Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
March 09, 2023
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-22-001937
PL170782
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
2147925 Ontario Inc.
Subject:
Application to amend Zoning By-law No. (74 - 51) - Refusal or neglect of Town of Halton Hills to make a decision
Existing Zoning:
Rural (RU) Zone
Proposed Zoning:
Site Specific - General Residential RG Special (RG-1) Zone and Recreation (OS1) Zone
Purpose:
To permit the development of a 32 lot single detached residential subdivision
Property Address/Description:
W 1/2 21, Concession 9
Municipality:
Town of Halton Hills
Municipality File No.:
D14ZBA09.006
OLT Case No.:
OLT-22-001937
Legacy Case No.:
PL170782
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-22-001937
Legacy Lead Case No.:
PL170782
OLT Case Name:
2147925 Ontario Inc. v. Halton Hills (Town)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant
2147925 Ontario Inc.
Subject:
Proposed Plan of Subdivision - Failure of Town of Halton Hills to make a decision
Purpose:
To permit the development of a 32 lot single detached residential subdivision
Property Address/Description:
W 1/2 21, Concession 9
Municipality:
Town of Halton Hills
Municipality File No.:
D12SUB09.001
OLT Case No.:
OLT-22-001954
Legacy Case No.:
PL170783
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-22-001937
Legacy Lead Case No.:
PL170782
Heard:
February 23, 2023, by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative*
2147925 Ontario Inc.
Town of Halton Hills
Regional Municipality of Halton
Hamlet of Glen Williams Residents Association Inc.
John Alati
Andy Margaritis
Jeffrey Wilker
Jeffrey Wilker
John J. Robinson*
MEMORANDUM OF AN ORAL DECISION DELIVERED FeBrUARY 23, 2023, BY JEAN-PIERRE BLAIS AND C. Hardy AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The matter before the Tribunal is in respect of appeals brought by 2147925 Ontario Inc. (“Applicant”) following the failure of the Town of Halton Hills (“Town”) to render a decision respecting applications for a Zoning By-Law Amendment (“ZBA”) and for a Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”) (together the “Applications”). The appeals are brought pursuant to s. 34(11) and s. 51(34) of the Planning Act (“Act”) respectively. The Applicant is proposing to build 32 single-detached dwellings, fully serviced by municipal water and sanitary infrastructure, together with a stormwater management pond.
2The Applications were originally filed in 2009 and have since gone through numerous reiterations. This Hearing had originally been scheduled for a 13-day Merit Hearing but was converted into a Settlement Hearing when the parties came to an agreement on all outstanding issues (“Proposed Settlement”). The Proposed Settlement was approved by the Town and agreed to by the Regional Municipality of Halton (“Region”). The Hamlet of Glen Williams Residents Association Inc. (“Association”), the only other Party to this proceeding, also consented to the Proposed Settlement. The Proposed Settlement includes an extensive list of conditions of approval for the DPS to address concerns raised in the review process by the Parties, entities, and agencies (“Conditions of Approval”). The Proposed Settlement is now before the Tribunal for approval.
3The uncontested evidence in support of the Proposed Settlement was provided by Mr. Glenn J. Wellings, retained by the Applicant, who was qualified on as an expert in land use planning. Mr. Wellings’ written evidence, in the form of an Affidavit dated February 21, 2023, including numerous attachments, was marked as Exhibit 2.
SUBJECT LANDS AND SURROUNDINGS
4The Applicant seeks to implement its development proposal with respect to vacant lands described as Part of Lot 21, Concession 9 in the Town (“Subject Lands”). They are situated in the northwest portion of the Hamlet of Glen Williams.The Subject Lands comprise an area of approximately 6.9 hectares and are generally rectangular. They are located east of Eight Line and north of Wildwood Road.
5Single-detached dwellings are situated east, south, and west of the Subject Lands. The houses on Oak Ridge Drive are mostly two-storey single-dwellings; those on Eight Line have a mix of bungalow and two-storey built forms. Agricultural lands abut the northerly limit of the Subject Lands. These agricultural lands, known as the Stull farm, are outside the boundary of the Hamlet of Glen Williams, but are within the Greenbelt.
