitted in support of the proposed "Inn at Hardwood", together with the subsequent (separate) peer reviews conducted on behalf of Oro- Medonte and the County (tab 10, exhibit 2) and her evidence that in relatien to the issues of hydrogeology, noise, odour and general nuisance', the proponent had not responded to requests for more information. In particular, the Board was directed to a letter (tab 11, exhibit 2), outlining the deficiencies in the proponent's material, which letter was written on July 10th, 2001. just two months prior to the municipality's enactment of By-law 2001-81. The Board accepts Ms Little's expert evidence and finds that Zoning By-law 2001-81 has not 'had appropriate regard' to PPS 1.1.3 (g), is thus premature and does not represent appropriate land-use planning. On the basis of this finding, the Board allows the County appeal and hereby repeals Zoning By-law 2001-81. COSTS Mr. Green asked for costs in the amount of $1500 against HH (Viney family) to "send a message" as to unacceptable behaviour. The Board pointed out that neither the Viney family nor their corporate entity had been a party to these proceedings as the proponent had been Ms Gates, who had been successful in having Oro-Medonte enact the zoning change. The Board questioned the action of the municipality, an active player in the preliminary environmental analysis of potential conflict between the .' . \1 -3- lD \<-3 PL011017 (County) land-fill operation and the proposed "Inn at Hardwood", as well as the County's vigorous opposition, proceeding with the zone change and then opting to not defend the by-law. Mr. Green w~s given sixty days, from today's date, to file any cost motion(s). The Board so Orders. "Ronald J. Emo" RONALD J. EMO MEMBER