The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About99 078 OMB-BIA - Al Ostner " THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KINCARDINE-BRUCE-TIVERTON -. I'..... IY-llWU._ ....11 111....11............. _1....11 ~- 1I-DII.1IE....... ....ø.. all111l111 -0 :: .. ~ .IRIII Board; WHEREAS an Appeal has been launched against the aforesaid By~aw 1999-10; AND WHEREAS the Appeal of said By-law is presently before the Ontario Municipal AND WHEREAS Council has deemed it desirable and appropriate to amend By-law 1999-10 as hereinafter set forth. e NOW THEREFORE The Council for the Corporation of the Township of Kincardine- Bruce- Tiverton, pursuant to Section 34 of the Plannina Ad, RS.O. 1990, ENACTS as follows: 1. By-law No. 1999-10 is hereby amended by deleting Section 8 in its entirety and replacing it with the following: - . i) For those lands within the 'C6-h' Zone and identified as the subject property on the attached Schedule "A" attached hereto, Council may consider removal of the '-h' in accordance with the Plannina Ad, RS.O. 1990, once it is satisfied that the policy requirements of the Official Plan have been met that all servicing and traffic related issues are addressed and that a Site Plan Agreement has been entered into. ii) Prior to considering the removal of the '-h' for development proposals involving retail warehousing uses, Council shall be presented with a marKet analysis study that identifies the long term economic impact of such development on the commercial base of the community, specifically on the downtown commercial core. Such market studies shall either be prepared by a quaflfied independent third party, as approved by Council, or shall be subject to review by a qualified independent third party, as approved by Council. All costs associated with the preparation and review of such studies shall be the responsibiflty of the developer. Such marKet studies shall be presented to the BIA, Chamber of Commerce and the generaf public for their comment and review, prior to Council's consideration of the development proposal. iii) Notwithstanding Subsection ü) noted above, Council may exempt specific retail warehousing development proposals from preparing a marKet study, provided the development proposals involve the expansion of an existing business within the municipality, or the establishment of a new business type which is not presently represented within the municipality. iv) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, Subsections ii) and iï) shall not apply to the 8.34 acre parcel of land being composed of Part lot 1, Concession 1, S.D.R, Township of Kincardine-Bruce- TlVerton, North of Durham Street and identified as "exempt lands" on Schedule "A" attached hereto and forming part of this By~. · .' -- e· "'-. '- .. -2- 2. By-law No. 1999-10 is hereby amended by deleting Section 4 in its entirety and replacing it with the following: i) By~aw No. 1988-1, as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting Section 2.67 of Section 2, Definitions, and replacing it with the following: "Retail Warehousing shall mean a building or strudure or portion thereof having a minimum of 232 square metres (2500 square feet) wherein goods, wares or merchandise are offered for sale at retail, including a food store. "Notwithstanding the above, for lands described as lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Concession 1, S.D.R., Township of Kincardine-Bruce- TlVerton and designated "Business Park" in the Town of Kincardine Official Plan, "Retail Warehousing" shall mean a single use building or strudure operated by one entity having a minimum of 232 square metres (2500 square feet) wherein goods, wares or merchandise are offered for sale at retail, including a food store." Schedule "A" to By-law 1988-1, as amended, is hereby further amended in accordance with Schedule "A" attached hereto and forming part of this By-law. 4. This By-law takes effect from the date of passage by Council conditional, however, upon receiving the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board to this Amending By-law. 3. 