Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 04, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002285 (Formerly PL210032)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 4005 Hickory Drive Ltd.
Appellant: Calloway REIT (Mississauga) Inc.
Appellant: Choice Properties REIT
Appellant: First Capital (Meadowvale) Corporation and others
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. CD.03REI - OPA 115
Municipality: City of Mississauga
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002285
Legacy Case No.: PL210032
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002285
Legacy File No.: PL210032
OLT Case Name: Calloway REIT (Mississauga) Inc. v. Mississauga (City)
Heard: December 12, 2023 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
City of Mississauga (“City”)
A. Biggart L. Magi
Sheridan Retail Inc., Prime Real Estate Group Inc.
L. Johnston M. Nemanic G. Mutlu
Calloway REIT (Mississauga), First Capital (Meadowvale) Corporation
M. Laskin D. Bronskill (in absentia)
Choice Properties REIT
K.Sliwa M. Reedijk
The Children’s Centre South Common Court Inc.
P. Bottos
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION DELIVERED BY ERIC S. CROWE AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal convened a Settlement Hearing with respect to the Phase 2 appeals brought by Calloway REIT (Mississauga) Inc. et al. (“Appellants”) pursuant to section 17(24) of the Planning Act (“Act”) for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”).
2The policies of OPA 115 were the subject of a statutory public meeting held on February 3, 2020, and a recommendation report was brought to City Council on September 28, 2020, which addressed the feedback and comments received through the consultation process and recommended a revised set of policies for approval.
3OPA 115 included policies that applied to the following nodes:
Central Erin Mills Major Node;
Meadowvale Community Node;
South Common Community Node;
Sheridan Community Node;
Rathburn-Applewood Community Node; and
Malton Community Node
4OPA 115 included amendments to two portions of the Mississauga Official Plan (“MOP”):
Changes to Section 13.2 – Central Erin Mills, in Chapter 13, Major Nodes (Exhibit 2A); and
The addition of Sub-section 14.1.7 – Mall-based Community Nodes, in Chapter 14, Community Nodes (Exhibit 2B).
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
5The Appellants and the City (collectively, the “Parties”) have agreed to a comprehensive resolution of the appeal and wish to reflect their agreement herein, before the Tribunal for approval.
6The Parties request that the Tribunal should allow the appeal of OPA 115 except (i) the appeal to Policy 14.1.7.1.3 related to Issues 4(D)(ii) and Issue 9 of the Phase II Issues is adjourned sine die; and (ii) policies 13.2.5.1 to 13.2.5.6 and 14.1.7.4.1 to 14.1.7.4.8, which were the subject of the Phase I proceeding in this matter, are not affected by this Order (attached as Attachment 1).
WITNESSES
7Evidence in support of the proposed application was provided by Andrew Davidge, a land use planner. Mr. Davidge, on consent, was qualified to provide expert land use planning opinion evidence.
8The Tribunal marked the following documents as Exhibits:
Exhibit 1: Affidavit of Andrew Davidge;
Exhibit 2A: OPA 115- Major Node Policies - Chapter 13; and
Exhibit 2B: OPA 115- Mall based Community Node Policies - Chapter 14.
Policy Environment
9Mr. Davidge outlined the various policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”), the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (“Growth Plan”), Regional Official Plan 1996 (“ROP 1996”) and Regional Official Plan 2022 (“ROP 2022”) and the MOP. Mr. Davidge focused on growth management, intensification, healthy complete communities and active transportation policies.
10Mr. Davidge explained that the Growth Plan prioritizes intensification and higher densities in Strategic Growth Areas to make efficient use of land and infrastructure and support transit viability.
11Mr. Davidge advised the ROP 1996’s objectives on growth management direct a significant portion of growth to the built-up areas through intensification, particularly to the urban growth centres, intensification corridors and major transit service areas.
