Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: July 20, 2022
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002121
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Appellant: The Ashton Inc.
Subject: By-law No. BL 2021-154
Municipality: Town of Oakville
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002121
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002121
OLT Case Name.: The Ashton Inc. v. Oakville (Town)
Heard: July 4, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
The Ashton Inc. (“Applicant”)
I. Kagan/S. Kagan
The Town of Oakville (“Town”)
J. Huctwith
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BLAIR S. TAYLOR ON JULY 4, 2022, AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Applicant owns the lands known municipally as 315 Glenashton Drive (“Subject Lands”).
2The Town had passed a site specific Zoning By-law No. 2021-154 which would have allowed a height of 31 metres (“m”), and a maximum number of 6 storeys for the Subject Lands.
3The Applicant appealed.
4In the lead up to the hearing, the parties were able to resolve their issues and proposed a settlement that included revising the site specific zoning to enable 9 storeys of development within the 31 m height, and a s. 37 Planning Act agreement for the additional height.
5For the reasons set out below, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, and ordered that the Town’s Zoning By-law was amended by the recommended draft Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) as found in Exhibit 2, Tab 3B, being proposed ZBA No 2022-079.
DECISION
6The Subject Lands are a vacant parcel located on the north side of Glenashton Drive, on the west side of Trafalgar Road, and formerly owned and used by the Town as part of a public works yard. The Subject Lands have about 102 m of frontage onto Glenashton Drive, about 29 m of frontage onto Trafalgar Road, and an area of about 0.4 hectares .
7The development context is as follows:
a. North: vacant lands, then a 12 storey apartment building and a car dealership;
b. East: Trafalgar Road and then 2 storey residences;
c. West: Winfield Park and Tauton Road, then 3 and 4 storey residences; and
d. South: residential, office and 4 storey townhouses.
8The Subject Lands are: designated Urban Area in the Regional Official Plan, within a Primary Regional Node, and Trafalgar Road is a Regional Transit Priority Corridor.
9In the Town of Oakville’s Official Plan the Subject Lands are located within the Uptown Core Nodes and Corridors designation, and further designated as Uptown Core which permits residential uses.
10As noted above the impugned zoning would have allowed a height of 31 m but only with 6 storeys of residential development.
11The development proposal is a 9-storey mid-rise apartment building at 31 m in height, with 149 residential units, a Floor Space Index of 3.7, and a s. 37 agreement with the Town for the additional height.
12In support of the proposed settlement the Tribunal had before it: the Town Council Minutes approving the settlement, a land use planning affidavit from Lincoln Lo, and a proposed ZBA found at Exhibit 2 Tab 3B, (being proposed ZBA No. 2022-079).
13The Tribunal, having considered: the land use planning affidavit of Mr. Lo and his viva voce evidence; the Town Council decision and the information and materials in Exhibit 2; and hearing the submissions of counsel, found that the revised ZBA as found in Exhibit 2 Tab 3B would enable the utilization and appropriate intensification of a vacant site within an area designated for intensification with immediate adjacency to a Regional Transit Priority Corridor, within walking distance of the Town’s Uptown Core, that would utilize existing municipal services, and add to the range and mix of housing options and densities.
14Accordingly, the Tribunal concurred with the evidence of Mr. Lo and found that the settlement proposal:
a. Had appropriate regard for the matters of Provincial Interest in s. 2 of the Planning Act;
b. Had appropriate regard for the decision of Town Council;
c. Was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement;
d. Conformed to A Place to Grow: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe;
e. Conformed to the Regional Official Plan;
f. Conformed to the Town of Oakville Official Plan;
g. Represented good land use planning; and
h. Was in the public interest.
15Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, and ordered that the Town’s Zoning By-law was amended by the proposed settlement ZBA as found in Exhibit 2 Tab 3B, being ZBA No. 2022-079.
16In an abundance of caution, in light of the Town’s transition from s. 37 agreements under the Planning Act to the new Community Benefits, the Tribunal pursuant to Rule 24.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure directed that this decision shall come into force and effect as of the date of the hearing, being July 4, 2022.
17This 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.