Pl080881-Aug-17-2009.Pdf

ISSUE DATE: Aug. 17, 2009 PL080881 Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de l’Ontario Lee Abrahamson (Dunnville Autodrome Limited) has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from Council's refusal or neglect to enact a proposed amendment to the Official Plan for the Town of Dunnville to redesignate land at 536 Port Maitland Road to add a site specific policy that would allow additional uses on the subject lands including advertisement and entertainment media production facilities (Approval Authority File No. OP-HA-8-2004) OMB File No. PL081055 Lee Abrahamson (Dunnville Autodrome Limited) has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from Council’s refusal or neglect to enact a proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 1-DU 80 of the Town of Dunnville to rezone lands respecting 536 Port Maitland Road to permit advertising and entertainment production facilities, a technology centre, an outdoor proving ground and a trade school OMB File No. PL080881 APPEARANC ES: Parties Counsel/ Agent* Dunnville Autodrome Limited B. Duxbury Haldimand County S. Premi & T. A. Richardson Dunnville CARES R. I. Smith & G. Hedley Participants Toronto Motorsports Park N. Armstrong* Beckley Beach Cottagers Corp. D. Blunt* DECISION DELIVERED BY A. CHRISTOU AND ORDER OF THE BOARD BACKGROUND These Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment appeals have been lodged by the Applicant/Appellant, Lee Abrahamson, President of Dunnville Autodrome Limited - 2 - PL080881 (Autodrome), against Haldimand County Council’s (Haldimand) refusal of its applications. The Autodrome leases a part of an airport hangar at the small but active Dunnville Airport site at 536 Port Maitland Road. The Autodrome runs various automotive and car racing related activities, including a 2.2 km long outdoor Formula track constructed on part of an unused runway. The track facility has been in operation for over five years, apparently without proper zoning and licensing by the Municipality. The proponent asserts that it was their understanding from early discussions with municipal officials, that the Autodrome business was desirable by Haldimand as a recreation facility that would draw business and investment to the Municipality. The Autodrome concluded, in their own due diligence and by their own advisors that their uses would be allowed under the current municipal planning instruments and chose to proceed with a business decision some time in 2003, to lease space at the Dunnville Airport and to construct the track. Further, it was the proponent’s opinion that the Autodrome is not a racetrack per se, because “wheel to wheel” competitive racing is not permitted, and as such, Ministry of the Environment (MOE) noise guidelines do not (or should not) apply to this facility. When the Autodrome were subsequently made aware of the Municipality’s concerns about zoning compliance (Exhibit 14, 14A & 25A) in 2003 and 2004, and noise complaints, they submitted the required applications, including a series of noise studies, and have been working cooperatively with Haldimand. They have since also instituted a two-step control measure to screen cars for noise before entering the track and they now require mufflers on all cars. The Autodrome originally submitted planning applications in December 2004, “without prejudice”, to: amend the Town of Dunnville Official Plan to redesignate land to add a site specific policy that would allow additional uses on the subject lands, including advertisement and entertainment media production facilities. amend Zoning By-law 1-DU 80 of the Town of Dunnville, to rezone the airport lands to permit advertising and entertainment production facilities, a technology centre, and a trade school, within the industrial zoned lands, as - 3 - PL080881 well as an outdoor “proving ground” in the Agricultural zoned land of the airport. According to Mr. Darbyson, the Autodrome’s planner, the list of uses has been further “refined” by the Autodrome on several occasions to clarify the specifically proposed uses and to add uses similar to the uses currently permitted under “special permit and events” provisions in the Zoning By-law. More specifically, these uses were summarised by the proponent as follows: 1. Testing of racing cars such as open wheel Renault with mufflers, which is a scaled down version of open wheel Indy Light racing cars. This involves racing teams using one to four cars over many laps at high speeds. 2. Promo Sport Canada uses the track for corporate events, including racing car training and instruction. Up to four open wheel-racing cars run at high speeds around the track for up to 15 minutes at a time. 3. Track days or “Lapping days” allows car clubs to use the track with up to 15 “normal” and souped-up “Road” cars on the track over many laps and at high speeds. (This activity, according to Mr. Da Sylva, generates 96 decibels on the Lmax scale, which is somewhat less than what the racing cars generate). 