Sovereign Ransom Street Limited v. Halton Hills (Town), 2022 CanLII 28198

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE:

April 06, 2022

CASE NO(S).:

OLT-22-002179

(Formerly PL210303)

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

Applicant/Appellant:

Sovereign Ransom Street Limited

Subject:

Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request by the Town of Halton Hills

Existing Designation:

Low Density Residential Area

Proposed Designation:

Medium Density Residential Area

Purpose:

To permit a medium density residential area with 10 two-storey townhouse units

Property Address/Description:

20 Ransom Street

Municipality:

Town of Halton Hills

Approval Authority File No.:

D09OPA20.001

OLT Case No.:

OLT-22-002179

Legacy Case No.:

PL210303

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-22-002179

Legacy Lead Case No.:

PL210303

OLT Case Name:

Sovereign Ransom Street Limited v. Halton Hills (Town)

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

Applicant/Appellant:

Sovereign Ransom Street Limited

Subject:

Application to amend Zoning By-law No. (#2010-0050 be amended) – Refusal of Application by the Town of Halton Hills

Existing Zoning:

Low Density Residential One, Mature Neighbourhood (LDR1-1) (MN) Zone

Proposed Zoning:

Medium Density Residential Two Exception (MDR2(106) (H25)) Zone

Purpose:

To permit a medium density residential area with 10 two-storey townhouse units

Property Address/Description:

20 Ransom Street

Municipality:

Town of Halton Hills

Approval Authority File No.:

D14ZBA20.004

OLT Case No.:

OLT-22-002181

Legacy Case No.:

PL210304

OLT Lead Case No.

OLT-22-002179

Legacy Lead Case No.:

PL210303

Heard:

March 21, 2022 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Sovereign Ransom Street Ltd.

J. Shapira

Town of Halton Hills

D. Germain

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY t.f. ng and p. tomilin on mARCH 21, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This was a Settlement hearing in the matter of appeals by Sovereign Ransom Street Ltd. (the “Applicant”) from the refusal of the Town of Halton Hills (the “Town”) in respect of applications for amendments to the Official Plan (the “OP”) and Zoning By-law No. 2010-0050 (the “ZBL”) to permit a development at the property municipally known as 20 Ransom Street (the “Subject Property”). The Applicant has proposed to develop 10 two-storey Townhouse units on a private road. The Applicant has revised the development to nine, two-storey Townhouse units and increased the number of visitor parking spaces from four to nine spaces.

2The Town now supports the development as the Parties have achieved a resolution of the matter. A revised Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and a revised Zoning By-Law Amendment (“ZBLA”) are approved by the Parties in the settlement, were presented to the Tribunal and entered as exhibits and are now appended to this Decision as Attachments 1 and 2 respectively.

3The settlement proposal was notified to relevant Parties and Participants and the Affidavit of Service of the Settlement was marked as Exhibit 1. The Applicant’s land use planner, Mark Condello, submitted an Affidavit and was marked as Exhibit 2. The revised development concept was accepted by Town Council at its meeting on December 15, 2021. A copy of the Minutes of Settlement (“Settlement Proposal”) between the Appellant and the Town dated December 20, 2021, reflecting the Settlement Proposal and implementing planning instruments was executed by the Parties.

SETTLEMENT

4The Settlement Proposal incorporates the following changes to the proposed development:

• A reduction of one townhouse unit from Block 1, resulting in a total of nine (9) townhouse units;

• An additional five (5) visitor parking spaces have been added, for a total of nine (9) visitor parking spaces;

• The setback to Ransom Street has been increased from 2.36 metres to 3.3 metres;

• The setback from the end townhouse units (Units 5 and 6) to the parking spaces (internal to the blocks) has been reduced from 1.25 metres to 1.0 metre;

• The width of the condominium road has been reduced from 6.4 metres to 6.0 metres; and

• The townhouse blocks have been shifted so that the setback from the east property line (rear yard for the townhouses) is increased from 7.0 metres to 7.5 metres.

SITE AND CONTEXT

5The Subject Property is located on the south side of Ransom Street, and west of Main Street. The Subject Property is rectangular in shape and has an area of approximately 0.27 hectares (0.68 acres) and has a frontage on Ransom Street of approximately 33.6 metres (110 feet). The lot depth is approximately 81 metres. Access to the property is provided from Ransom Street. The Subject Property is currently occupied by a one-and-a-half storey detached dwelling.

