Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 07, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001368
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Windfall GP Inc. and Windfall Limited Partnership
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law 2018-65 neglect of Town of The Blue Mountains to make a decision
Existing Zoning: Residential 'Rl-3-62-h19'
Proposed Zoning: Residential 'Rl-3-62-h19' (no change)
Purpose: Increase from 609 units to 659 units
Property Address Description: Part of Lot 16 Concession 1, formerly Township of Collingwood, now Town of The Blue Mountains
Municipality: Town of The Blue Mountains
Municipality File No.: ZBA-2015-06
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001368
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001368
OLT Case Name: Windfall GP Inc. v. The Blue Mountains (Town)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Windfall GP Inc. and Windfall Limited Partnership
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision - Failure of Grey County to make a decision
Purpose: Increase from 609 units to 659 units
Property Address Description: Part of Lot 16 Concession 1, formerly Township of Collingwood, now Town of The Blue Mountains
Municipality: Grey County
Municipality File No.: 42T-2010-03
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001369
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001368
Heard: January 11, 2023 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Windfall GP Inc./ Windfall Limited Partnership | David White |
| Town of The Blue Mountains | Matthew Helfand Leo Longo (in absentia) |
| County of Grey | Erroll G. Treslan |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY T.F. NG ON JANUARY 11, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The parties have reached a settlement (“proposed settlement”) in the matter of appeals by Windfall GP Inc. and Windfall Limited Partnership (“Applicant/Appellant”) from the refusal or neglect of the Town of The Blue Mountains (the “Town”) and the County of Grey (the “County”) for the Zoning By-law Amendment application (“ZBA”) to amend Zoning By-law No. 2018-65 and the application for Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”) respectively in respect of lands described as Part of Lot 16 Concession 1, formerly Township of Collingwood, now Town of The Blue Mountains, County of Grey (the “subject lands/subject property”).
2The effect of the proposed ZBA and the subdivision is to permit the development of a total of 659 units on the subject lands, in particular the proposal to develop a total of 166 units within Phase 6 of the subject lands.
3The Applicant has provided a revised plan of subdivision for its Phase 6 lands and draft zoning by-law amendment to the Parties and the Tribunal which show a total of 166 units.
4The County and Town have provided a list of revised draft conditions of subdivision approval that are agreeable to the Applicant.
5Thus, the Parties have resolved all issues between them and have jointly agreed that the appeals should be granted in part by the Tribunal on the basis of and in accordance with the proposed settlement.
6The parties jointly requested the appeals be allowed, the ZBA be approved and the final revised DPS be approved with conditions.
SITE
7The subject lands are located at the northwest corner of Grey Road 19 and 21. Le Scandinave Spa is located east of the subject lands.
8North of the subject lands is a draft approved subdivision known as Second Nature. The southern portion of the Blue Mountain Resorts is located west of the subject property. Residential dwellings, vacant lands and a driving range are located south of the subject lands.
BACKGROUND
9The subject lands (59.929 ha) comprise an approved Draft Plan of Subdivision (DPS) and related implementing Zoning By-law 2011-57 provisions enabling development of a 609-unit residential subdivision. The approved Draft Plan comprises a total of 609 residential dwelling units made up of 351 single detached residential lots and 258 semi-detached residential lots to be developed over six phases.
10Initially, application was made to amend the Draft Plan and the Zoning By-law to permit an additional 71 dwelling units bringing the total Draft Plan unit yield to 680.
11As a result of further reviews, the Owner proposed modifications to the application that sought to reduce the requested increase in units from 71 to 50 along with adding lands to the existing Community Park. The modified request for an additional 50 units brought the Draft Plan unit yield to 659, and an equivalent residential density of 13.4 units per gross hectare (13.4 u/gha).
12The Draft Plan modifications included provision of public parking on the lands to be added to the Community Park (Block A), an additional public walkway connecting Phase 6 lands to existing public open space lands (Block 180) and, a re-distribution of semi-detached units within Phase 6 to reduce the number of consecutive semi-detached units fronting along the public streets and, to ensure that semi-detached lots do not back on to single detached lots.
13The Zoning By-law amendment sought to increase the permitted number of units from 609 to 659 and, to rezone five residentially zoned lots to Open Space.
14Provisions of Zoning By-law 2011-57 were accounted for in the Town’s Zoning By-law comprehensive review and update, that resulted in the Town’s Zoning By-law 2018-65 (ZBL) passed on November 29, 2018.
15As of December 2022, permitted dwelling units in Phases 1 through 4 have been constructed and are occupied. Phase 5 is nearing completion.
16Applications to amend the approved Draft Plan of Subdivision and ZBL to the County and Town were made in November 2018.
17The resulting Draft Plan density calculated to 13.4 u/gha (659/49.04 ha). The updated Draft Plan amendment and corresponding ZBA were submitted in July 2020 as an addendum to the initial 2018 applications. The updates were limited to Phase 6.
18The Phase 6 unit yield was proposed at 166, comprising 48 single detached units and 118 semi-detached units.
19In response to comments at the November 30, 2020 Public Meeting, the Applicant further modified its proposed changes to the Draft Plan. The modifications included re-distributing proposed semi-detached lots so as not to back onto proposed single detached lots while at the same time reducing the number of consecutive semi-detached lots along the street frontage.
Planning Evidence
20Colin Travis was qualified by the Tribunal to give expert opinion evidence in land use planning matters in support of the proposed ZBA and DPS. He is a Registered Professional Planner and a Member of the Canadian Institute of Planners.
21Mr. Travis provided an overview and analysis of the policy and regulatory framework. He concluded that the DPS and the ZBA represent good land use planning and should be approved.
