Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: April 12, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001273
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Stylux Caledon Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of Town of Caledon to adopt the requested amendment
Existing Designation: Low density residential
Proposed Designated: Medium density residential
Purpose: To permit residential development
Property Address/Description: 6098, 6110, 6112, 6114, 6122, 6124, 6126 and 6142 Old Church Road
Municipality: Town of Caledon
Approval Authority File No.: POPA 2020-0002
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001273
OLT File No.: OLT-21-001273
OLT Case Name: Stylux Caledon Inc. v. Caledon (Town)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Stylux Caledon Inc.
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2006-50 Refusal or neglect of Town of Caledon to make a decision
Existing Zoning: Rural Residential (RR)
Proposed Zoning: Residential One – Exception XX (R1-XX) and Townhouse Residential -Exception XX (RT-XX
Purpose: To permit residential development
Property Address/Description: 6098, 6110, 6112, 6114, 6122, 6124, 6126 and 6142 Old Church Road
Municipality: Town of Caledon
Municipality File No.: RZ 2020-0006
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001273
OLT File No.: OLT-21-001274
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Stylux Caledon Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision - Failure of Town of Caledon to make a decision
Purpose: To permit residential development
Property Address/Description: 6098, 6110, 6112, 6114, 6122, 6124, 6126 and 6142 Old Church Road
Municipality: Town of Caledon
Municipality File No.: No. 21T-20003C
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001273
OLT File No.: OLT-21-001275
Heard: February 21, 2023 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Stylux Caledon Inc. | M. Flowers, S. Lampert |
| Town of Caledon | R. Kehar |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY STEVEN COOKE AND N. EISAZADEH ON FEBURARY 21, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This is a settlement hearing on an appeal filed by Stylux Caledon Inc. (“Applicant”) of the failure by the Town of Caledon (“Town”) to make a decision within the legislative time frame for s. 22(7) on an application to amend the Official Plan (“OPA”), s. 34(11) amendment to the Zoning By-law (“ZBA”), and s. 51(34) Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”), pertaining to the properties municipally known as 6098, 6110, 6112, 6114, 6122, 6124, 6126 and 6142 Old Church Road, and 1 and 3 Marilyn Street, Caledon, Ontario (“Subject Land”).
2Original applications for an OPA, ZBA and DPS were submitted on July 20, 2020 (“Original Applications”). The Original Applications were for 7 parcels of land with a total area of 1.775 hectares (4.386 acres), seeking to permit 12 detached lots and 25 townhouses with an additional estimated 8 future residential units. The future residential units were contingent on the acquisition of 2 additional properties known municipally as 1 and 3 Marilyn Street, which would allow the extension of the proposed local road and lane to be completed to intersect with Marilyn Street, all which were conceptually illustrated on the DPS within the Original Applications.
3After various revisions and the acquisition of the 2 additional properties by the Applicant, being 1 and 3 Marilyn Street, notice was provided to persons with potential interest and a revised application was submitted on September 20, 2022 (“Revised Applications”).
4The Revised Applications seek to permit 6 townhouse blocks comprising 34 lane access townhouse units, 14 detached lots and a future development block intended for 1 additional detached lot. This was subject to the acquisition of a surplus temporary turning circle from the Town, abutting to the west, which has since been acquired and included in the proposed DPS within the Revised Applications. The Subject Land area now totals approximately 2.112 hectares (“ha”) (5.219 acres) which is an approximate 0.337 ha (0.833 acres) of increase from the Original Applications.
5The Town supports, in principle, approval of the Revised Applications subject to proposed conditions as agreed between the parties and set out further below.
EXHIBITS
6Continuing the Exhibits from the previous Case Management Conferences, the Joint Affidavit of Mark Yarranton and Robert Lavecchia, sworn February 13, 2023, in support of settlement was marked as Exhibit 3.
7The Participant Statement of Damian Saramak dated September 12, 2022, was marked as Exhibit 4.