12Mr. Davidge advised the revisions in ROP 2022 add a new term, Strategic Growth Areas, to areas where growth is to be directed. Strategic Growth Areas are identified on Schedule E-2 of the ROP 2022. Among others, Central Erin Mills, Meadowvale, South Common, Sheridan, Malton and Rathwood-Applewood are identified Nodes/Centres. The Strategic Growth Areas establish a hierarchy for which the highest densities and scale of development will be directed:
Urban Growth Centres
Major Transit Station Areas
Nodes/Centres
Intensification Corridors.
13Mr. Davidge advised the MOP establishes a City Structure which is the basis of the following urban hierarchy;
Downtown
Major Nodes
Community Nodes
Corporate Centres
Neighbourhoods and Employment Areas
Special Purpose Areas.
14Mr. Davidge testified, as intensification areas, the MOP establishes that the major Nodes and community Nodes will be planned to reflect their role in the City Structure hierarchy and that development will promote the qualities of complete communities.
15In regard to healthy complete communities, Mr. Davidge advised the PPS promotes the creation of healthy, liveable and safe communities. An important part of this direction is land use patterns that promote a mix of housing, including affordable housing, employment, recreation, parks and open spaces, and transportation choices that increase the use of active transportation and transit before other modes of travel.
16Mr. Davidge advised the Growth Plan establishes that complete communities support quality of life and human health by encouraging the use of active transportation and providing high quality public open space, adequate parkland, opportunities for recreation, and access to local and healthy food. They provide convenient access to an appropriate mix of jobs, local services and public service facilities, as well as a balance of jobs and housing to reduce the need for long distance commuting.
17Mr. Davidge stated among the objectives for intensification listed in the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022 are those to reduce dependence on the automobile through the development of mixed-use, transit-supportive, pedestrian-friendly urban environments and to achieve a diverse and compatible mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses to support vibrant neighbourhoods.
18In concluding, Mr. Davidge submits the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022 include a section dedicated to Healthy Communities and the Built Environment in the implementation section. This section outlines a conception of healthy communities and links different policy areas within the broader plan to healthy community objectives. It identifies the elements of the built environment that impact healthy communities as: density, service proximity, land use mix, street connectivity, streetscape characteristics, and efficient parking. It indicates that health assessments will be incorporated into the development and review process.
19In Mr. Davidge’s opinion, the proposed development is consistent with the policies of the PPS, conforms with the Growth Plan, conforms to the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022, and is appropriate in the context of the policies of the MOP.
EVALUATION OF THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL
Revisions to OPA 115 Policies Concerning Central Erin Mills Major Node Section
20Mr. Davidge highlighted several revisions to OPA 115 policies concerning the Central Erin Mills Node section. In regard to height, it has been revised to decrease the required minimum height of a building without a residential component from two storeys to one. Regarding density, the Floor Space Index (“FSI”) policy has been revised from establishing a maximum FSI of 2.75 to be calculated across the entire area of the Node, excluding public and private roads, to limit the FSI on individual properties to an FSI of 4.
21Regarding Urban Design, Mr. Davidge advised the Policy 13.2.4.1 establishes that a range of building types and heights will be provided to create diversity of urban form and housing choice. Mr. Davidge explained the language regarding mid-rise buildings not being connected to tall buildings was removed, as there was uncertainty as to how it would be interpreted and whether it would prevent buildings of different typology from being connected by underground structures, which was not the policy’s intent. Policy 13.2.4.4 was revised to change the standard from “maximize” to “promote adequate” natural light, sky views and privacy with the intent of a more flexible standard.
22Regarding mixed use designation, various policies have been revised, including redevelopment permitted uses, maintenance of the non-residential planned function of the mixed-use designation, and expansion of retail and service commercial uses.
23Regarding Transportation policies Mr. Davidge advised policies have been revised in regard to well-connected road systems, establishing a maximum block size of 80 metres (“m”) by 180 m, or equivalent perimeter to a maximum of 520 m, a limited number of private roads and phased basis requiring the replacement of surface parking areas by structured parking.