6The Subject Property is located within the community of Acton, which is predominately described as a low-rise community. The Neighbourhood generally consists of various one (1) and two (2)-storey detached dwellings and an apartment building. The residential area surrounding the Subject Property is an established neighbourhood, characterized by low-rise residential built forms. The neighbourhood is also characterized by mature tree-lined streetscapes.

INSTRUMENTS

7The OPA redesignates the Subject Property from the existing “Low Density Residential” land use designation to the “Medium Density Residential” designation. The proposed built form and residential density will comply with the provisions of the “Medium Density Residential” designation and do not require any site-specific modifications.

8The OPA also seeks to identify the Subject Property as a ‘Residential Special Policy Area’, which would allow for a maximum of nine townhouses, with a maximum height of two storeys.

9The ZBLA rezones the Subject Property from the existing Low Density Residential One (LDR1-1 MN) Zone to the Medium Density Residential Two (MDR2) Zone, with site specific exemptions. For the purposes of the site-specific zoning, Provision XIV of the ZBLA states, “the exterior limit of the zone boundary shall be deemed to be one lot for the purposes of applying zone provisions. Zoning provisions shall not apply to any interior boundaries created as a result of a Common Element Condominium”.

10The following site-specific regulations are required to implement the proposed development:

• a maximum height of 10.5 metres (two storeys);

• a minimum garage setback of 6.0 metres to a private road;

• a minimum side yard setback of 7.5 metres. This dimension would be observed as a rear yard setback for the individual townhouse units;

• a minimum rear yard setback of 1.4 metres. This dimension would be observed as an interior side yard setback for Unit 9;

• a minimum front yard setback of 3.3 metres. This dimension would be observed as an exterior side yard setback for Unit 1;

• a maximum encroachment of 3.0 metres for a porch, deck and stairs into a front or interior side yard;

• a maximum encroachment of 1.0 metre for features including but not limited to eaves or gutters, chimney breast, pilasters and roach overhangs into a front, rear, or interior side yard;

• a minimum drive aisle width providing access to a visitor parking space of 6.4 metres; whereas the Town’s Zoning By-law would require a minimum aisle width of 6.7 metres;

• a minimum private road width of 6.0 metres; whereas the Town’s Zoning By-law requires 6.4 metres;

• a minimum setback of 1.0 metre to a parking area; whereas the Town’s Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 1.25 metres;

• prohibit a second storey deck or balcony. This provision was provided to address resident concerns regarding overlook;

• a minimum of nine visitor parking spaces. This provision was provided to establish an increased parking requirement in response to resident concerns regarding parking in the surrounding neighbourhood. A minimum of nine visitor parking spaces exceeds the Town’s Zoning By-law requirement of 0.3 spaces per dwelling unit. The Town’s Zoning By-law would require a minimum of three visitor parking spaces.

11A Holding (“H”) Provision is proposed for the new zoning for the Subject Property. Lifting of the Holding Provision will require confirmation of servicing allocation and demonstrating to the Town that access to any private amenity space for yard maintenance purposes for each townhouse unit is secured without passing through habitable space. Both of these provisions will be demonstrated through a Site Plan application.

HEARING

12Mr. Condello was qualified by the Tribunal to give expert land use planning evidence and opinion. He provided the Tribunal his opinion and thorough overview of the applicable provincial and local planning policies. He stated that the proposed development, as will be permitted by both the OPA and the ZBLA, is consistent with, and/or conforms to, the identified provincial and local policies. Mr. Condello concluded that the development, as proposed under the amending instruments, represents good planning, and should be approved. The Tribunal accepts the uncontradicted land use planning opinion evidence and approves the proposed development and planning instruments.

SECTION 2 PLANNING ACT

13Section 2 of the Planning Act, requires the Tribunal, in carrying out its responsibilities, to have regard to matters of Provincial interest. The Tribunal finds that the proposed development and corresponding OPA and ZBLA have sufficient regard for matters of Provincial interest in particular:

• s.2.f), ‘the adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management services’.

• s.2.h), ‘the orderly development of safe and healthy communities’.

• s.2.j), ‘the adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing’.

• s.2.p), ‘the appropriate location of growth and development’.

• s.2.r), ‘the promotion of built form that is well-designed, encourages a sense of place and provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant’.

The Tribunal agrees with Mr. Condello and finds that the Settlement Proposal and implementing OPA and ZBLA have regard to matters of Provincial interest.

PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT, 2020 (“PPS 2020”)

14Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that all decisions affecting planning matters be consistent with the policies contained in the PPS 2020.

15Section 1 of the PPS 2020 outlines policies associated with future development and land use patterns. Section 1.1.1 of the PPS 2020 identifies that healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by:

a. promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;

b. accommodating an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of residential types (including single-detached, additional residential units, multi-unit housing, affordable housing and housing for older persons), employment (including industrial and commercial), institutional (including places of worship, cemeteries and long-term care homes), recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long-term needs;

16The Tribunal agrees with Mr. Condello that, consistent with s. 1.1.1 of the PPS 2020, the Settlement Proposal will contribute to a healthy, liveable and sustainable community through providing an efficient development and land use pattern, which is compatible with the surrounding Neighbourhoods. In keeping with s. 1.1.1. b), the Settlement Proposal introduces condominium townhouse units thereby contributing to the mix of residential types within the surrounding community and to achieving Acton’s intensification targets.

17The Tribunal finds that the Proposal represents an efficient use of land and resources and increases residential density, beyond that which currently exists thereby allowing for an efficient use of land (s.1.1.3.1 and s.1.1.3.2).

18The Subject Property is within close proximity to a Major Transit Station Area (Acton GO). The Settlement Proposal will allow for a more efficient use of land by accommodating additional residential density on a site which is currently underutilized. The Development Proposal will make efficient use of existing municipal infrastructure. The Development Proposal will contribute to the achievement of the Town’s intensification targets, while facilitating a compact development to occur at an appropriate location and at an appropriate density to make better use of land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities (s.1.1.3.5 and s.1.1.3.6).

19The Tribunal agrees with Mr. Condello that the Settlement Proposal and implementing OPA and ZBLA is consistent with the policy direction provided in s. 1.4.3 of the PPS 2020 in that it contributes to a wider range of housing options and densities to meet projected market-based needs. The proposed redevelopment is in an area serviced by existing infrastructure and community services, which can support the proposed development.

20The Tribunal is satisfied that the Settlement Proposal and the implementing OPA and ZBLA are consistent with the PPS (2020).

GROWTH PLAN FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE, 2020 (“GROWTH PLAN”)

21Mr. Condello emphasized that Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan established a 2051 population forecast of 1,100,000 people and 500,000 jobs for the Halton Region.

22The Tribunal finds that the proposed redevelopment conforms to several of the guiding principles that are established in s. 1.2.1 of the Growth Plan, including, supporting the achievement of complete communities that are designed to support healthy and active living and meet people’s needs for daily living throughout an entire lifetime, the provision of a wider range of dwelling types than what currently exists within the neighbourhood as well as to support a range and mix of housing options to serve all sizes, incomes, and ages of households.

23The proposed residential townhouse units will provide for greater diversity of housing forms and a range of land uses beyond what currently exists in the existing neighbourhood while ensuring that there is adequate water and wastewater services to support this growth (s. 2.1).

24With regards to s. 2.2.1.2 of the Growth Plan, forecasted growth to the 2051 planning horizon will be allocated based on settlement areas that have a delineated built boundary, have existing or planned municipal water and waste water systems, and can support the achievement of complete communities.

25The Tribunal finds that the Settlement Proposal and implementing OPA and ZBLA conform to the Growth Plan.

HALTON REGION OFFICIAL PLAN (“ROP”)

26The ROP provides guidance to the area municipalities in the preparation and implementation of their local Official Plans. The ROP builds on policies from the PPS and the Growth Plan. The policies and strategies of the ROP support growth and development that takes place in a sustainable manner by integrating environmental, social, economic and cultural considerations.

27The ROP, Mr. Condello explained, defines a Regional land use structure and allocates growth to the four local municipalities within Halton Region.

28Its primary role is to provide broad policy directions on strategic matters such as, management of land and natural resources, growth strategies, housing, economic development, water and wastewater services, solid waste management, transportation, health and social services.

29The Subject Property is located within the Urban Area designation of the Urban System. Additionally, the Subject Property is located within the Region’s Built Boundary for the Town. Lands within the “Urban Area” are intended to accommodate the Region’s growth over the long term where urban services are or will be made available to accommodate existing and future urban development and amenities.

30The policies of the Urban Area designation promote complete and compact communities that support intensification within the Built Boundary where urban services exist to accommodate concentrations of existing and future development.

