Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: December 05, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003300 OLT-22-004723
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Bushland Heights Limited Appellant: Via-Ru Limited Subject: By-law No. 2017-66 Municipality: Township of King OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003300 Legacy Case No.: PL170869 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003300 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL170869 OLT Case Name: Bushland Heights Limited v. King (Township)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant(s): See Schedule 1 Subject: By-law No. 2022-053 Description: Rural Countryside Zoning By-Law Reference Number: Z-2020-03 Property Address: Town Wide Municipality/UT: Township of King/Regional Municipality of York OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004723 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004723 OLT Case Name: 611428 Ontario Limited. et al. v King (Township)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 9(1) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021, S.O. 2021, c. 4, Sched. 6
Request by: Via-Ru Limited, Bushland Heights Limited and 611428 Ontario Limited Request for: Request for Directions to seek an Order on the basis of settlement and adjournment of appeals against Zoning By-law No. 2017-66 and dismissal of appeal against Zoning By-law No. 2022-053
Heard: November 14, 2024, in Writing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Via-Ru Limited | Steven C. Ferri Mandy Ng |
| Bushland Heights Limited | Steven C. Ferri Mandy Ng |
| 611428 Ontario Limited | Steven C. Ferri Mandy Ng |
| Township of King | Tom Halinski |
DECISION DELIVERED BY BITA M. RAJAEE AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1This Motion was brought in writing pursuant to Rule 10.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Motion”) by three Appellants: Via-Ru Limited (“Via-Ru”), Bushland Heights Limited (“Bushland”), and 611428 Ontario Limited (“Ontario”). The Motion was brought with the consent of the Township of King (“Township”).
2By way of this Motion, the Appellants seek the following from the Tribunal:
a. That Via-Ru’s appeal of the Township’s Zoning By-law No. 2017-66 (“Urban ZBL”) be allowed, in part, and certain modifications to the Urban ZBL be approved;
b. That Via-Ru’s appeal be dismissed in all other respects;
c. That Bushland’s appeal of the Urban ZBL be scoped;
d. That Bushland’s appeal be adjourned until such time as the Parties are ready to proceed and advise the Tribunal of this; and
e. That Ontario’s appeal of the Township’s Zoning By-law No. 2022-053 (“Rural ZBL”) be dismissed.
3The lands to which these appeals apply are the following:
a. Via-Ru Lands: Via-Ru owns the lands known municipally as 6365 Highway 9 in the Township, located at the northwest corner of the Schomberg settlement area, with approximately 105 metres of frontage along Highway 9 and a total area of approximately 1.47 hectares (14,760 square metres). The Via-Ru Lands are currently vacant. The abutting lands to the south and west form part of Osin Lions Park.
b. Bushland Lands: Bushland owns the lands known municipally as 13245 Jane Street in the Township. Approximately 11 hectares of the Bushland Lands are the subject of a current Draft Plan of Subdivision Application.
c. Ontario Lands: Ontario owns the lands known municipally as 4670 18th Sideroad in the Township.
BACKGROUND
4On June 26, 2017, the Township adopted the Urban ZBL for all lands within the Schomberg and King City Urban Areas. The Urban ZBL replaces the application of Zoning By-law No. 74-53 to the Via-Ru Lands and the Bushland Lands. The Urban ZBL zoned the Via-Ru Lands as “Future Use” and the Bushland Lands as “Future Use” and “Environmental Protection”. Via-Ru and Bushland appealed the Urban ZBL on the basis that it significantly restricted uses on their respective land.
5On September 26, 2022, the Township passed the Rural ZBL to replace Zoning By-law No. 74-53. A number of appeals were filed (by the Appellants listed in Schedule 1 to this Decision) against the passing of the Rural ZBL pursuant to s. 34(19) of the Act, which were before the Tribunal in the file OLT-22-004723. Ontario was one of those Appellants and appealed the entirety of the Rural ZBL. On December 6, 2023, the Tribunal issued a Decision and Order in case no. OLT-22-004723 directing that all issues in Ontario’s appeal pertaining to the lands zoned “Future Use” in the Rural ZBL be heard together with case no. OLT-22-003300.
6On May 10, 2024, the Tribunal issued a Decision and Order in case no. OLT-22-004723 to introduce a new “Hamlet Residential Future” zone and rezone the Ontario Lands from “Future Use (F)” to “Hamlet Residential Future (HRF)”.
7A hearing was scheduled for OLT-22-003300 and Ontario’s appeal in OLT-22-004723 to proceed on November 12 to November 15, 2024. On November 8, 2024, the Parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement agreement. As a result, this hearing in writing took place to allow the Tribunal to consider the settlement and approve it if warranted.
