Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 14, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004517
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Star Oak Developments Limited
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: Star Oak Developments v Oakville (Town)
Reference Number: Z.1316.10
Property Address: 90 Burnhamthorpe Road W
Municipality/UT: Oakville/Halton
OLT Case No: OLT-22-004517
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004517
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description:
Reference Number: 24T-21002/1316
Property Address: 90 Burnhamthorpe Road W (90 Burnhamthorpe Road West,)
Municipality/UT: Oakville/Halton
OLT Case No: OLT-22-004518
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004517
Heard: February 6, 2023 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Town of Oakville | J. Huctwith |
| Star Oak Developments Limited | R. Cheeseman |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY STEVEN COOKE ON FEBRUARY 6, 2023, AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) for the Star Oak Developments Limited (“Applicant”) appeals pursuant to s. 34 (11) and s. 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended (“Act”), for the failure of the Town of Oakville (“Town”) to make a decision within the legislative timeframe for the Zoning By-law and draft Plan of Subdivision applications for the properties municipally known as 90 Burnhamthorpe Road West (“Subject Lands”).
2The Affidavit of Service, signed by Darlene Hornsby, attesting to proper notice having been given, was filed as Exhibit 1, together with the Addendum dated January 6, 2023.
3Prior to the commencement of the CMC, the Tribunal was informed that the parties reached a settlement. Pursuant to Rule 12 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, the matter before the Tribunal was converted to a settlement hearing.
PLANNING EVIDENCE
4Robert Thun is the Town’s Senior Planner. After a review of his credentials and his signed Acknowledgement of Expert Duties form, the Tribunal qualified Mr. Thun to provide expert opinion evidence in the field of land-use planning. The Affidavit of Mr. Thun was marked as Exhibit 2.
5Using the visual evidence submitted by the Town, and marked as Exhibit 3, Mr. Thun gave an overview of the applications and Subject Lands.
6The Subject Lands are located in the southwest corner of the Sixth Line and Burnhamthorpe Road. The Subject Lands are surrounded by either existing, approved, or proposed residential development.
7The Subject Lands consist of a total of 23.58 hectares (“ha”) in area. The Applicant proposes to construct 68 single detached dwelling units and 128 multiple-attached dwelling units. The total 196 dwelling units would be located on 5.24 ha generally located in the southwestern portion of the Subject Lands. Mr. Thun informed the Tribunal that the Subject Lands will consist of a 12.74 ha of natural heritage system. The balance of the Subject Lands would include roadways, a stormwater management pond, and a small area of 0.39 ha, that fronts onto Burnhamthorpe Road West for potential future development.
8Mr. Thun informed the Tribunal that these lands are subject to the North Oakville East Secondary Plan and the 1984 Official Plan.
9Throughout the municipal process, Mr. Thun indicates that there had been no public interest submitted to Town Council. A staff report, prepared by Mr. Thun, recommended approval of the applications. Council raised concerns regarding parking and deferred those applications to a future meeting that included a parking strategy. Mr. Thun explained to the Tribunal that the Applicant did not seek a reduction to the number of parking spaces required by the Zoning By-law.
10It is the expert opinion of Mr. Thun, that the applications for Zoning By-law and draft Plan of Subdivision be approved by the Tribunal. The parties have worked collaboratively towards a settlement agreement and the conditions have adequately addressed any staff or commenting agency concerns.
11Mr. Thun stated that the proposed settlement represents good planning because it conforms to the Region of Halton Official Plan, s. 3 Urban Structure of the Livable Oakville Official Plan, the 1984 Official Plan and the North Oakville East Secondary Plan. He further gave the expert opinion that the settlement has regard to the applicable matters listed in s. 2 of the Act, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the directives found in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL
12In determining this matter, the Tribunal accepts and adopts the uncontested land use planning evidence and expert opinions provided Mr. Thun. The Tribunal is persuaded by the evidence that the proposal promotes efficient development of land, accommodates a range of appropriate mixed uses, intensifies uses within the settlement area, and contributes to the range of housing options, and in particular, with the increase in three-bedroom dwelling units as desired by the Town.
13The Tribunal finds that the proposed settlement is consistent with the policy direction established by the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the relevant directives established by the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and as maintained by the Town and Region Official Plans. The Tribunal is further satisfied that the proposal has due regard for matters of Provincial interest, is consistent with the principles of good land use planning and is in the greater public interest. More significantly, the proposal furthers the goals and objectives of the Provincial planning regime to increase housing opportunities.
ORDER
14THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed in part and the Town of Oakville Zoning By-law No. 2014-014, as amended, is further amended in accordance with By-law No. 2023-008 as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order.
15THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeal is allowed, and the draft plan shown on the plan prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc, dated June 29, 2022, enclosed as Attachment 2 is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Attachment 3 to this Order;
16AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that pursuant to subsection 51(56.1) of the Planning Act, the Town of Oakville 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.
“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.