31The Tribunal notes that the Region’s objectives for the Urban Area are established in s. 72 of the ROP. Section 72(2) of the ROP establishes the objective to support a form of growth that is compact and supportive of transit usage and non-motorized modes of travel, reduces the dependence on the automobile, makes efficient use of space and services, promotes live-work relationships and fosters a strong and competitive economy.

32Section 72(3) of the ROP establishes the objective to provide a range of identifiable, inter-connected and complete communities of various sizes, types and characters, which afford maximum choices for residence, work and leisure. Additionally, s. 72(9) of the ROP establishes the objective to facilitate and promote intensification and increased densities.

33It is Mr. Condello’s opinion that the location, site design and development configuration which would be implemented through the approval of the Applications meets the above-mentioned objectives (Policies 72(2), (3) and (9)) through providing a development with a compact built form, which is located in an area where there are existing urban services and community facilities. Additionally, the proposed development contributes to a wider range of housing options than currently exists in the neighbourhood, thereby contributing to achieving a complete community, and does so in a manner which is sensitive to the surrounding land uses.

34Section 86(11) of the ROP states, it is the policy of the Region to permit intensification of land use for residential purposes such as infill, redevelopment, and conversion of existing structures provided that the physical character of existing neighbourhoods can be maintained. Mr. Condello’s opinion is that the proposed development has been designed to integrate into and be compatible with the existing neighbourhood and will maintain the character of the neighbourhood. The proposed development will facilitate the redevelopment of the Subject Property with a higher residential density than what currently exists, therefore fulfilling and promoting intensification within an existing residential area in a sensitive manner.

35The Tribunal finds that the Settlement Proposal and the implementing OPA and ZBLA maintain the general intent and purpose of the ROP.

REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 48 (“ROPA 48”) (APPROVED BY PROVINCE ON NOVEMBER 10, 2021)

36Mr. Condello stated that the Province approved ROPA 48 (‘An Amendment to Define A Regional Structure’) on November 10, 2021. ROPA 48 changes mapping and policies related to the Region’s Regional Structure and defines a hierarchy of Strategic Growth Areas to which population and employment growth will be directed. Map 1 (Regional Structure) of ROPA 48 continues to identify the Subject Property as being within the Urban Area and Map 1H (Regional Urban Structure).

37The Tribunal finds that the Settlement Proposal and the implementing OPA and ZBLA conform to the applicable policies of ROPA 48.

TOWN OF HALTON HILLS OFFICIAL PLAN (“OP”)

38The Official Plan implements the policies of the Province and the Regional Official Plan and is intended to serve as the basis for making land use decisions.

39On Schedule A6 – Acton Urban Area Land Use Plan of the OP, the Subject Property is located within the Town of Acton’s Urban Area and is designated as “Low Density Residential”.

40The Tribunal finds that Part A of the OP establishes policies and objectives for Community Vision, Goals and Strategic Objectives. With regards to Community Vision, the preamble of Part A states:

The Preferred Growth Option in the context of Halton Hills consisted of 20,000 population growth, 370 hectares of residential/mixed use area contiguous to the Georgetown Urban Area, and 340 hectares of employment land contiguous to the Premier Gateway Employment Area to the 2031 planning horizon. In addition, a minimum intensification requirement of 5,100 units between 2015 and 2031 within the Built-up Areas of Acton and Georgetown was established.”

• A2.2.1 provides direction for growth within Urban Areas, and directs “most forms of development to urban areas where full wastewater and water services are available and to support the efficient use of land.” This direction is followed by the Town’s “Strategic Objectives”, Section A2.2.2 (a), which notes that it is the Town’s objective “to direct the majority of new residential and employment growth to Urban Areas, where full services exist.” Sufficient servicing capacity exists to accommodate the proposed redevelopment.

• Section A2.3 outlines the Town’s policies with regards to preserving and enhancing ‘urban character’ and establishes a goal “to protect and enhance the character of existing urban areas and to maintain them as diverse, livable, safe, thriving and attractive communities.

41The OP defines “character” as:

a) the aggregate of the distinct features that work together to identify a particular area. This distinct feature may include the built and natural elements of an area.

b) with respect to residential neighbourhoods, including Mature Neighbourhood Areas, the collective physical qualities and characteristics that are prevalent in a neighbourhood, and which define its distinct identity. These qualities and characteristics may include such features as street network and design, lot pattern and configuration, lot area, lot frontage, location and orientation of building on a lot in relation to surrounding lots, building setbacks, building height, massing, scale and design, façade articulation and materials, trees, vegetation, cultural heritage resources, and age of buildings.