6Two existing municipal roads (McMaster Street and Meagan Drive) have temporary stubs on the eastern limit of the Subject Lands. These roadways will be extended into the proposed subdivision. These stubs were planned to be extended to service the Subject Lands at the time the adjacent subdivision located to the east was developed.
7The Subject Lands are currently zoned “D” Development by the Town’s Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2010-0050. A rezoning is required to implement the Town’s Official Plan (“Town OP”) and Glen Williams Secondary Plan 2005 (“Secondary Plan”) and the proposed subdivision.
8A proposed ZBA has been agreed to and forms part of the Proposed Settlement. It proposes: (1) a Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception Zones for Lots 1-32 inclusive; (2) an Environmental Protection Two (EP2) Zone for the Hamlet buffer block (Block 35); (3) an Open Space Two (OS2) Exception Zone for the walkway block (Block 34); and (4) an Open Space Three (OS3) Zone for the stormwater management block (Block 33).
9In addition, the ZBA provides for a maximum of 32 single-detached dwellings/Lots with a minimum lot area of 0.10 hectares and a minimum lot frontage of 21 metres. Site-specific permissions are included for the irregular shaped Lots. A maximum building height of 2 storeys/10 metres is provided with a 0.3 metre construction tolerance for certain Lots. Permission for the additional height tolerance is not provided for the perimeter Lots. An enhanced minimum rear yard setback of 20 metres has been included for Lots 1-16 given the anticipated grade changes and the potential for a walkout house design on these Lots.
EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS
10Although this was a Settlement Hearing, the Tribunal must nevertheless be satisfied that the Applications meet all legislative tests. In particular, the Tribunal must be satisfied that revised Applications: (a) have regard to matters of provincial interest in s. 2 of the Act; (b) are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (“PPS”); (c) conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (“Growth Plan”); and (d) conform to the Region of Halton Official Plan (“Regional OP”) and to the Secondary Plan. In addition, the Tribunal must be satisfied that the revised DPS application has regards to the criteria set out at s. 51(24) of the Act, that the proposed Conditions of Approval are reasonable pursuant to s. 51(25) of the Act, and the ZBA meets the legislative test in s. 24 of the Act.
11Mr. Wellings testified that, in his professional opinion, the revised Applications met all the legislative tests. The following is an account of his uncontested evidence, which is accepted by the Tribunal.
Matters of Provincial Interest
12Mr. Wellings provided extensive oral evidence to conclude that, in his professional opinion, the Applications had regard to matters of Provincial Interest. With respect to the protection of agricultural resources, he noted that the proposed development will be within a settlement area and warning clauses will place future purchasers on notice of surrounding agricultural activity. He testified that the Applications support an efficient and orderly development of the Subject Lands, with Lots that will be fully serviced through municipal water and sanitary infrastructure. Moreover, Mr. Wellings testified that hydrogeological matters will be further addressed through Conditions of Approval to protect the local water table and surrounding wells.
13From a transportation perspective, the new subdivision will be serviced by the extension of pre-existing stub roads, and it will have walkways and sidewalks for pedestrians. He noted that school and recreation facilities are available in the area. The proposed built form is consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood and the Secondary Plan. He also testified that no significant issues arose with respect to ecological systems, natural heritage, and archaeological impact.
PPS 2020
14Mr. Wellings testified that the Applications provide an appropriate form of housing in the Hamlet of Glen Williams (i.e., single-detached dwellings) and promote an efficient use of land and infrastructure. They are situated within a settlement area, and the Applications will facilitate an efficient use of available land and infrastructure and will contribute to a range of housing options through intensification.
15Mr. Wellings also explained that the Applications propose a land use and density in conformity with the applicable Official Plans, and efficiently utilizes land where appropriate levels of infrastructure can be made available to the Subject Lands for future residents.
Growth Plan
16Mr. Wellings testified that the proposed development supports the policies for the management of population and employment growth. He noted that population growth is directed to settlement areas. The Subject Lands are located within a settlement area (i.e., Hamlet of Glen Williams) and will contribute to residential growth within the community.