OTHER PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS
8The Region of Peel (“Peel”) had previously been granted party status on consent of the Parties as it shared several of the same issues then identified by the Town. However, as settlement has been reached, Peel did not attend or participate at the hearing.
9The Tribunal had also previously granted Participant Status to Mr. Saramak. As aforementioned, Mr. Saramak’s Participant Statement was entered as Exhibit 4 and is addressed further below.
PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION
10The proposed DPS within the Revised Application (“Proposed DPS”) includes 15 lots for single-detached dwellings with a minimum frontage of 14.03 meters (“m”) (46.03 feet), 6 blocks containing 34 townhouse units with minimum frontages of 6.1 m (20 feet) together with one (1) 18-metre-wide municipal road (Russel Mason Drive), one (1) 8-metre-wide municipal lane, one (1) 7.75 meter wide Road Widening Block along Old Church Road and two (2) 0.3 m reserves along Old Church Road to restrict vehicular access.
11Vehicular access for the single-detached dwellings is from the proposed municipal road, whereas the townhouses will obtain access from the proposed municipal lane. Based on the concept site plan, off-street parking will be provided with up to 4 spaces for detached dwellings and up to 3 spaces for the townhouses in a combination of garages and driveways.
PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
12The proposed OPA within the Revised Applications (“Proposed OPA”) seeks to redesignate the Subject Lands from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and to add site specific policy to allow a maximum net density of 34 units per hectare.
PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENTS
13The proposed ZBA within the Revised Applications (“Proposed ZBA”) seeks to rezone the Subject Lands from Rural Residential (RR) to Residential One Exception (R1-xxx) and Townhouse Residential Exception (RT-xxx) together with site specific exceptions for both zones to permit and regulate the future use.
14Site-specific exceptions are proposed through the Residential Exception (RT-xxx) zone which is proposed to apply to the townhouse blocks. Additional site-specific exceptions are proposed through the Residential One Exception (R1-xxx) zone which is proposed to apply to the single-detached dwellings.
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
15Conditions were compiled by the Town which outline further requirements and details that must be satisfied prior to the final plan of subdivision being registered (“Proposed Conditions”). The Proposed Conditions include several standard conditions that relate to the Proposed DPS which address the requirements to be satisfied, as requested by Peel, the Town, School Boards, Canada Post and various utility companies, in consultation with the Applicant’s planners.
PLANNING EVIDENCE
16While the Tribunal was provided with a Joint Affidavit by Mr. Yarranton and Mr. Lavecchia in support of the settlement, only Mr. Lavecchia appeared before the panel to provide viva voce evidence. Mr. Lavecchia was qualified, without objection, by the Tribunal to give expert land use planning evidence and opinion in support of the settlement reached.
The Planning Act:
17Mr. Lavecchia stated that the proposed development within the Revised Applications responds appropriately to matters of provincial interest enumerated in s. 2 of the Act, specifically as follows (enumerated in accordance with the applicable subsections):
(f) The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems;
(h) The orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
(h.1) The accessibility for persons with disabilities to all facilities, services and matters to which this Act applies;
(j) The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing;
(l) The protection of the financial and economic well-being of the Province and its municipalities;
(n) The resolution of planning conflicts involving public and private interests;
o) The protection of public health and safety;
p) The appropriate location for growth and development;
(q) The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians; and
(r) The promotion of built form that,
(i) is well-designed,
(ii) encourages a sense of place, and
(iii) provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant;
(s) The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to a changing climate.
