Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: July 07, 2022
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001871 (Formerly PL210081)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(40) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1494282 Ontario Inc.
Subject: Failure of the City of Peterborough to announce a decision respecting Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 01904
Municipality: City of Peterborough
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001871
Legacy Case No.: PL210081
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001871
Legacy Lead Case No.: PL210081
OLT Case Name: 1494282 Ontario Inc. v. Peterborough (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: 1494282 Ontario Inc.
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 1997-123 - Neglect of City of Peterborough to make a decision
Existing Zoning: SP. 268-244 Special District (Commercial)
Proposed Zoning: SP.Special District (Residential)
Purpose: To permit high density mixed-use commercial/residential development consisting of 218 units
Property Address/Description: 1597,1607,1619 & 1633 Lansdowne St. W.
Municipality: City of Peterborough
Municipality File No.: Z1913
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001884
Legacy Case No.: PL210082
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001871
Legacy Lead Case No.: PL210081
Heard: June 1, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| 1494282 Ontario Inc. (Appellant) | J. Ewart |
| The City of Peterborough | A. Barber |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY D. ARNOLD AND STEVEN COOKE ON JUNE 1, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This is a hearing of the appeals by 1494282 Ontario Inc. (the “Appellant”) with respect to the failure or neglect of the City of Peterborough to render a decision respecting Applications by the Appellant for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high density residential development consisting of 118 units at the property municipally known as 1597, 1607, 1619, and 1633 Lansdowne Street West in the City of Peterborough. The subject property is located on the south side of Lansdowne Street West, east of the signalized intersection of Lansdowne Street West and Spillsbury Drive. The subject property is vacant currently as previously existing detached single unit dwellings were demolished.
2The proposed Official Plan Amendment would redesignate the subject property from “Low Density Residential” to “High Density Residential” under the City’s Official Plan (the “OPA”).
3The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment would rezone the subject property from SP.268-244-Special District (Commercial) to a site-specific zoning of Special District (Residential) under the City’s Zoning By-law (the “ZBA”).
4At the outset of the hearing, counsel for the City advised that the City would not be participating in the proceedings other than to observe and have staff available to be assistance should the Tribunal require.
5The Tribunal received written statements from the two Participants in this matter, Jill Smallwood and Donald Thom.
EVIDENCE
6The Tribunal heard the evidence of one witness at the Hearing: Kevin Duguay. Mr. Duguay was qualified to provide expert opinion evidence on Land Use Planning matters.
7The Tribunal entered the following documents as Exhibits in evidence at the Hearing:
Exhibit 1: The witness statement of Kevin Duguay
Exhibit 2: Aerial Photo of the Subject Property
Exhibit 3: Draft OPA and ZBA
Exhibit 4: Acknowledgement of Expert’s Duty signed by Kevin Duguay
Exhibit 5: Document Book of the Appellant
a) Mr. Duguay provided expert professional Land Use Planning opinion evidence at the Hearing as follows:
b) The 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (the “2014 PPS”) is relevant with regard to the OPA and ZBA given the date that the Applications in respect of same were submitted by the Appellant.
c) The OPA and the ZBA are consistent with the 2014 PPS and, in particular, the proposed development will, among other things, contribute towards a complete community (Policy 1.0), promote cost-effective development patterns and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs (Policy 1.1), and constitute an efficient and compact form of development which will contribute towards a healthy, liveable and safe community (Policies 1.1.1, .2 and .3, Policy 1.6). In this regard, Mr. Duguay noted that the subject property is within the serviced limits of an established urban settlement area with full municipal services (water and wastewater) and the adjacent Lansdowne Street West was recently widened and improved with new public sidewalks and related treatments.
d) The OPA and ZBA conform to the relevant Growth Plan, being the 2019 A Place to Grow, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (“2019 Growth Plan”) as the subject property is located within a designated urban settlement area and forms part of the Built Boundary portion of the Community as set out in the City’s Official Plan.
e) The OPA and ZBA are in keeping with the general purpose and intent of the policies of the applicable (pre-November 2021 version) Official Plan of the City. In this regard, Mr. Duguay testified that the proposed development will be serviced by existing municipal infrastructure, is located on an Arterial Street, and on-site stormwater management, and will constitute compact development that is configured in a manner that is respectful of area land uses.
f) The ZBA is in keeping with the general purpose and intent of the regulatory provisions of the City’s Zoning By-law (1997-123). In this regard, Mr. Duguay noted that the proposed development will include 207 parking spaces and accordingly exceed the minimum parking space requirement of Section 4.2(A) of the Zoning By-law.
g) The OPA and ZBA represent good land use planning.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
8Upon consideration of Mr. Duguay’s Witness Statement (Exhibit 1) and his oral evidence, which was uncontroverted, the Tribunal finds that the OPA and ZBA are consistent with the 2014 PPS, and conform with the 2019 Growth Plan and the City’s pre-November 2021 Official Plan. The Tribunal finds that the ZBA is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the regulatory provisions of the City’s Zoning By-law No. 1997-123. In making these findings, the Tribunal has had regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act.
9The Tribunal has considered the concerns raised by the Participants but was not persuaded that the concerns they have raised are either sustainable given the evidence offered in support of the planned development, or otherwise bears relevance to the land use planning merits of the proposal.
ORDER
10THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeals are allowed and the City of Peterborough Official Plan and Zoning By-law No. 1997-123 is hereby amended substantially in accordance with Schedule A and B, respectively, as appended to this order.
“D. Arnold”
D. ARNOLD
MEMBER
“Steven Cooke”
STEVEN COOKE
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.