Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: October 26, 2021
CASE NO(S).: PL190188
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Lynne Steffler
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 1-Z-2014 – Refusal of Application by the County of Norfolk
Existing Zoning: Urban Residential Type 1-A (R1-A) Special Provision 14.526 zone
Proposed Zoning: Site-specific Urban Residential Type 4 (R4) zone
Purpose: To permit the development of four stacked townhouses, totalling 36 units, with additional provisions for the existing Clonmel building
Property Address/Description: 150 Prospect Street
Municipality: Norfolk County
Municipality File No.: ZNPL2018124
OLT Case No.: PL190188
OLT File No.: PL190188
OLT Case Name: Steffler v. Norfolk (County)
Heard: October 15, 2021 by Video Hearing ("VH")
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Lynne Steffler ("Applicant")
P. Pickfield
County of Norfolk ("County")
P. Boutis
Sheila Whiteley
A. Toumanians
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BLAIR S. TAYLOR ON OCTOBER 15, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Applicant had filed a development proposal for the lands known municipally as 150 Prospect Street ("Subject Lands") seeking inter alia, a site specific Zoning By-law Amendment ("ZBA") to allow 36 stacked townhouses.
2The development proposal was denied by County Council and the Applicant appealed to the Tribunal.
3The parties engaged in Tribunal-led mediation which led to a full settlement, which was recommended for approval by the Tribunal.
4The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the rezoning of the Subject Lands to allow for inter alia, 12 stacked townhouse units, all for the reasons set out below.
DECISION
5The Subject Lands are located at the intersection of Prospect Street and Tisdale Road. There is a 2 ½ storey dwelling at the north end of the property, which is a designated building.
6The Subject Lands are in the Port Dover Urban Area, and have roads on three sides and the Lynne River. The Subject Lands have an area of about 1.2 hectares.
7The surrounding context includes mainly townhouses to the north and east, low density residential to the south, and the Lynne River to the west.
8The Subject Lands are designated Urban Residential (with a portion in a Hazard Lands designation). A range of residential uses from single detached to high-density apartments is permitted in the Urban Residential designation.
9The Subject Lands have an R1-A site specific zoning which allows single detached dwellings, a bed and breakfast establishment, home occupation, and permission for a boarding house.
10From the Tribunal-led mediation, the parties were able to come to agreement with regard to a settlement proposal that includes the following:
a. 12 stacked townhouse units;
b. A revised list of heritage features for protection;
c. Certain required landscape treatments;
d. Protection of a landscaped triangle and the green lawn as a cultural landscape;
e. The location of the 12 stacked townhouse units; and
f. Agreed screening.
11In the lead up to the hearing, the Applicant provided the land use planning affidavit of Kristen Boulard (Exhibit 1).
12The settlement proposal was reduced to formal Minutes of Settlement executed by all the parties and included in Exhibit 1 at Tab C.
13Also included in Exhibit 1 at Tab D was the agreed upon draft ZBA to implement the Minutes of Settlement.
14At the hearing, the Tribunal heard the viva voce evidence of Ms. Boulard in support of the settlement proposal.
15She opined that the settlement proposal resulted in an infill residential development in a settlement area, which would achieve residential intensification while balancing appropriate regard for the heritage designation and appropriately responding to the natural features of the Subject Lands, and with minimal impact on the surrounding area.
16The parties all recommended that the Tribunal approve the settlement proposal.
17The Tribunal having considered the land use planning affidavit of Ms. Boulard, having heard her viva voce evidence, having heard the submissions of counsel, and having considered the decision of County Council as expressed in the Minutes of Settlement, found that the settlement proposal was a modest form of intensification in a settlement area, had due regard for the matters of Provincial Interest in s. 2 of the Planning Act, conformed to the County Official Plan, represented good land use planning, was in the public interest and accordingly, allowed the appeal in part and approved the site specific ZBA as found in Exhibit 1, Tab D.
18The Tribunal wishes to acknowledge the cooperation of all the parties to engage in Tribunal-led mediation, which ultimately led to the settlement and avoided for all the parties, a lengthy and costly hearing.
19This is the Order of the Tribunal.
"Blair S. Taylor"
BLAIR S. TAYLOR
MEMBER
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248
The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal ("Tribunal"). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.