Summary
24In Mr. Davidge’s opinion, the revisions made in the Settlement Proposal pertaining to policies in Section 13.2 of the MOP, both individually and taken as a whole with the rest of the amendment, represent good planning and are appropriate for the development of Central Erin Mills Major Node. They are consistent with the policies of the PPS, conform with the Growth Plan, conform to the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022, and are appropriate in the context of the policies of the MOP.
Revisions to OPA 115 Policies Concerning Mall-based Community Nodes
25Mr. Davidge highlighted several revisions to OPA 115 policies concerning Mall-based Community Nodes. According to Mr. Davidge, a general policy was added to reassure the Appellants in this matter, that the policies included elsewhere in the OPA did not represent requirements that exceeded the authority of the municipality.
26Regarding height, Mr. Davidge advised the maximum building height has been increased from 15 to 18 storeys. Regarding density, he highlighted the increase in FSI maximum that applies to individual sites to replace the approach of establishing a maximum FSI node-wide with a further policy indicating how this should be interpreted for an individual site.
27A revision to replace “employment” with “commercial” is the same as is made concerning Central Erin Mills Major Node. Regarding Urban Design, Mr. Davidge advised removing the definition of a mid-rise building, edges and setbacks relating to the scale of “other” buildings and widths of roads, promoting rather than maximizing light, and revising separation distance from 40 m to 30 m.
28Revisions also included mixed use designation, office uses, environment and transportation policies.
Summary
29In Mr. Davidge’s opinion, the revisions made in the Settlement Proposal pertaining to policies in Section 14.1.7 of the MOP, both individually and taken as a whole together with the rest of the amendment, represent good planning and are appropriate for the development of the Mall-based Community Nodes. They are consistent with the policies of the PPS, conform with the Growth Plan, conform to the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022, and are appropriate in the context of the policies of the MOP.
CONCLUSION
30In Mr. Davidge’s overall opinion, the Settlement Proposal revises the policies of OPA 115. OPA 115 is a set of Official Plan policy amendments that provide direction on the evolution of Mall-based Community Nodes to realize appropriate intensification, preserve and revitalize the planned function of these important areas and realize healthy, complete communities. The revisions made in the Settlement Proposal pertaining to policies in Sections 13.2 and 14.1.7 of the MOP, both individually and taken as a whole together with the rest of the amendment, represent good planning and are appropriate for the development of the Nodes in question. They are consistent with the policies of the PPS, conform with the Growth Plan, conform to the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022, and are appropriate in the context of the policies of the MOP.
FINDINGS AND DISPOSITION
31In the absence of any planning evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal finds and accepts the land use planning evidence and expert opinion provided by Mr. Davidge, that the proposed Official Plan Amendment represents good planning and is appropriate for the development of the Nodes, is consistent with the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, conforms with the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, conforms to the ROP 1996 and ROP 2022, and is appropriate in the context of the policies of the MOP.
32The Tribunal acknowledges the cooperation between the Parties to reach a Settlement.
33Additionally, since the conclusion of the merit hearing held by the Tribunal, and prior to the issuance of this Decision, the Tribunal has reached out to the Parties to seek input if the passing of Bill 150, Planning Statute Law Amendment Act, 2023, which enacts the Official Plan Adjustments Act, 2023 (“OPAA”) and received Royal Assent on December 6, 2023, had any impacts on the potential outcome of this matter. None of the Parties have provided responses to state that Bill 150 impacts the matter that was heard. As there has been no response provided, the Tribunal treats this as confirmation that there is no Bill 150 impact.
ORDER
34THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeals to Official Plan Amendment 115 (“OPA 115) are allowed, in part, and OPA 115 is modified, and approved in accordance with Exhibit 1 to the Affidavit of Andrew Davidge, attached hereto as Attachment 1, except that:
(i) The appeal to Policy 14.1.7.1.3 related to Issues 4(D)(ii) and Issue 9 of the Phase II Issues is adjourned sine die; and
(ii) Policies 13.2.5.1 to 13.2.5.6 and 14.1.7.4.1 to 14.1.7.4.8, which were the subject of the Phase I proceeding in this matter, are not affected by this Order.
“Eric S. Crowe”
ERIC S. CROWE
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