Ontario Land Tribunal / Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 25, 2021
CASE NO(S).: PL200403
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Listowel Carriage Shopping Centre Ltd.
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. OPA 184
Municipality: Municipality of North Perth
LPAT Case No.: PL200403
LPAT File No.: PL200403
LPAT Case Name: Listowel Carriage v. Perth (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Listowel Carriage Shopping Centre Ltd.
Subject: By-law No. BL 91-2020
Municipality: Municipality of North Perth
LPAT Case No.: PL200403
LPAT File No.: PL200460
Heard: April 29, 2021 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Listowel Carriage Shopping Centre Ltd. | Joel Farber |
| Nichol Properties Inc. | David Sunday |
| County of Perth | Steven O’Melia |
| Municipality of North Perth | Steven O’Melia |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY JATINDER BHULLAR ON APRIL 29, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This was the second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) converted to a settlement hearing respecting two Appeals against the adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 184 (“OPA 184”) and the enactment By-law No. BL 91-2020 (“ZBA 91-2020”) by the County of Perth (“County”).
2Nichol Properties Inc. (the “Applicant”) has adjacent residential and other developments in the area. Listowel Carriage Shopping Centre Ltd. (the “Appellant”) has commercial and other developments in the area, which are impacted by the OPA and ZBA as enacted, and thus, raised their appeals based on conflicts or non-conformity with appropriate policies and plans.
3The subject lands are located west of Mitchell Road South (Highway 23 South) and south of Main Street West (Perth Line 86) in the Municipality of North Perth (“Municipality”), within the County of Perth (“County”). The Municipality is comprised of the Listowel Ward, the Elma Ward and the Wallace Ward. The Listowel Ward, which is located centrally within the Municipality, is just east of the subject lands. It is considered to be the primary commercial centre of the Municipality, as it offers a full range of municipal services, which sustain the majority of Municipality's business activities and non-agricultural related land uses. The lands are comprised of a total area of 2.2 hectares (“ha”) (5.4 acres (“ac”)), which are presently used for agricultural purposes (cash crop production) with no associated buildings.
4A Compromise Settlement was agreed upon by both parties. This Settlement includes revisions to the approved OPA 184 and also, changes to the approved ZBA 91-2020. The agreed upon changes to OPA 184 and Zoning By-law No. 91-2020 will continue to permit a mixed use development.
5The Applicant, the Appellant, the County and the Municipality are the only parties.
6Pierre Chauvin was presented as an expert to provide opinion evidence in the area of land use planning. Mr. Chauvin provided a sworn affidavit of his evidence.
EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS
7Mr. Chauvin, in consideration of the provincial interest, referred to the policies in the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (“PPS 2020”). He stated that whereas the planning report refers to the PPS 2014, the report continues to apply with respect to PPS 2020 as the key aspects of policy 1.1.1 to develop healthy, livable and safe communities are supported by this proposal. A mix of uses with residential, commercial and other possible employment uses are enabled by this proposed development.
8Mr. Chauvin opined that, additionally, in consideration of the PPS 2020, the proposal uses existing municipal services. The water and sewer services are available. The proposed area is well served by roads access.
9Mr. Chauvin opined that when PPS 2020 is reviewed as a whole, the proposal is consistent with the PPS 2020.
10Mr. Chauvin stated that there is no lower tier in the Official Plan and that there is only the County Official Plan (“COP”). Mr. Chauvin stated that the proposal, while supporting the COP, introduces uses beyond neighbourhood commercial. He stated that this is in keeping with other adjacent properties including that of the Appellant.
11In broader context of the COP, Mr. Chauvin opined that the proposal conforms with the COP and specifically with policies for residential development patterns (policy 5.2.2), commercial development with residential uses (policy 5.2.3) and consideration for transportation policy direction (policy 5.2.4). Mr. Chauvin, in conclusion, opined that the proposal conforms with and maintains the general intent and purpose of the COP.
12In reviewing the Municipality Zoning By-law No. 6-ZB-199 (“ZBL”), Mr. Chauvin opined that the proposed ZBA maintains the general intent and purpose of this ZBL. The amendment requested will allow the rezoning from existing agricultural to Highway Commercial (C5) zone and this will allow for synergistic development with request to other neighbourhood residential, commercial and employment uses.
13In conclusion, Mr. Chauvin opined that the proposed OPA and ZBA meet the statutory tests as well as the propose development, which represents good land use planning and is desirable in the development of these lands.
14The Tribunal having considered the sworn affidavit of Mr. Chauvin, his uncontroverted expert testimony and all materials before it, finds that the OPA and ZBA meet the necessary statutory tests and are appropriate for the development of the Applicant’s lands.
ORDER
15The appeals are allowed in part as follows:
a. Official Plan Amendment No. 184 is approved, with such changes shown in Attachment 1; and,
b. Zoning By-law No. 91-2020 is approved, with such changes shown in Attachment 2.
16Should any difficulties arise implementing this Order, the Tribunal may be approached.
“Jatinder Bhullar”
JATINDER BHULLAR
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.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2