18With respect to the Proposed DPS, Mr. Lavecchia opined that it has regard to the health, safety, convenience, accessibility for persons with disabilities and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the municipality, and to the criteria found in section 51(24) of the Act, as follows (enumerated in accordance with the applicable subsections):
(a) It satisfies matters of provincial interest, as addressed at paragraph 17 above;
(b) It is not premature as it relies on existing available municipal services, and community facilities;
(c) Subject to the approval of the proposed OPA, it conforms to the Town OP and adjacent plans with respect to the extension of existing roads;
(d) Environmental Site Assessment Reports dated May 15, 2020 and June 19, 2020 show the Subject Lands are suitable for purposes of residential roads as results did not exceed the applicable MECP standards for residential use;
(e) The existing road network is adequate to accommodate the Proposed DPS;
(f) The dimensions of the proposed residential blocks and lots are appropriate to accommodate the proposed townhouses and detached dwellings respectively;
(g) The proposed requirements or restrictions within the Proposed ZBA will appropriately regulate the residential use and the Proposed Conditions require, as necessary, easements for purposes of servicing and utilities;
(h) There are no natural resources or flood control issues;
(i) A Functional Servicing Report dated September 2022 confirms that the proposed development can be serviced with full municipal services;
(j) The school boards have no objection and have provided appropriate and reasonable conditions;
(l) The Proposed DPS will facilitate a compact form of development that will contribute or help optimize supply, efficient use and conservation of energy that will also promote sustainability through active transportation, and access to potential future transit; and,
(m) There will be no issues between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and site plan control matters relating to the development of land.
Provincial Policy Statement (“PPS”):
19In Mr. Lavecchia’s opinion, the proposed development within the Revised Applications is consistent with the PPS, particularly policies 1.1.1, 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2, 1.1.3.3, 1.1.3.6, 1.4.1, 1.6.6.1, 1.6.6.2, 1.6.6.7, 1.6.7.4 as follows:
i. Growth management policies related to health, livable and safe communities that support efficient development in a compact form and an appropriate range of residential uses that are transit supportive;
ii. Settlement area policies which state that settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development;
iii. Land use patterns within settlement areas that efficiently use the infrastructure and public service facilities which are planned or available, support active transportation and are transit supportive where transit is planned, exists or may be developed;
iv. Housing policies which seek to provide an appropriate range and mix of housing forms including affordable housing;
v. Infrastructure policies that promote the use of municipal services (water and wastewater) as the preferred form of servicing growth;
vi. Stormwater management policies that promote the efficient use and optimization of existing municipal services and appropriate on-site retention and water balance; and,
vii. Transportation policies that promote the efficient use of existing and planned infrastructure and promote land use pattern, density and mix of uses that minimize the length and number of vehicle trips and support potential future use of transit and active transportation.
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (A Place to Grow) 2019 and 2020 (“Growth Plan”):
20Mr. Lavecchia testified that the proposed development within the Revised Applications conform with the policies and objectives of the Growth Plan, and in particular:
i. Policy 1.2.1, as it achieves a community designed to support healthy and active living, to meet daily living needs through an entire lifetime, to prioritize intensification and higher densities in strategic growth areas to make efficient use of land and infrastructure, and supports transit viability;
ii. Policy 2.2.1, as it achieves a complete community where development is focused on a delineated built-up area that has existing municipal services;
iii. Policy 2.2.2, as it will contribute to meeting the minimum intensification target where a minimum of 50% of all residential development is to occur annually within the delineated built-up area of the Region of Peel; and,
iv. Policy 2.2.6, through the provision of residential uses that contribute to a greater range and mix of housing options within an existing settlement area at a density and form that support all forms of safe and active transportation including walking and cycling.
Greenbelt Plan 2017 (“Greenbelt Plan”):
21Mr. Lavecchia testified that the Greenbelt Plan designates the Subject Lands under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan 2017, and that only policies 3.3 of the Greenbelt Plan, related to Parklands, Open Space and Trails, apply. Considering the abundance of municipal parkland in the immediate vicinity of the Subject Lands, the Town has elected to impose a condition of draft plan approval requiring cash-in-lieu of parkland. For this reason, it is Mr. Lavecchia opinion that the Revised Applications conform with the Greenbelt Plan.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (“ORMCP”):
22Mr. Lavecchia gave testimony that the Subject Lands are designated “settlement area” by the ORMCP, which permits the applicable land uses of the municipal Official Plans (“Settlement Area”).
