Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 25, 2022

CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001791 (Formerly PL210113)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Shore Developments Ltd. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of Norfolk County to adopt the requested amendment Existing Designation: Urban Waterfront, Urban Residential, Lakeshore Special Policy Area, Lynn River/Black Creek Special Policy Area, Hazard Land Proposed Designated: No Change Proposed Purpose: To permit sole residential uses, apartments up to a maximum of eight storeys, and the continuation of existing uses on the Subject Lands. Property Address/Description: 225 & 230 Chapman St. E. and 2 Lynn St. Municipality: Norfolk County Approval Authority File No.: OPNPL2019014 OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001791 Legacy Case No.: PL210113 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001791 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL210113 OLT Case Name: Shore Developments Ltd. vs. Norfolk (County)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Shore Developments Ltd. Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. (1-Z-2014) - Neglect of Norfolk County to make a decision Existing Zoning: Marine Commercial (CM) and Hazard Land (HL) zone Proposed Zoning: Urban Residential Type 6 (R6) Zone with special provisions, and Urban Residential Type 4 (R4) with special provisions Purpose: To permit the development of townhouses, stacked townhouse and apartment dwellings on the subject lands Property Address/Description: 225 & 230 Chapman St. E. and 2 Lynn St. Municipality: Norfolk County Municipality File No.: ZNPL202019 OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001031 Legacy Case No.: PL210114 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-001791 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL210113

Heard: January 28, 2022 via Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties Counsel

Shore Developments Ltd. Steven Ferri

County of Norfolk Peter Tice

Long Point Region Conservation Authority Peter Tice

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT ON JANUARY 28, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1This hearing of merit was scheduled to adjudicate appeals by Shore Developments Ltd. (“Shore”) against Council’s failure to make decisions with respect to applications to amend both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit lands known municipally as 2 Lynn Street, together with 225 and 230 Chapman Street East to be used for residential purposes. The Tribunal has been advised that the appeals have been settled as between the Parties, who have, as a result, jointly tendered affidavit evidence and amending instruments for the consideration of, and approval by, the Tribunal.

2The Tribunal was in receipt of the sworn affidavits, from Dana Anderson (dated January 25, 2022 and marked as Exhibit 1 to this proceeding) and James Amos (dated January 25, 2022, and marked as Exhibit 4 to this proceeding), who were respectively qualified to assist the Tribunal through opinion evidence in areas of land use planning and water resource engineering. Both witnesses also provided viva voce testimony and executed Acknowledgements of Experts Duties.

3The Tribunal, having reviewed all of the filed materials and having heard scoped viva voce, uncontroverted evidence of the two witnesses, allows the appeal in part, having been satisfied that the revised proposal had regard to matters of provincial interest, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (“PPS”), conforms with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the County of Norfolk Official Plan (“County OP”), represents good planning and is in the public interest.

CONTEXT

4The development as herein approved incorporates three related properties, which either front onto Chapman Street East or are located on the south side of Chapman Street East. Central to the redevelopment of these formerly industrial lands, is now the approved closure and conveyance of Lynn Street, to allow the lands to be developed in a more rational way, in exchange for a public easement over a new private roadway.

5As described by Ms. Anderson,

the subject lands are surrounded by the confluence of the Black Creek and the Lynn River. The Lynn River runs directly into Lake Erie to the south. On the eastern side of the river are a number of riverfront marine related uses including the Port Dover Yacht Club. To the west is a residential neighbourhood and additional commercial uses. To the north, is a property which recently received approval by the LPAT for a 6 storey residential apartment, and further north is Misner Dam.

6The former ship building yard takes both amenity from, and is constrained by, its proximity to both Silver Lake and the confluence of Black Creek and the Lynn River. The brownfield site has been the subject of Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Assessments, and will be subject to remediation prior to development. Given the location of the site, a portion of the lands fall within the regulatory floodplain as defined by the Long Point Region Conservation Authority (“LPRCA”). The development concept, subject of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, will stipulate the creation of a new three metre wide publicly accessible walkway along the Lynn River.

7The revised development organized around, and taking access from the new private roadway, will take the form of three six-storey residential apartment buildings containing approximately 295 units, three and four-storey stacked townhouse buildings containing a total of 54 units and 16 grouped townhouses. A further 10 two-storey townhouses units will be built on 225 Chapman Street East, pursuant to existing Official Plan permissions.

8It was the uncontroverted evidence of both Ms. Anderson and Mr. Amos that the revised plans, subject of the draft instruments before the Tribunal, provide for and promote the sustainable redevelopment of the lands, utilizing existing infrastructure to revitalize an underutilized parcel to provide a compact urban built form comprised of a variety of housing options, thereby creating a more compatible land use given the surrounding uses.

9The proposed redevelopment also aligns with matters of provincial interest, is consistent with the intensification policies of the PPS and conforms to both provincial and County policy with respect to safe public access through the site and improved pedestrian connectivity to the shoreline. The limits of development will respect the hazard lands adjacent to the Lynn River as delineated by the modified floodline, developed with LPRCA oversight in keeping with the provisions of the PPS.

10Given the required remediation, the draft Zoning By-law employs the use of a Holding provision to ensure that all matters related to the Record of Site Condition, servicing and design, are addressed before development can proceed.

11The Tribunal is satisfied, and accepts the opinions of the witnesses that the proposed OPA ad ZBA have regard for maters of provincial interest, are consistent with the PPS, are in conformity with the County OP, and are appropriate for the redevelopment of a brownfield site in a form of development that does not create any adverse impacts, and in fact, will enhance the Lynn River waterfront and the public’s use and enjoyment of the publicly accessible open space.

12In all, the proposal represents good planning, and is in the public interest.

ORDER

13The Tribunal allows the appeals in part and approves the Official Plan Amendment, Attachment 1 hereto.

14The Tribunal approves the Zoning By-law Amendment, Attachment 2 hereto.

15The appeals, in all other respects, are dismissed.

“Sharyn Vincent”

SHARYN VINCENT VICE-CHAIR

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.

ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2