Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: September 21, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004634

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

Applicant/Appellant: bclMC Realty Corporation

Subject: Site Plan

Description: To permit the construction of an urban distribution and logistics facility with a total gross floor area of approximately 31,883 square metres.

Reference Number: SPA -2021-0148

Property Address: 8925 Torbram Road

Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel

OLT Case No: OLT-22-004634

OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004634

OLT Case Name: bcIMC Realty Corporation v. Brampton (City)

Heard: September 6, 2023 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

bcIMC Realty Corporation

Michael Foderick Daniel Angelucci (in absentia)

City of Brampton

Steven Ross

DECISION DELIVERED By F. LAVOIE AND S. DIXON AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1The matter before the Tribunal concerns an appeal filed by bcIMC Realty Corporation (the “Appellant”) pursuant to s. 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended (the “Act”), regarding the City of Brampton’s (the “City”) failure to render a decision on the Appellant’s submitted site plan application (the “SPA”).

2The Appellant owns the lands municipally identified as 8925 Torbram Road (the “Subject Lands”). The Subject Lands are located on the southeast corner of Torbram Road and Queen Street East and have an approximate area of 63,025 square metres (“m^2”). The Subject Lands are surrounded by a mix of uses, including an industrial/warehouse building to the south, a commercial plaza to the north, a commercial plaza to the east, and a residential neighbourhood to the west.

3The SPA contemplates the development of a 30,798 m² total gross floor area, Class ‘A’ industrial park for “last mile” urban distribution warehousing and logistics on the Subject Lands.

4The Tribunal was advised that heavy truck access was the most contentious issue between the Parties. There are three vehicular access points to the Subject Lands: two from Torbram Road and one from Queen Street East. The southernmost access point on Torbram Road is achieved by way of an easement in favour of the Appellant over an existing driveway on the property to the immediate south of the Subject Lands. The proposed development seeks to utilize the southern access from Torbram Road for heavy truck access, with the Queen Street East and northern Torbram Road accesses being reserved for passenger vehicles.

5Prior to the Hearing, the Parties reached a settlement and are now seeking an Order from the Tribunal approving, in principle, the revised site plan attached as Schedule 1 to this Decision (“Revised SPA”).

6For the reasons set out below, the Tribunal approves the Revised SPA in principle. The final Order will be withheld until the Tribunal receives confirmation in writing from the Parties of an executed site plan agreement and the delivery of a final site plan.

LEGISLATIVE TESTS

7When considering an appeal under s. 41(12) of the Act, the Tribunal shall:

a. Have regard for matters of provincial interest pursuant to s. 2 of the Act;

b. Ensure its decision is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (the “PPS”), as set out in s. 3(5) of the Act;

c. Ensure its decision conforms, or does not conflict, with any provincial plans that are in effect on the date of the decision – in this case the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019, as amended (the “Growth Plan”) – as set out in s. 3(5) of the Act; and

d. Ensure its decision conforms, or does not conflict, with the policies of the Region Official Plan (September 2021 Office Consolidation) (“ROP”), the City's Official Plan (“COP”), and any applicable Secondary Plans.

SUBMISSIONS

8Evidence in support of the Revised SPA was provided by the Appellant’s planner, Ryan Guetter. Mr. Guetter is a Registered Professional Planner in the Province of Ontario, a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners, and has been practicing as a land use planner for over 18 years. He was duly qualified by the Tribunal as an expert in land use planning.

9The Tribunal was provided with the Settlement Affidavit of Ryan Guetter, dated August 25, 2023, marked as Exhibit 1. The Parties also provided a Document Book, marked as Exhibit 2.

10Mr. Guetter provided the Tribunal with an overview of the local planning frameworks applicable to the Subject Lands. To that end, the Subject Lands are:

a. Within the “Urban System” of the ROP;

b. Identified as “Employment” along a “Primary Intensification Corridor” on Schedule 1 - City Concept of the COP;

c. Designated “Industrial” on Schedule A – General Land Use Designations of the COP;

d. Designated “Industrial Area A1” by the Bramalea South Industrial Secondary Plan (the “Secondary Plan”); and

e. Zoned “Industrial Three A – M3A” by the City Zoning By-Law 204-2010 (the “ZBL”).