23Mr. Lavecchia further testified that uses permitted by the applicable Official Plan for lands designated Settlement Area are permitted by the ORMCP, subject to conformity with subsections 19(3) and 13(4) of the ORMCP. Subsection 19(3) contains policies related to protecting the ecological and hydrological integrity within Settlement Areas, while subsection 31(4) applies specific land use policies with respect to land and Settlement Areas regarding infrastructure, official plan provisions for well head protection areas and areas of higher aquifer vulnerability, sewage and water services, stormwater management and stormwater management plans and rapid infiltration basins and columns.
24Mr. Lavecchia testified that the Subject Lands are within the minimum area of influence (120 meters of the associated meander belt) of Boyces Creek. Boyces Creek is a permanent stream which is also separated from the Subject Lands by an existing residential area. A Natural Heritage Evaluation dated June 2020, through the impact assessment, confirms there will be no adverse effects on the hydrological form or function of Boyces Creek, provided the mitigation measures of the Natural Heritage Evaluation and those contained in the Functional Servicing Report dated September 2022 are adhered to. In Mr. Lavecchia’s opinion, there will be no negative impacts to these features resulting from the proposed redevelopment of the Subject Lands.
25Mr. Lavecchia further testified that there are no uses proposed on the Subject Lands that are prohibited or restricted in the ORMCP respecting well head protection areas and areas of high aquifer vulnerability. Nor are there any rapid infiltration basins or columns proposed which are prohibited by the ORMCP.
Region of Peel Official Plan, 2018 and 2022 (“ROP 2018” and “ROP 2022”):
26It was submitted that ROP 2018 is no longer operative as it was in force at the time of the Original Application and submission of the Revised Applications, just prior to the approval of ROP 2022. However, it is Mr. Lavecchia’s opinion that the Revised Applications conform with both ROP 2018 and 2022.
27Respecting ROP 2018, Mr. Lavecchia opined that the proposed development would constitute the appropriate intensification of lands that are within the region's built-up area where intensification is to be facilitated, thereby furthering policies 5.4.3.2.2, 5.5.3.2.2 and 5.5.3.2.3.
28Respecting ROP 2022, Mr. Lavecchia opined that:
i. The proposed development constitutes new growth to the built-up area of the community through intensification, which by definition, includes development at a higher density than currently exists, thereby furthering policy 5.4.1.1;
ii. The proposed development encourages the use of existing services and infrastructure and promotes compact built forms or urban development and redevelopment, thereby furthering policy 5.6.1.2;
iii. The Revised Applications propose 69.38% of its 49 units to be in the form of street townhouses, which furthers policies directed at a mix of housing options and densities with a target of 50% of housing units in forms other than detached and semi-detached homes as set out as section 5.9.7; and,
iv. Road widening requirements and provisions of noise attenuation have been addressed through the Proposed DPS and Proposed Conditions.
Town of Caledon Official Plan, April 2018 Consolidation Including the Caledon East Secondary Plan (“Town OP”):
29Mr. Lavecchia stated that the proposed development within the Revised Applications has been designed to be compatible with and enhance the community character of the Caledon East settlement. The Proposed DPS provides that single-detached dwellings be developed on lands abutting existing single-detached dwellings in order to provide compatibility and transition with townhouses on the interior and facing Old Church Road. The proposed density can be accommodated with the existing road system and there is an abundance of parks and open space in the vicinity to also serve the proposed development. The street-edge built form of the street townhouses, particularly on Old Church Road, will enhance the community character by avoiding driveways and promoting a strong pedestrian realm that supports active transportation. Mr. Lavecchia quoted from the Staff Report that the proposed development is an example of desirable intensification that can be supported by existing infrastructure and contributes to the existing character of the area.
30Mr. Lavecchia further testified that the Urban Design Report dated September 2022, confirms that the proposed development would conform to the Caledon Design Guidelines including the design standards established in the Caledon East Streetscape Concept.
