Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: April 04, 2024 CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004723

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: Tony Nicoletti v. King (Township)

Heard: March 8, 2024, in writing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel/Representative*
Tony Nicoletti	Self-Represented*
Township of King	Tom Halinski, Jasmine C.M. Fraser

DECISION DELIVERED BY BITA M. RAJAEE AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1Tony Nicoletti (“Appellant 14”, as identified in Schedule 1 to this Decision) appealed the passing of the Township of King’s (“Township”) new Comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 2022-053 (“ZBL 2022-053”), passed on September 26, 2022, on a site-specific basis, related to lands known municipally as 675 Kettleby Road, in the Township (“Subject Property”).

2Appellant 14 is one of 17 Appellants who appealed the passing of ZBL 2022-053. A number of Case Management Conferences pertaining to this matter have taken place on March 14, 2023, June 9, 2023, October 5, 2023, and January 15, 2024. Two phased hearings were scheduled to address the various appeals, with the second phase to take place on March 11-22, 2024. Prior to this Hearing, wherein Appellant 14’s Appeal was to be addressed, the Tribunal was advised that Appellant 14 and the Township had reached a settlement with respect to this matter. As such, this hearing in writing took place to allow the Tribunal to consider and approve the site-specific modifications to ZBL 2022-053, if warranted.

HEARING

3In support of the settlement agreement reached between Appellant 14 and the Township, the Tribunal received an Affidavit by Harry Froussios, Land Use Planner, sworn on February 28, 2024, with accompanying exhibits. The Curriculum Vitae and Acknowledgement of Expert Duty form for Mr. Froussios were included and confirm his expertise in the area of Land Use Planning. Mr. Froussios is relied upon by the Tribunal and, without objection, his opinions are qualified as expert opinion evidence in the field of land use planning.

4No other Party filed any materials with respect to this matter.

5The Subject Property is a generally rectangular-shaped parcel, with a lot area of approximately 9.49 hectares. It has approximately 205 metres of frontage along Jane Street, and 385 metres of frontage along Kettleby Road. The majority of the Subject Property is flat with no significant natural or built features or natural hazard areas. Lands in agricultural production occupy the largest area of the Subject Property. The southern portion of the Subject Property is regulated by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, as there is a watercourse that runs along the southern property boundary, together with mature vegetation (woodlot) along the north side of the watercourse.

6In his Affidavit, Mr. Froussios explained that ZBL 2022-053 proposes to rezone the majority of the Subject Property to Hamlet Rural (“HU”), with the southern portion of the lands being rezoned to Oak Ridges Moraine Feature Protection (“ORF”):

a. The HU Zone permits primarily agricultural uses, a variety of on-farm diversified uses, and specified accessory uses, including bed and breakfast, home industry, and home occupation.

b. The ORF Zone permits uses such as conservation projects and flood and erosion control projects; fish, wildlife, and forest management; low-intensity recreational use; and transportation, infrastructure, and utilities uses. Agricultural uses are also permitted, subject to Special Provision (4), which does not permit this use within a key natural heritage feature.

7Appellant 14 appealed ZBL 2022-053, as it related to the Subject Property, on the basis that the proposed HU Zone does not conform to the Township’s Official Plan and the site-specific policies that apply to the Subject Property; fails to conform to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; and does not recognize or permit previous agricultural uses and standards for greenhouses previously permitted by the Township’s Zoning By-law 74-53 (“Former ZBL”), which was replaced by ZBL 2022-053. The Appeal also sought clarification regarding the permissions for a vertical farm building in the HU Zone.

8As a result of the Settlement Agreement, Appellant 14 and the Township have agreed to request that the Tribunal amend ZBL 2022-053 to add a Site-Specific Exception Zone for the Subject Property (“Proposed Modification”), which provides that the base provisions of the HU Zone continue to apply, except that certain additional uses and a maximum building height of 11 metres are permitted on the HU-zoned portion of the Subject Property. For the portion of the Subject Property zoned ORF, all provisions of the ORF Zone shall continue to apply.

9The additional uses permitted are primarily agricultural and agricultural-related uses that were permitted on the Subject Property through the Former ZBL. However, as Mr. Froussios explained, they are subject to Special Provision (1) of Table 6-2 of ZBL 2022-053, which indicates that the total maximum ground floor area of all uses subject to this provision shall be 500 square metres per lot. Additional on-farm diversified uses are also permitted, subject to Special Provisions (1) and (4) of Table 6-2.