42The Tribunal agrees with Mr. Condello that with respect to residential neighbourhoods, which includes Mature Neighbourhoods, character is defined as “the collective physical qualities and characteristics” that are prevalent in a neighbourhood, and which define its distinct identity. This includes but is not limited to street network, lot patterns and configuration, lot area, lot frontage, orientation of building, building setback, building height, massing, scale and design, façade articulation and materials, trees, vegetation, cultural heritage resources, and age of buildings.

43While the Town’s policy and zoning regulations identify the area surrounding the Subject Property as a ‘Mature Neighbourhood’. It is Mr. Condello’s opinion that the character of the surrounding Neighbourhood is unique and does not follow traditional building patterns elsewhere in Acton. The surrounding Neighbourhood comprises different built forms that includes single detached dwellings and along Adams Court and Ransom Street, an apartment building and townhouse.

44He stressed that a guiding principle in the Town’s OP for infill developments is compatibility. The OP defines “compatible” as, “the development or redevelopment of uses as well as new housing, replacement housing, additions, or alterations, which may not necessarily be the same as or similar to the existing development, but can coexist with the surrounding area without negative impact.” In accessing compatibility, the OP provides policies and criteria through s. D.1.4.3 (Infill Development in Established Neighbourhoods) and D1.4.4 (New Medium and High Density Residential Areas).

45Section D.1.4.3 of the OP establishes evaluative criteria for infill developments, which Mr. Condello explained that the proposal fulfills. On the basis of the above analysis, his opinion is that the Settlement Proposal and implementing OPA and ZBLA generally conform with the purpose and intent of the OP policies and meet the planning objectives of the OP. It is his opinion that the Settlement Proposal and OPA and ZBLA represent good land use planning and should be approved by the Tribunal.

46The Tribunal accepts Mr. Condello’s opinions and finds that the proposed development is compatible with the character of the neighbourhood and is satisfied that the Settlement Proposal and the implementing OPA and ZBLA maintain the general intent and purpose of the OP.

CONCLUSION

47In determining this matter, the Tribunal has taken into consideration the Municipal records, the matters before Council, considered and accepted the uncontroverted land use planning evidence of Mr. Condello. The Tribunal is persuaded by the evidence that the proposal is an efficient development of the underutilized subject lands, which, accommodates affordable housing; promotes a liveable, healthy and modestly sized community of residential Townhouse dwellers within the settlement area.

48The proposed nine-unit Townhouse residential density with nine visitor parking spaces of the proposed development promotes the integration of land use planning, growth management, infrastructure and services planning. The revised proposal is sensitive to the adjacent property owners’ specific concerns regarding overbuilding, off-site street parking and traffic issues. The proposed redevelopment of this underutilized subject property achieves the Provincial and Town’s targets of increasing the housing and residential supply. The residential infill development and intensification will support as well as lead to a healthy and liveable community.

49The proposed development is in keeping with the predominant low-rise two-storey character of the neighbourhood. The proposal’s built form and design is compatible with that of the existing mature neighbourhood, while not being the same, can coexist with the surrounding varied built forms without adverse impact to the adjacent properties in the area. The proposed development will be fully serviced with existing municipal sanitary, water and stormwater management services. The Applications will result in the redevelopment of an existing parcel located within the Town’s Urban Area and Delineated Built Boundary and contribute to a wider range of housing options than currently exists in the neighbourhood.

50The Tribunal finds that the development proposal is consistent with the policy direction established by the PPS, conforms to the Growth Plan, maintains the general intent and purpose of the ROP, ROPA 48 and OP. The Tribunal is satisfied that the proposed development has due regard for matters of Provincial interest, represents good land use planning and is in the public interest. The Development Proposal furthers the targets and objectives of the Provincial planning regime and enhances the residential housing supply.

51The Tribunal accordingly approves the OPA and ZBLA recommended by the parties, which were presented to the Tribunal and attached as Attachments 1 and 2 to the Decision.

ORDER

52The Tribunal Orders that the appeal under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, is allowed and the Official Plan to the Town of Halton Hills is amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order.

53The Tribunal Orders that the appeal under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, is allowed and Zoning By-law No. 2010-050 is hereby amended in the manner as set out in Attachment 2 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk to assign a number to this By-law for record keeping purposes.

“T.F. Ng”

T.F. NG

MEmber

“P. Tomilin”

p. tomilin

MEmber

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: www.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