5. This By-law shaH be cited as the "By-law to Amend the Business ParK (The Annex) Rezoning By-law". READ a FIRST and SECOND time this day of ,1999. READ a THIRD time and FINALLY PASSED this 1999. day of Mayor ClerK I '6.1.' I ~"'~?':::"'_._- . , I' I ~~.I";~ I~~ ... r-~~ i r~ "¡¡ ~i . SCHEDULE "A" TO , BY-LAW 1999-78 ,.-~~~ '-~ ~ : i Ii , I II 2:-'6.L- '~f~~- , "' t j -4.00Ac. I: ,. ¡; : I ji 11 c¡ ~ ~ cr I! ~ II ..._1 I : ~ ð-'",,- ~",,:. ......Ji ~ ¡ . _ _. __ .. _.. . \\~ !Iil Ii I I' , I II I Ii I I I i I I '''T I . ,; . .. '5~'o~~~\1i L-.~W\..~S : I / / II Z)l~M.r\ . w..V'\ts ,_:~ , , , , , I i , , , , , ; ! , , , , i , i I / i I ·.1 ! I , I I , I ¡ , , , , I i' : ! , , I' I' 'i , I I! : I; c. - 9 I I :~ . , I' , , '-~"-""". --II .~ ...r..... ..~ ~! 8-S + î::- .6·L I qCf ~ ~(D PLAN or SURVEYOr PART or LOT 1 CONCESSION 1 SOUTH or THE DURfiAM ROAD <roRHERL Y TOVNSHIP or KINCARDINE) TOVN or KINCARDINE COUNTY or BRUCE v (c ~ SCALE 1:3000 DECDlBER II ItHl8 .......- '.-"'-...."""" .__.,>...._~ .... "" - ''''''--'',:.£Jil. ~ __4--'1..... - " ~'"t_=-' ~ . '. 4t , , PAATOF LOT I. CONCESSION I. S.D.R ì'OWNSHIP OF KlNCARDINE-BRlJCE-TlVERTON (FORMERLY TOWN OF KINCARDINE) ;~ . "'-- -... TOWNSt-fIP OF KINCb,RDINE ----....~- . """-~."- ,~ , ~~~ SUBJECT PROPERTY EXEMPT LANDS SCRBD1..JI..B -A- 'IBIS IS SCHBDULI!. ~A-'tO BY-LAW P:A§I;Ð nus OF . 19!IIf MA YOIt """'cnuc H'ft.ICJWI";~ --II"'C..,TMiKI'DN ~ d' ~ (. DAY . ~IUL""_ / t, V:"· . e . '.,." , The Ontario Municipal Board on July 29,1999 and by Order dated the ( date) the Ontario Municipal Board approved By-Law No. 1999-10 as amended by draft By-Law No. 1999-78 which is pursuant to Section 34, Sub-section 11 of the Ontario Municipal Act. v . . . , ~- .., >þ. July 21, 1999 4.3 OMB - BIA Motion #99-413 Moved by: Bryan Grant Seconded by: Sharon Mooser THAT Council supports draft By-law No. 1999-78 and directs its Solicitor to forward same to the Ontario Municipal Board for the Board's review and approval. Carried "" ~ ~ ~ ... . . - WHfl'E, DUNCAN, OSTNER & LINTON Barristers and Solicitors WlUIAM H. WHITE. Q.C. J. DAVID LINTON DAVID M. STEELE IRWIN A. DUNCAr.I DARRELL N. HAWRELIAK STEPHEN D.E. WALTERS ALBERT l. OSTNER WILLIAM J. POULOS August 16, 1999 File #028071 SENT BY FAX TRANSMISSION and Regular Mail Mr. John deRosenroll Administrator Township of Kincardine-Bruce-Tiverton 707 Queen Street Kincardine, Ontario N2Z 1 Z9 Dear Sir: BIA APPEAL P.O. BOX 457 46 ERR STREET EAST WATERLOO. ONTARIO N2J 486 TELEPHONE, 1519) 886-3340 FAX, 15191 888·8651 Q~~ !",-.- .~,'(: -:,..- ~'.'.. .' , , <:i>~ ~. G" "" ", Q a- on -:e ~ ~ ~~ C:) "/1/)11/.. '1/ ç.; We are pleased to forward, for your safekeeping, a copy of the Board's Memorandum of Oral Decision issued on August 12, 1999. As you are aware, By-law 1999-10, as amended by Exhibit 6, excluding Section 4 thereof, has been in force as of July 29, 1999. Yours very truly, WHITE, DUNCAN, OSTNER & LINTON Per: A. L. OSTNER ALO:ct Enclosure cc: Mr. Chris LaForest + Enclosure - by fax ~. ~ .t, . \ " ' fj'/ DiCISIONIOItDER NO: 1517 PL990235 ~. < ~'S~TE; Aug. 12. 1999 Ontario Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de l'Ontario The Kincardine Business Improvement Area Association has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, 8S amended, against Zoning By-law 1999 -10 ofthe Township of Kincardine-Bruce- Tiverton OMS File No. R990059 APPEARANCES: f~~' Ç'~Ih~t Township of Kincardine-Bruçe.Tiverton A. Ostner Kincardine Busine" Improvermtnt Area Association J. Smith . MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION FROM A PREHEARING CONFERENCE HELD .wI..)' 2a..jW.