PPS
22Provincial Policy Statement (PPS): The PPS provides a province wide planning policy framework on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. The subject lands lie within a “Settlement Area” as they are situated in a built-up area having concentrated development on full municipal services and are designated for growth in the local Official Plan. The PPS directs new housing development toward locations having appropriate levels of infrastructure and services. Such housing is to provide a range or mix of housing types (Section 1.4). Section 2 provides for, among other matters, policies protecting natural and cultural heritage resources. Section 3 seeks to protect public health and safety directing development away from natural hazards.
23It is noted that the proposed amendments to the Draft Plan and Zoning By-law maintain a mixed dwelling type residential development on full municipal services while maintaining identified and zoned environmental protection lands.
NEP
24Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP): Map 6 to the Niagara Escarpment Plan places the subject lands in the “Escarpment Recreation Area” designation. Further to Section 1.8.3, permitted uses are as provided for in the Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan (TOP).
25The proposed amendments conform to the intent of this direction as the subject land comprise lands designated for development in the TOP.
COP
26The County of Grey Official Plan (2016) (COP): Schedule A, Land Use Designations, Map 2 to the COP designates the subject lands as “Recreational Resort Area”. Section 2.6 identifies the “Recreational Resort Area” as comprising part of the County’s “Settlement Areas” land use structure. Subsection 2.6.7 describes such lands as consisting of, among other uses, residential development with full municipal services.
27The proposed amendments conform to the intent of the COP as the subject lands are located in a Settlement area that is the subject of residential development on full municipal services.
TOP
28The TOP: Schedule ‘A-5’, ‘Blue Mountain Village Area’, to the TOP designates the subject lands as “Residential Recreational Area”. Under provisions of Section B3.7.3 a range of land uses is permitted, including single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, townhouse and low-rise multiple units and, accessory apartments. Under Section B3.7.4.4 the maximum density permitted in the “Blue Mountain Village Area” is 15 u/gha. In Section E11 to the TOP, “Gross Hectare” is defined and directs that “gross density shall not include any land designated Hazard Lands, Wetlands or Escarpment”. The south-east portion of the subject lands is designated “Hazard”.
29The proposed amendments conform to the intent of the TOP in that residential uses are proposed and will result in a Draft Plan density of 13.4 u/gha, under the maximum stipulated of 15 u/gha. In addition, the proposed amendments respect existing lands identified, conveyed and zoned as Open Space and Hazard lands.
ZBL
30Town of The Blue Mountains Zoning By-law 2018-65 (ZBL): Schedule ‘A’ to ZBL zones the subject lands “R1-3-62-h19”, that is a site-specific zoning allowance limiting unit types to single detached and semi-detached dwellings to a maximum 609 units in total. Additional regulations address minimum yard setbacks, minimum lot areas and maximum height. The Holding provision “h-19” requires execution of a Master Development Agreement, Subdivision Agreement and Registration of a Plan of Subdivision.
31The proposed amendments maintain the housing type and related lot performance regulations, zone lands appropriately for the addition to the Community Park and, will maintain the overall built form established through development in previous Draft Plan Phases. In this regard, the proposed amendments maintain the intent and purpose of the ZBL.
Findings
32The Tribunal concurs with the uncontested opinion evidence of Mr. Travis and finds that the DPS and ZBA facilitates a development that has regard for the matters of Provincial interest set out in s. 2 of the Planning Act (“the Act”), is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the NEP, the COP and the TOP.
33The development proposal is an orderly development. The Applicant has constructed phases 1 to 4 and phase 5 is nearing completion. The proposal relates to phase 6 in a location that is appropriate for residential development of a safe and healthy community. The proposed development of single detached and semi-detached units is well designed, provides for open spaces that are accessible and maintains the natural heritage features.
34The proposal will assist the County and Town in achieving the objectives of residential density targets and support the achievement of intensification in a built-up settlement area. The residential housing stock will increase as the proposed plan includes a significant number of single detached and semi-detached dwellings.
35The ZBA to implement the development proposal conforms to the policies of the COP and TOP. The proposal optimizes use of the subject property, creates more housing, utilizes existing municipal services and infrastructure.
Conclusion
36The Tribunal is satisfied that the proposed ZBA and DPS facilitate an orderly residential development of the single and semi-detached built form on the subject lands. The proposal makes efficient use of existing infrastructure and municipal services that facilitate a healthy, safe and complete community.
37The proposed development has regard for matters of provincial interests in the Act in particular: s. 2(h) the orderly development of safe and healthy communities; and s. 2(p) the appropriate location of growth and development. The proposal as implemented by the ZBA and DPS represents good land use planning and is in the public interest.
38The proposed development is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the NEP, the COP and the TOP. The Tribunal is satisfied that the relevant s. 51(24) criteria of the Act are met and the draft plan conditions satisfy s. 51(25) of the Act.
ORDER
39The Tribunal orders that the appeals are allowed.
Zoning By-law No. 2018-65, is amended in the manner set out in Attachment 1 to this order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk to assign a number to this by-law for record keeping purposes.
The Draft Plan shown on the plan (Exhibit 1- Schedule A) prepared by Bousfields Inc. dated April 23, 2021 comprising Part of Lot 16, Concession 1, formerly Geographic Township of Collingwood, Town of The Blue Mountains, County of Grey (Attachment 2) is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Attachment 3 to this Order AND the Tribunal orders that pursuant to subsection 51(56.1) of the Planning Act, the Town of The Blue Mountains/the County of Grey as the case may be shall have the authority to clear the conditions of draft plan approval and to administer final approval of the plan of subdivision for the purposes of subsection 51(58) of the Act. In the event that there are any difficulties implementing any of the conditions of draft plan approval, or if any changes are required to be made to the draft plan, the Tribunal may be spoken to.
“T.F. Ng”
T.F. NG
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.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3