31As the proposed 34 units per ha is not permitted in the Low-Density Residential Designation, the Proposed OPA is sought to redesignate the Subject Lands to Medium Density Residential. Mr. Lavecchia opined that the proposed maximum density of 34 units per net ha is appropriate in consideration that freehold townhouses are an existing permitted use that is compatible with other existing permitted low rise uses, that the lands can be serviced with existing full municipal services and community facilities, and that the existing road network can accommodate the proposed development.
32Mr. Lavecchia concluded that the proposed development within the Revised Applications meets the intent of the Town OP, and in particular sections 3.5.3.5, 3.5.3.5.1, 7.7.4.1, 7.7.5.2, and 7.7.5.2.1.
Town of Caledon Zoning By-law 2006-50, as amended (“ZBL 2006-50”):
33The Proposed ZBA is required as the current zoning of Rural Residential does not permit townhouse dwellings. Mr. Lavecchia testified that subject to the approval of the Proposed OPA, the Proposed ZBA conforms to the Town OP, is appropriate to regulate the use and development of the Subject Lands and implements the Proposed DPS.
Participant Statement of Damian Saramak:
34Mr. Saramak set out three primary concerns in relation to the proposed development. Mr. Lavecchia testified in response to those concerns as follows:
i. Regarding the concern that the Original Application has transformed into a large-scale development out of line with the current character of the area, Mr. Lavecchia opined that the total increase of 0.337 hectares does not classify the development as large scale. The existing Low Density Residential designation of the Town OP permits a mix of both single-detached and townhouses as of right, which is a compatible form of low rise residential with single-detached dwellings in the area.
ii. Regarding the concern of a lack of current services and infrastructure, Mr. Lavecchia testified, inter alia, that the Functional Servicing Report confirms that the proposed development can be serviced utilizing or connecting to existing municipal services and infrastructure. A Traffic Impact Study also confirms that existing and proposed intersections will have acceptable operating conditions and that Old Church Road will operate below capacity.
iii. Regarding the concern that the Revised Applications circumvented proper planning practices, Mr. Lavecchia testified that a complete submission including updates to all relevant supporting materials was submitted for review. Further, the acquisition of additional properties in the Revised Applications was conceptually illustrated as part of the original DPS from the outset.
35Overall, it is Mr. Lavecchia’s professional opinion that the proposed development within the Revised Applications represents good land use planning in the public interest and should be approved.
FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL
36The Tribunal accept and adopts the uncontested land use planning written and oral evidence and expert opinions provided by Mr. Lavecchia and Mr. Yarranton. The Tribunal is persuaded by the evidence that the proposal promotes efficient development of land, intensifies uses within the settlement area, contributes to the range of housing options, and is supported by existing municipal infrastructure.
37The Tribunal has considered the concerns raised by the Participant, Mr. Saramak, but was not persuaded that the concerns raised are sustainable given the evidence offered in support of the planned development, or otherwise bears relevance to the land use planning merits of the proposal.
38The Tribunal finds that the proposal is consistent with the policy direction established by the PPS, conforms to the relevant directives established by the Growth Plan, and is maintained by the Town’s OP and related provincial policies as set out above. The Tribunal is further satisfied that the proposal has due regard for matters of provincial interest and the criteria set out in section 51(24) of the Act, represents good land use planning and is in the greater public interest. The Tribunal also finds that the conditions of draft plan approval are reasonable in accordance with section 51(25) of the Act.
ORDER
39THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeal is allowed in part, and By-law No. 2006-50 of the Town of Caledon is hereby amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk of the Town of Caledon to assign a number to this by-law for record keeping purposes.
40THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Official Plan for the Town of Caledon is amended as set out in Attachment 2 to this Order.
41THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the draft plan shown on the plan prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc. dated January 12, 2023, as set out in Attachment 3, is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Attachment 4 to this Order.
42AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that pursuant to subsection 51(56.1) of the Act, the Town of Caledon 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.
43The Tribunal may be spoken to in the event that any issues should arise in connection with the implementation of this Order.
“N. Eisazadeh”
N. EISAZADEH
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.