4. Bill Brack Driving Academy uses the track for driver education with both race cars and “Road” cars. 5. Multimatic uses the facility for “Commercial Research and Development” (R&D) in testing various cars, including internal combustion, solar and electric cars. It carries “research” for various manufacturers to develop and test suspension systems on the track and adjusting, modifying and “fabricating” components in the garage. This is also known as “proving ground”. 6. The facility is used for car shows and events where car dealers come to view and drive various cars on the track. Several cars can be on the track at any time. - 4 - PL080881 7. The Autodrome track has been used as an advertising and entertainment media production facility in the past and this use is being promoted as being non-intrusive. 8. The Autodrome is requesting an exemption of 15 “loud” days a year for “Non- Commercial Research and Development” which involves the running and testing of full size Formula-type racing cars on the track at high speeds of 160 km/hr for 73 laps for two to three hours. It is a very noisy activity. After a lengthy process and many discussions with the proponent, Haldimand held the statutory public meeting in June 2008, and Council refused the Autodrome applications shortly thereafter. The prime reasons for Haldimand’s decision apparently stem from: 1. the proposed uses are not appropriate for the area, are incompatible and do not represent good planning; 2. it does not comply with the Region of Haldimand-Norfolk, Town of Dunnville or the adopted Haldimand Official Plan; 3. it does not have regard to the PPS; 4. the proposal is not in the public interest; 5. considerable degree of opposition from area residents who assert that the uses carried out at the Autodrome are incompatible with the surrounding area and the amount and kind of noise generated by cars racing on the Autodrome track, is loud, intrusive, and adversely impacts and affects their quality of life. The noise impact extends over a large distance from this facility and affects the community at large. The noise from the Autodrome can not be contained or mitigated and therefore, the use should not be allowed; 6. the Autodrome applications were incomplete, as the Applicant did not initially submit adequate and acceptable noise studies required by the County, to properly assess the applications; and a peer review of the Applicant’s noise studies was required (the cost of which was to be paid by the proponent) before the applications could be dealt by Council. (Apparently, a dispute on - 5 - PL080881 the payment for the peer review delayed the process, although I am given to understand that there may have been other matters, not necessarily related to this hearing, which contributed to the delay, with mutual agreements between the Parties). Dunnville CARES (Community Association Respecting our Environment), an incorporated group of concerned residents living near the Dunnville Airport, is the third Party to this hearing and opposes the Autodrome applications on the basis that the racing track is an incompatible and highly intrusive use with the rural, residential and recreational setting of the area. The noise from the racetrack is intolerable and disruptive to the residents. The operation of the racetrack near the airport runways may be in conflict with the airplanes and raises safety concerns. These applications seek to legalize uses not permitted in the Zoning By-law that have operated for more than five years, in total disregard for the residents and to the detriment of the community. THE CASE This is a land use planning case, with significant compatibility, appropriateness, adverse impact and public interest considerations. The Board is asked to decide whether: 1. the noise impacts from this racetrack upon the area residents, should be the determining factor; 2. the land uses being proposed to be added to the Official Plan and Zoning By- law for the airport land, are appropriate; 3. these uses should be allowed or not; and 4. the proposal constitutes good planning. Over 13 hearing days and two evening sessions set aside for the community to express their views, the Board heard a great deal of evidence and received multiple exhibits which provide for a better understanding and appreciation of the issues and concerns to the Board and all Parties. The Board heard from: - 6 - PL080881 three qualified land use planners: 1. Doug Darbyson provided evidence in support, on behalf of the Autodrome; 2. Michael Higgins provided evidence in opposition, on behalf of Dunnville CARES; and 3. Mike Evers, the County planner, also provided evidence in opposition to the proposal.

Load more