~Q.AXli- ç. J~QIS~rQN 4~ 913R~13 ~OARQ . This second prehearing conference was scheduled to hear 4 motions emanating from the first prehearing. The Board was advised, however, that the 4 motions were abandi:)ned and that 8 settlement requiring amendments to the proposed zoning bylaw would be brought before the Boerd. The Bø.rd heard professional planning evidence from Christopher I.afor.t, a aenior planner With the COU/"lty of Bruce planning department. A lengthy planning exercise, involving annexation, plant closure. c:ommera.lanalyais respec:üng th.lack of c:omtrtercial i>rop~for..IOpmtnt,."rategic plan promoting eeønomic:d.ve~.ñd proteCtion of the downtown core, culminated in the adoption of Official Plan Amendment 9. This amendment in effect for the subject property at the comer of highways iii end 21, deJignetu such lands as business park. Light industrial and highway c:ommerciel uses were permitted. C.rtain controls were prøposed to minimiZe any negative impact on the downtown core. The Township following servicing study and tran&pQn.tion analysis, passed Bylaw 1999-10 as an amendment to it's comprehensive zoning Þyhaw. This bylaw now before the Board as a result of an appeal by the Kincardine Business Improvement Area Association, among other matters rezones 45 acres of lot 1,concession 1 from restrictive agriculture to Business Park Commercial Holding. Proposed amendments to bylaw 1999·10 now put forward supported by the Township and the Appellant in the form ~~. , ~ ,. , ~<.-. . . , -2- PL990235 . of exhibit 6 require that additional consideratIons apply prior to the lifting of the "W from the Zoning 8ylaw .The Bylaw had required consideration of policy requirements of the ÖP, servicing, traffic and site planning, and now wIß involve . market analysis for retail warehousing uses. The effect of the amendment is to give the appellant and others an opportunity to review such analysis and to comment on it to the municipality prior to the lifting of the H. The BOllrd reviewed with the patti. and the planner the workability of the ··--ãmenCfr'nents.àfut In'pêil'ticof'lrllÎe-ex~p1fontôrlrnew businesSI"fot't'Offentlytepresênteè!' in the community and is satisfied that the parties have resolved matters in a manner that represents good planning and is in the public: interest. The parties in . credible manner have recognized the changes asaoclated with new format retailing and made use of mechanisms aveil.ble under section 36 of the Planning Ad to provide the Appellant and others with a role in the planning ptOctss for the future. Baaed on the evidence from the plsnTler the Bo81'd is satisfied that there is II foundation in the OffiCial Plllln in effect, to provide for market considerøtiOtls prior to the lifting of the H. In addition, the mechanisms proposed in the zoning amendments in exhibit 6 for the liftiì"lg of the H .r. .ppropriate in the circumstances. . With the amendments of exhibit 6 the IoeIrd finds that aylew 1999-10 as amended, conforms with and implements the recentty approved Officia' Plan Amendment 9.The Board is satisfied that no further notice i$ MC:essary. The amendments Mve in a meaningful manner involved two public bodies in dialogue and resulted in . mar. detailed and restrictive document. The áoard therëfóre allOws the Appeal to the extent ñêCêssary to give effect to the amendments in exhibit 6.Section 4 of exhibit 6, the effective date of the draft amending bytaw i$ not neC8$$8ry when the Board amends and is struck. The Board emends Bylaw ·1999-10 in accordance with exhibit 6, exc:/udlng section 4 thereof. Bylaw 1999-10 as amended is approved of and the Appeal otherwise dismissed. . The Board so Orders. "N. C. Jackson" N. C. JACKSON MEMBER