Regional OP
17Mr. Wellings explained that the Subject Lands are designated “Hamlet” by Map 1 (Regional Structure). Hamlets are described as “compact rural communities designated to accommodate future residential growth in the rural area and small scale industrial, commercial and institutional uses serving the farming and rural communities.” The range of uses permitted in Hamlets are to be in accordance with the policies of the Regional OP and approved Area-Specific Plans for Hamlets. In Mr. Wellings’ opinion, the Applications will facilitate future residential growth in accordance with the Regional OP and the Secondary Plan.
18The required hydrogeological study has been prepared and provided in support of the Applications and reviewed by the Region, with additional work being addressed through the satisfaction of Conditions of Approval.
2005 Glen Williams Secondary Plan
19Mr. Wellings explained that the Secondary Plan was adopted by Town Council through Amendment No. 113 to the Town OP on July 7, 2003. It was approved with modifications by the Region on July 29, 2005. The Secondary Plan has been incorporated into Part H of the Town OP. The objectives of the Secondary Plan are to permit limited growth appropriate to the Hamlet, preserve Hamlet scale and character, and protect the natural features of the area.
20Mr. Wellings further explained that the Subject Lands are designated “Hamlet Residential Area”. The Secondary Plan permits single-detached residential uses in the Hamlet Residential Area designation.
21Mr. Wellings noted that the Secondary Plan targets a general lot line setback of 20 metres from the Hamlet boundary in new development areas, however, lesser widths may be approved. The proposed subdivision provides a 6.0 metre-wide Hamlet buffer (Block 35) together with a minimum rear yard setback of 10 metres along the north property line. Block 35 will be dedicated to the Town.
22Mr. Wellings testified that the Secondary Plan generally requires a minimum lot size for residential development on municipal water and wastewater services to be 0.10 hectares (0.25 acres), and the maximum permitted density of any plan of subdivision developed on such water and wastewater services to be 5 units per net residential hectare (2 units per net acre). The proposed subdivision includes a range of lot sizes between 0.12 hectares and 0.31 hectares with a net density of approximately 5.1 units per net hectare. The density calculation excludes the stormwater management block (Block 33), walkway block (Block 34) and Hamlet buffer block (Block 35).
23Mr. Wellings also opined that the proposed subdivision is supported by various engineering, transportation, environmental and design studies as is required under the Secondary Plan.
Proposed Glen Williams Secondary Plan
24Mr. Wellings explained that the Proposed Glen Williams Secondary Plan (“Proposed Secondary Plan”) was approved by the Region on July 7, 2022. It remains under appeal before the Tribunal and, as such, is not yet in force.
25The Proposed Secondary Plan retains the same designation (i.e., Hamlet Residential Area), permitted uses (i.e., single-detached residential), minimum lot size (i.e., 0.10 hectares), and maximum density (i.e., 5 units per net hectare) as the 2005 Secondary Plan.
26However, Mr. Wellings explained that the Proposed Secondary Plan will require: (1) new buffer areas to be conveyed as public open space; and (2) a general lot line setback of at least 5 to 10 metres to the Hamlet boundary to maintain a Hamlet buffer area. Mr. Wellings testified that the proposed subdivision conforms to the not-yet-in-force Proposed Secondary Plan. Block 35 will be dedicated to the Town and provide for a 6.0 metre Hamlet buffer in accordance with the proposed new policy.
Greenbelt Plan
27Mr. Wellings explained that the Greenbelt Plan was amended and approved by the Lieutenant Governor in Council effective July 1, 2017. The Subject Lands are identified as “Settlement Areas Outside the Greenbelt”. The Greenbelt Plan Protected Countryside and Natural Heritage System abut the Subject Lands to the north. However, the development of the Subject Lands, being located outside of the Greenbelt Plan, would not, in Mr. Wellings’ opinion, offend any of the goals, objectives, and policies of the Greenbelt Plan.