11Mr. Guetter testified that, in his opinion, the Revised SPA of the Subject Lands has regard for matters of provincial interest in s. 2 of the Act, including (f) on the adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems; (h) on the orderly development of safe and healthy communities; (k) on the adequate provision of employment opportunities; (l) on the protection of the financial and economic well-being of the Province and its municipalities; (n) on the resolution of planning conflicts involving public and private interests; and (r) on the promotion of built form that is well-designed, encourages a sense of place, and provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant.

12Mr. Guetter also testified that the Revised SPA is consistent with the PPS, in that it:

a. Seeks to achieve the efficient development patterns that minimize environmental and public health and safety concerns, in accordance with Policy 1.1.1;

b. Represents appropriate development within a settlement area, in accordance with Policies 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2 a) to e), and 1.3.1 a) to d); and

c. Promotes economic development in an Employment Area, in accordance with Policies 1.3.2.1 and 1.3.2.3.

13In Mr. Guetter’s opinion, the Revised SPA conforms to the Growth Plan in the following manner:

a. It supports the Growth Plan’s guiding principles to achieve complete communities, capitalize on new economic and employment opportunities, and provide for different approaches to manage growth, in accordance with Section 1.2.1;

b. It is located within a settlement area and supports the achievement of complete communities, in accordance with Section 2.2.1; and

c. It supports economic development and competitiveness in an employment area, in accordance with Section 2.2.5.

14Mr. Guetter also testified that the Revised SPA conforms to the ROP in that it:

a. Meets the goal of the Regional Structure set out in Policy 5.1.2;

b. Represents compact development that contributes to a mix of uses to support healthy communities, is transit supportive, and respects the existing community, in accordance with Section 5.3.2;

c. Provides an employment area use on land designated Employment; and

d. Contributes to the City’s employment forecast, in accordance with Section 5.6.2.

15In Mr. Guetter’s opinion, the Revised SPA will conform to the COP in the following manner:

a. It will enhance business and industry opportunities, is close to major transportation and transit facilities, and protects a designated employment area, in accordance with the Employment Area objectives of Section 4.4;

b. It provides an industrial use on land designated for Employment Area uses, in accordance with Policy 4.4.2.1; and

c. It is surrounded by infrastructure that provides connectivity to the broader City and Region, in accordance with Policy 4.4.2.7.

16With respect to the Secondary Plan, Mr. Guetter testified that the Revised SPA will conform to same in the following manner:

a. It provides adequate setbacks, landscaping, and screening in consideration of the adjacent residential neighborhood;

b. The necessary services and utilities can support the use;

c. The use meets the class of industrial uses; and

d. The development is high quality, provides adequate parking, and can be serviced.

17Lastly, Mr. Guetter testified that the Revised SPA complies with the ZBL through the previous approval of a minor variance application which permits a building height of 16.5 metres. He further proffered that all other provisions of the ZBL are satisfied by the Revised SPA.

Heavy Vehicle Access

18Mr. Guetter relied on the report of Thomas Woodhall of BA Group, appended to his Affidavit, with respect to the appropriateness of heavy truck access from the southern Torbram Road access.

19In short, the Parties agree that while the City Traffic By-Law 93-93 disallows heavy truck use along the stretch of Torbram Road, which provides access to the Subject Lands, the By-Law also provides an exception for premises where there is no alternative access. As the only other access to the Subject Lands is from Queen Street East, itself subject to heavy truck restrictions by the Region of Peel Traffic By-Law 15-2013, the Torbram Road access is the only permitted access by way of the exception.

CONCLUSION

20The Tribunal accepts the above evidence and uncontroverted professional opinions of Mr. Guetter.

21The Tribunal finds that the Revised SPA has appropriate regard for matters of Provincial interest under s. 2 of the Act, is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the Growth Plan, ROP, COP, Secondary Plan, and ZBL, represents good planning, and is in the public interest.

INTERIM ORDER

22THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Revised Site Plan prepared by Glenn Piotrowski Architect Ltd for QuadReal, dated August 16, 2023, appended hereto as Schedule 1, is approved in principle.

23The final approval of the site plan shall be withheld by the Tribunal until:

a. The delivery by counsel for the Appellant of the final site plan, within 120 days of the date of this Interim Order; and

b. The written confirmation by counsel for the City and the Appellant of an executed final site plan agreement, within 120 days of the date of this Interim Order.

24The Panel is seized and may be spoken to if any issues arise with respect to the above conditions.

“F. Lavoie”

F. LAVOIE

MEMBER

“S. Dixon”

S. DIXON

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.

SCHEDULE 1