One step forward…

Development of 26 rooms at Fields on West Lake cleared to proceed

Mark Henry and Lynne Ellis have crossed the final hurdle in their quest to amend the zoning for Fields on West Lake. In June of 2009 Henry and Ellis won council approval to allow them to build and operate 26 accommodation units—five in the century home located on the property, one in the adjacent carriage house and 20 in a new proposed building nearby.

Council’s decision was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) by a neighbour, Dave Ashton, who owns a tourist accommodation business across the road from Fields on West Lake, who argued, among other things, that the proposed inn was incompatible with surrounding land uses.

In his ruling in January Ontario Municipal Board member Norm Jackson largely dismissed the appeal but laid out five conditions to Henry and Ellis before he would close the file. They had to get assurances from the County’s building officials that the site could sustain the water and sewage needs of the proposed inn. The board also wanted the County’s Heritage Advisory Committee to weigh in to ensure the new building proposed did not overpower the existing buildings.

The third condition requires Henry and Ellis to file a $10,000 bond with the municipality to ensure compliance with noise and nuisance complaints. The fourth and fifth were procedural requirements to ensure consistency among the various overlaying regulations.

Ashton argued on Monday that Henry and Ellis had not yet fulfilled the requirements of the conditions. But Jackson disagreed. He ruled that the conditions had been satisfied and dismissed the appeal.

Jackson also clarified that the financial security is a one-time requirement. This is key. Henry and Ellis have already spent much of the year combating a noise complaint leveled by Ashton and prosecuted by the County. They were found guilty on the first charge and will learn the amount of the fine payable in January. They face at least two additional charges.

Had they been required to post a $10,000 bond for each charge, they would soon be drained of resources.

Council will likely look at tightening its noise bylaw in the new year, to define specific limits and measurable impact that amount to a violation of the noise bylaw. Currently the bylaw prescribes “likely to disturb” as the sole test of a nuisance.

The vagueness of the wording and the precedent set by the successful prosecution has made the County an unwitting combatant in a dispute among neighbours. It is not a role it will want to take on again without objective definitions of what constitutes a disturbance.

Meanwhile Henry and Ellis must await the decision of the provincial judge that will set the fine. It must also wait to see if council acts to fix the noise bylaw. Only then will they know if their path forward is finally clear or, alternatively, even if they are allowed to open and operate in 2011.