Other s. 51(24) Criteria and s. 51(25) Conditions of Approval
28Mr. Wellings reviewed the criteria set out in s. 51(24) which are applicable to the DPS Application. He concluded that the DPS had appropriate regard to those criteria and is in the public interest. In particular, he opined that the DPS Application has no impact on matters of provincial interest, conforms with and implements the Town OP, is suitable for its intended purpose and can utilize existing infrastructure and community services, provides appropriately sized and dimensioned Lots, and is consistent with the surrounding built form. He also noted that the Subject Lands contain no natural heritage features and are not regulated by Credit Valley Conservation. The Tribunal accepts his evidence and opinion and finds same.
29The Proposed Settlement envisages numerous Conditions of Approval pursuant to s. 51(25) of the Act to appropriately implement the DPS. The conditions require, among other matters:
i. Subdivision agreements to be executed between the Applicant and the Town and Region;
ii. The public dedication of lands;
iii. The preparation and implementation of a detailed Construction Management Plan;
iv. Updates to the various technical reports including Functional Servicing, Stormwater Management, Tree Preservation and Inventory, Environmental Site Assessment and Traffic;
v. Updates to the Urban Design and Architectural Guidelines and for a peer review;
vi. A landscape plan to address the preservation of the existing hedgerows and for additional planting;
vii. Various notices and warning clauses to ensure that purchasers are made aware of matters such as nearby agricultural operations, rear yard landscaping requirements, and restrictions on publicly dedicated lands; and,
viii. Requests by the various public agencies, the Credit Valley Conservation, and the Region.
30Mr. Wellings testified that the Conditions of Approval ensure that appropriate regard has been given to the criteria contained under Section 51(24) of the Act and are reasonable. The Tribunal accepts his evidence and finds same.
CONCLUSION
31In conclusion, based on the foregoing uncontested evidence, the Tribunal finds that the Applications: (1) have regard to matters of provincial interest pursuant to s. 2 of the Act; (2) are consistent with the PPS pursuant to s. 3(5)(a) of the Act; (3) conform to the policies of the Growth Plan pursuant to s. 3(5)(b) of the Act; (4) conform to the Regional OP and the Secondary Plan pursuant to s. 24(1) and 51(24)(c) of the Act; (5) otherwise have regard to the other criteria set out in s. 51(24) of the Act; and (6) have regard to the Proposed Secondary Plan (adopted, but-not-yet-in-force). The proposed development constitutes good planning.
ORDER OF TRIBUNAL
32THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:
i. The appeal pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Act is allowed in part and By-law No. 2010-050 of the Town is amended as set out in Attachment 1. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk of the Town to assign a number to this by-law amendment for record keeping purposes.
ii. The appeal pursuant to s. 51(34) of the Act is allowed in part and the draft plan prepared by Wellings Planning Consultants Inc. in Attachment 2 is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Attachment 3.
iii. Pursuant to s. 51(56.1) of the Act, the Town 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 s. 51(58) of the Act. If 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.
33The Tribunal may be spoken to if the Parties require any further assistance with respect to the Order.
34In all other respects, the appeal is dismissed.
“Jean-Pierre Blais”
JEAN-PIERRE BLAIS
MEMBER
“C. Hardy”
C. Hardy
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
BY-LAW NO. 2023-XXXX
Being a By-law to Amend Zoning By-law 2010-0050, as amended, of the Town of Halton Hills, Part of Lot 21, Concession 9,
Town of Halton Hills, Regional Municipality of Halton
(File Nos. D12SUB09.001 & D14ZBA09.006)
- That Schedule “A19” of Zoning By-law 2010-0050, as amended, is hereby further amended by rezoning the lands described as Part of Lot 21, Concession 9, Town of Halton Hills, Regional Municipality of Halton as shown on Schedule “B” attached to and forming part of this By-law;
From a Development (D) Zone;
To a Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception (114) Holding (H1) Zone, Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception (114-A) Holding (H1) Zone, Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception (114-B) Holding (H1) Zone, Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception (114-C) Holding (H1) Zone, Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception (114-D) Holding (H1) Zone, Hamlet Residential One (HR1) Exception (114-E) Holding (H1) Zone, Environmental Protection Two (EP2) Zone, Open Space Two (OS2) Exception (114-F) Zone and Open Space Three (OS3) Zone.