HEARING
8In support of the settlement agreement reached between the Appellants and the Township, the Tribunal received a Motion Record, jointly from the Appellants, dated November 8, 2024, which included a Notice of Motion and an Affidavit by Michael Bissett, Land Use Planner, sworn on November 8, 2024, with accompanying exhibits. The Curriculum Vitae and signed Acknowledgement of Expert Duty form for Mr. Bissett were included with the Motion Record, which confirmed his expertise in the area of Land Use Planning. Mr. Bissett is relied upon by the Tribunal, and, without objection, his opinions are qualified as expert opinion evidence in the field of Land Use Planning.
Via-Ru’s Appeal
9Mr. Bissett testified that Via-Ru and the Township have agreed to a set of site-specific modifications to the Urban ZBL applicable to the Via-Ru Lands (“Proposed Modifications”), which fully resolves the Via-Ru appeal. The Proposed Modifications are as follows:
a. Adding a new zone “Residential Future”, “RF” Zone Symbol and Description of the Zone to “Table 5.1: Establishment of Zones”;
b. Modifying Table 9.1 to add the “Residential Future” zone, with the Zoning Symbol “RF”;
c. Modifying Table 9.2 to add the “RF” Symbol with the permitted uses of “Agricultural use” and “Single-detached dwelling”;
d. Modifying Table 9.3 to add the “RF” Symbol with specific lot and building requirements pertaining to the RF zone; and
e. Modifying Schedule A1 to apply the new “RF” zone to the entirety of the Via-Ru Lands.
10As Mr. Bissett explained, the Proposed Modifications are largely technical in nature as they relate to the naming of the applicable zone. Substantively, the RF zone would remain consistent with the intent of the original Urban ZBL. The RF zone would permit agricultural uses and a single detached residential dwelling, with the intention that the Via-Ru Lands be rezoned in the future for residential purposes and environmental protection in accordance with the Our King Official Plan (“King OP”). The inclusion of the “Residential Future” (RF) zone terminology as opposed to “Future Use” (F) provides clarity with respect to implementing residential and environmental protection on the Via-Ru Lands, which are designated Neighbourhood and Village Natural Heritage System on Schedule D3 to the King OP (permitting residential uses within the Neighbourhood designation).
11With respect to the applicable legislative tests, Mr. Bissett testified that:
a. The Proposed Modifications have appropriate regard for matters of Provincial Interest.
b. The Proposed Modifications are consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) (“PPS”). PPS policies 2.3.1.1, 2.3.1.2, and 2.4.1.2 provide for growth to be focused in settlement areas to make efficient use of resources with appropriate standards to facilitate redevelopment in settlement areas and strategic growth areas. In this respect, the Proposed Modifications provide clarity that the subject area will be the focus of future residential development through a future development application that will provide precise delineations of residential, environmental protection, and other zones as appropriate to reflect the proposed development.
c. The Proposed Modifications conform to and do not conflict with the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (2009), which would be considered in detail at the time of future site-specific applications.
d. The Proposed Modifications conform to the Region of York Official Plan (2022), which establishes boundaries of the Towns and Villages and allows some level of intensification to be supported in Towns and Villages by appropriate infrastructure and other criteria (Policies 2.1.2 and 4.5.1).
e. The Proposed Modifications conform to the King OP, and in particular Policy 9.1.6.4, which states “that the policies of the Plan will be implemented via the zoning by-laws, but it is recognized that it will be appropriate for some policies to be implemented through zoning by-law amendments processed as part of development applications.” The proposed RF zoning will provide clarity with respect to the residential permissions for the Via-Ru Lands, with matters relating to scale and compatibility in accordance with these policies to be confirmed through a future site-specific rezoning application.
12Overall, Mr. Bissett opined that the Proposed Modifications represent good planning. Moreover, the modification to include the proposed RF nomenclature is in the public interest as it will provide clarity to the public that the future use of the lands will consist of residential uses and related environmental protection and other uses in accordance with the King OP. He recommended that the Tribunal approve the Proposed Modifications to the Urban ZBL and allow the change of the Via-Ru Lands zoned Future Use (F) to Residential Future (RF) and add specific regulations pertaining to the Residential Future (RF) zone, as set out in Schedule 2 to this Decision.
Bushland’s Appeal
13As part of the settlement agreement, the Parties agreed to scope the Bushland Appeal of the Urban ZBL to the Bushland Lands. Settlement discussions in that appeal are in progress, and the Parties requested that the Tribunal adjourn the hearing of the Bushland Appeal to allow for continued settlement discussions.
Ontario’s Appeal
14As part of the settlement agreement, Ontario agreed to withdraw its Appeal.