10In his sworn Affidavit, Mr. Froussios explained in detail, citing numerous policies, how the Proposed Modification:

a. Has appropriate regard for matters of Provincial Interest pursuant to Section 2 of the Planning Act;

b. Is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020;

c. Conforms with the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020;

d. Conforms with the Greenbelt Plan (2017);

e. Conforms with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan;

f. Conforms with the York Region Official Plan, both the 2010 version (in effect at the time of the adoption of ZBL 2022-053) and the 2022 version (currently in force); and

g. Conforms with Our King: The Township of King Official Plan, 2019.

11Mr. Froussios concluded that the Proposed Modification has regard for matters of Provincial Interest and is consistent with and/or conforms with provincial policy, regional policy, and local policy. Moreover, it is based on sound land use planning principles, and is in the public interest. He recommended that the Tribunal approve the Proposed Modification as arrived at by way of settlement agreement.

TRIBUNAL’S FINDINGS

12The Tribunal is satisfied by the evidence provided by Mr. Froussios, through his uncontroverted testimony provided by way of Affidavit. The Tribunal finds that the Proposed Modification to ZBL 2022-053 aligns with good land use planning, satisfies all legislative tests pertaining to this matter, and warrants approval.

ORDER

13THE Tribunal Orders as follows:

a. In accordance with subsection 34(26) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, the Appeal by Tony Nicoletti (“Appellant 14”) of the Township of King Rural Countryside Zoning By-law No. 2022-053 (“ZBL 2022-053”) is allowed, in part, and ZBL 2022-053 is hereby amended in the form attached to this Order as “Schedule 2" and ZBL 2022-053 shall be amended in accordance with “Schedule 2” immediately upon the issuance of this Decision and Order.

b. 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.

c. The Appeal by Appellant 14 is dismissed in all other respects.

d. This Order and the approval of portions of ZBL 2022-053, as attached hereto as “Schedule 2,” is without prejudice to the disposition of any other appeal of ZBL 2022-053 and any unapproved portions of ZBL 2022-053, 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 ZBL 2022-053 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 ZBL 2022-053, 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.

14The 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, Mandy Ng
3. 2731961 Ontario Inc. | Michael Cara, Daniel Artenosi
4. 1186675 Ontario Ltd. | Steven Ferri, Mandy Ng
5. Heste Corporation | Steven Ferri, Mandy Ng
6. Deborah and David Solomon Weis | Steven Ferri, Mandy Ng
7. Len Payne, Rideau Leasing Corp. | David White
8. Zao Wang, 84 Charing Cross International Inc., 1000124547 Ontario Inc. | Amber Stewart, Barry Horosko
9. Lloydtown Farms Ltd. | Steven Ferri, Mandy Ng
10. 611428 Ontario Limited | Steven Ferri, Mandy Ng
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, Daniel Artenosi
17. Bill and William Bowles Harris | Steven Ferri, Mandy Ng

SCHEDULE 2

Proposed Site Specific Zoning for 675 Kettleby Road

Part 10 is amended to add the following new special provision Exception Zone No. 101, as follows:

101

HU, ORF

1. For the lands identified in the HU zone, all provisions of the HU zone shall apply, except that:

a) The following additional uses shall be permitted:

i) Community Garden;

ii) Farmers Market;

iii) Farm Feed and Supply Store;

iv) Greenhouse, Commercial;

v) Recreational Use;

vi) Trail;

vii) Winery, Cidery, Distillery, or Micro-Brewery;

b) The uses identified in 1. a) of this exception shall be subject to Special Provision (1) of Table 6-2.

c) The following additional uses shall be permitted as on-farm diversified uses:

i) Kennel;

ii) Pet day care;

d) The uses identified in 1. c) of this exception shall be subject to Special Provisions (1) and (4) of Table 6-2.

e) Commercial patio shall be permitted as an accessory use to the Winery, Cidery, Distillery and Microbrewery use, subject to Special Provisions (1) and (4) of Table 6-2.

f) Notwithstanding Table 6-3, all lot and building requirements shall apply, except that the Maximum Height shall be 11.0 m.

2. For the lands identified in the ORF zone, all provisions of the ORF zone shall apply.

Schedules A3 and A12 are each amended to add the corresponding Exception Zone No. 101 as an overlay, as follows:

56177847.1