- That Table 13.1: Exceptions of Zoning By-law 2010-0050 is hereby amended by adding the Exception Provisions contained in Schedule “A” attached to and forming part of this By-law.
SCHEDULE “A” to By-law 2023-XXXX
Exceptions
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Exception Number
Zone
Municipal Address
Additional Permitted Uses
Only Permitted Uses
Uses Prohibited
Special Provisions
114
2023-XXXX
Glen Williams
HR1
Part of Lot 21, Concession 9
(Glen Williams)
i) Minimum lot frontage – 21 metres
ii) Minimum lot area – 1000 square metres
iii) Maximum number of Lots – 32
iv) Maximum lot coverage – 360 square metres
v) Setbacks
a. Maximum front yard setback – 10 metres
b. No more than two consecutive houses shall be sited at the same distance from the front property line after which subsequent houses shall be sited at a minimum variation of 2.0 m
c. Minimum of 10 houses fronting onto Street A (Plan 24T-09001/H) shall be sited at the minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres
vi) Minimum required rear yard measured from the rear property line as per Schedule B – 20 metres for Lots 1 to 16 (Plan 24T-09001/H)
vii) Minimum required rear yard measured from the rear property line as per Schedule B – 10 metres for Lots 17 to 32 (Plan 24T-09001/H)
viii) Maximum height – 2 storeys and 10 metres. A construction tolerance of an additional 0.3 metres is permitted for Lots 17 to 32 (Plan 24T-09001/H)
ix) Decks less than 0.6 m above the grade adjacent to the deck
a. No closer than 3 m measured from the rear property line as per Schedule B
x) Main wall means any exterior wall of a building or structure
xi) No main front wall of a house shall be set further back than half the length of the adjacent house
xii) Decks 0.6 m or more above the grade adjacent to the deck
a. Shall not be permitted above the first floor
b. Shall not project more than 2 metres from the furthest rear or side main wall relative to the adjacent yard
xiii) Balconies
a. Shall not be permitted above the first floor
b. Shall not project more than 2 metres from the furthest rear or side main wall relative to the adjacent yard.
xiv) Garages
a. The wall of the private garage facing the lot line the driveway crosses to access the private garage is to be recessed a minimum of 1.0 metre from the face of the house and shall be no closer than 5.5 metres from the front lot line
b. The interior dimensions (width) of the garage fronting the street shall not exceed 50% of the exterior width of the house
xv) Minimum interior side yard setback and rear yard setback for an accessory building or structure – 3 metres
xvi) Minimum rear yard setback for an accessory building or structure containing a dwelling unit – 10 metres
xvii) Maximum floor area for a detached private garage – 45 square metres
The following provisions apply to lands zoned HR1 (114-A) (H1) described as Lot 7 on Schedule C (Plan 24T-09001/H):
i) Minimum lot frontage – 12 metres
ii) Maximum front yard setback – 23 metres
The following provision applies to lands zoned HR1 (114-B) (H1) described as Lot 8 on Schedule C (Plan 24T-09001/H):
i) Maximum front yard setback – 12.5 metres
The following provisions apply to lands zoned HR1 (114-C) (H1) described as Lot 16 on Schedule C (Plan 24T-09001/H):
i) Minimum lot frontage – 10 metres
ii) Minimum front yard setback – 25 metres
iii) Maximum front yard setback – 40 metres
iv) The requirement that no main front wall of a house shall be set further back than half the length of the adjacent house shall not apply.
The following provisions apply to lands zoned HR1 (114-D) (H1) described as Lot 17 on Schedule C (Plan 24T-09001/H):
i) Minimum lot frontage – 18 metres
ii) Maximum front yard setback – 16 metres
The following provision applies to lands zoned HR1 (114-E) (H1) described as Lot 18 on Schedule C (Plan 24T-09001/H):
i) Maximum front yard setback – 20 metres
The following provision applies to lands zoned OS2 (114-F) described as Block 34 on Schedule C (Plan 24T-09001/H):
i) Minimum lot frontage – 6 metres
SCHEDULE “B” to By-law 2023-XXXX
SCHEDULE “C” to By-law 2023-XXXX
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3