TRIBUNAL’S FINDINGS
15The Tribunal is satisfied by the evidence provided by Mr. Bissett, through his uncontested testimony provided by way of Affidavit. The Tribunal finds that the Proposed Modifications to the Urban ZBL, as shown in Schedule 2 to this Decision, align with good land use planning, satisfy all legislative tests pertaining to this matter, and warrant approval. With respect to the scoping and adjournment of Bushland’s Appeal, the Tribunal agrees that such a scoping and adjournment is appropriate.
ORDER
16THE Tribunal Orders that in accordance with subsection 34(26) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended:
a. The appeal by Via-Ru Limited of the Township of King Zoning By-law No. 2017-66 (“Urban ZBL”) is allowed, in part, as it relates to lands municipally known as 6365 Highway 9 in Schomberg in the Township of King, Region of York.
b. The Urban ZBL is hereby amended in the following ways, and as attached to this Decision as Schedule 2:
- Add a new zone “Residential – Future”, “RF” Zone Symbol and Description of the Zone to “Table 5.1: Establishment of Zones” as follows:
| Zone | Zone Symbol | Description of the Zone |
|---|---|---|
| d) Other Zones | ||
| v) Residential Future | RF | Permits existing uses, agricultural uses, one detached dwelling unit, and is intended to be rezoned in the future for residential dwellings, and environmental protection in accordance with the Official Plan. |
Modify Table 9.1 to add the “Residential – Future” zone with the Zoning Symbol “RF”.
Modify Table 9.2 to add the “RF” Symbol with the “Agricultural use” and “Single-detached dwelling” use.
Modify Table 9.3 to add the “RF” Symbol with Lot and Building requirements as set out in Schedule A hereto.
Modify Schedule A4 and Schedule A13 to apply the new “RF” zone to the entirety of the Via Ru Lands.
c. The appeal by Via-Ru Limited is dismissed in all other respects.
d. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk to format, as may be necessary, and assign a by-law number to Schedule 2 for record-keeping purposes.
e. This Order and the approval of portions of the Urban ZBL, as attached hereto as Schedule 2, is without prejudice to the disposition of any other appeal of the Urban ZBL and any unapproved portions of the Urban ZBL, such that if those appeals proceed to a subsequent hearing or motion, either on their own or as may be consolidated with other proceedings, the Township will not take the position that the Tribunal ought not to approve amendments to the Urban ZBL on the basis that such amendments deviate from, or are inconsistent with, the amendments attached hereto as Schedule 2, as brought into force by this Order. However, this does not affect the Township’s right to assert that the Urban ZBL, as amended by Schedule 2 hereto, to the extent brought into force by this Order, should be applied to specific sites or areas without amendments on the basis that doing so is consistent with the Planning Act and Provincial policies, conforms to Provincial and municipal Official Plans, and/or constitutes good planning.
17THE TRIBUNAL FURTHER ORDERS that:
a. The appeal by 611428 Ontario Limited of the Township of King Zoning By-law No. 2022-053, which is Tribunal file no. OLT-22-004723, is dismissed in its entirety.
b. The appeal by Bushland Heights Limited of the Urban ZBL (“Bushland’s Appeal”) is scoped to only the Bushland Lands, namely approximately 18 hectares of lands municipally known as 13245 Jane Street in the Township of King, Region of York.
c. The hearing of Bushland’s Appeal is adjourned until such time as one or both of the Township and/or Bushland request that the matter be scheduled.
18The Member may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise with the implementation of this Order.
“Bita M. Rajaee”
Bita M. Rajaee
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
| Appellant | Counsel/Representative* |
|---|---|
| 1. Vito Pacifico | Milovan Prelevic |
| 2. Robert Scheinberg B & D Love Inc. | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |
| 3. 2731961 Ontario Inc. | Michael Cara, Justine Reyes |
| 4. 1186675 Ontario Ltd. | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |
| 5. Heste Corporation | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |
| 6. Deborah and David Solomon Weis | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |
| 7. Len Payne, Rideau Leasing Corp. | David White |
| 8. Zao Wang, 84 Charing Cross International Inc. | Amber Stewart, Barry Horosko |
| 9. Lloydtown Farms Ltd. | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |
| 10. 611428 Ontario Limited | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |
| 11. Leading Edge Property Developments Inc. | David White |
| 12. Intentionally left blank | |
| 13. Shawn Peebles, Northern Wide Plank Flooring Inc. | David White |
| 14. Tony Nicoletti | Self-represented* |
| 15. 2593033 Ontario Limited (c/o Weston Garden Centre) | Alex Lusty |
| 16. Penwest Holdings Limited | Michael Cara, Justine Reyes |
| 17. Bill and William Bowles Harris | Steven Ferri, Alexandra Whyte, Brendan Ruddick |