Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 02, 2024

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004674

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Valrose Paris Limited

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – refusal or neglect to make a decision

Description: Zoning By-law amendment to facilitate the development of a subdivision

Reference Number: ZBA35-22-SL

Property Address: 848 Watt’s Pond Road

Municipality: County of Brant

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004674

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004674

OLT Case Name: Valrose Paris Limited v. Brant (County)

Heard: April 15, 2024 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Valrose Paris Limited

Russell Cheeseman Stephanie Fleming

County of Brant

Thomas Sanderson Rochelle Welchman

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. DIXON ON April 15, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1This Decision and Order arises from an appeal by Valrose Paris Limited (“Appellant”) pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”), concerning Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA35-22-SL (“Application”) in the County of Brant (“County”).

2The Application seeks to facilitate the development of 230 single-detached dwellings and 64 townhouse dwellings on lands known municipally as 848 Watt’s Pond Road in the County (“Subject Lands”).

BACKGROUND

3In a previous Order issued on November 12, 2020, the Tribunal approved a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”), Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”), and corresponding conditions of draft approval for the Subject Lands. The DPS provides for 12.45 hectares (“ha”) of residential land, 21.53 ha of parkland and open spaces, 4.45 ha of agricultural land, and a 0.83 ha stormwater management pond on the Subject Lands.

4While the Appellant was undertaking to fulfil the DPS conditions approved by the Tribunal, the Parties determined that an additional ZBA would be required to facilitate the proposed development by:

a) Establishing a minimum required exterior side-yard setback of 3.0 metres (“m”), whereas the existing permissions require 4.5 m;

b) Clarifying the requirements for minimum interior side yard setbacks to ensure that a minimum separation distance of 1.8 m is maintained between dwellings through the pairing of 0.6 m side yards with abutting 1.2 m side yards; and

c) Establishing a maximum permitted building height of 11.0 m for all dwellings, whereas the existing permissions are 10.5 m.

5Accordingly, the Application was submitted on July 25, 2022, and deemed complete on August 24, 2022. The County did not make a decision on the Application within the statutory timeframe established by the Act and the Appeal was filed on that basis.

SETTLEMENT

6Since the Appeal was filed, the Appellant, County, and Grand River Conservation Authority worked collaboratively to reach a settlement of the Appeal that, among other things, ensures the appropriate protection of an identified great blue heron habitat and nesting area in the vicinity of the Subject Lands. On March 18, 2024, the Parties executed Minutes of Settlement (“Settlement”), which were marked as Exhibit 5.

7In support of the Settlement, the Parties provided the Tribunal with the sworn Affidavit of Matt Johnston, which was marked as Exhibit 3.

8Mr. Johnston is a Registered Professional Planner and a Principal with UrbanSolutions Planning & Land Development Consultants Inc. He has over 20 years of experience as a land use planner and has been qualified by the Tribunal to provide expert opinion evidence in that regard on several occasions. He was so qualified again by the Tribunal at this Hearing.

ANALYSIS

9Mr. Johnston proffered that the three modifications listed in Paragraph [4] of this Decision apply only to the R1-54 Zone, which is a site-specific zone applicable only to the Subject Lands. In all other regards, he proffered, the Application is in keeping with the previous approvals granted by the Tribunal. Accordingly, it is his opinion that the Application:

a) Has appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act;

b) Is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”);

c) Conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019, as amended (“Growth Plan”);

d) Conforms to the County Official Plan (“COP”); and

e) Conforms to the North West Paris Area Plan (“Secondary Plan”).

10Mr. Johnston proffered that the development proposal facilitated by the Application directly implements the Secondary Plan’s preferred land use concept, ensuring that existing natural heritage features on the Subject Lands are located within corresponding blocks to ensure their continued protection and long-term ecological function.

11Mr. Johnston further proffered that the Application will ensure adequate flexibility during the construction and design stage of the development, achieve drainage standards, increase the distance between driveways to provide more opportunities for on-street parking, ensure appropriate grading and stormwater management controls, maintain the existing streetscape pattern, and implement a previously approved grading plan.

12In Mr. Johnston’s opinion, the Application represents good land use planning.

FINDINGS

13Based on the uncontroverted professional opinion evidence of Mr. Johnston, the Tribunal finds that the Application has appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act, is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the Growth Plan, COP, and Secondary Plan, represents good planning, and is in the public interest. As required by the Act, the Tribunal has had regard for the decisions of Council for the County.

ORDER

14THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Appeal is allowed and By-law No. 61-16 of the County of Brant is hereby amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order. The Tribunal authorises the municipal clerk of the County of Brant to assign a number to this by-law for record keeping purposes.

“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.

ATTACHMENT 1

BY-LAW NUMBER xxx-23 –

• of -

THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF BRANT

To amend By-Law Number 61-16, the Zoning By-Law for the County of Brant, as amended, Valrose Paris Limited, 848 Watt’s Pond Road, County of Brant.

WHEREAS an application was received from UrbanSolutions Planning & Land Development Consults Inc., on behalf of Valrose Paris Limited, Owner of the lands legally known as Concession 2 Part of Lots 32 and 33, geographic Former Township of South Dumfries, Count of Brant, located at 848 Watt’s Pond Road, County of Brant, proposing to amend the site-specific provisions of Residential Singles (R1-54).

AND WHEREAS the Planning Act empowers a municipality to pass By-Laws prohibiting the use of land and the erection, location and use of buildings or structures, except as set out in the By-Law;

AND WHEREAS this By-Law is in conformity with the Official Plan for the County of Brant (2012);

AND WHEREAS the Planning and Development Committee of the Corporation of the County of Brant has recommended approval of this By-Law;

AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the County of Brant deems it to be desirable for the future development and use of the lands described above;

NOW THEREFORE THE ONTARIO LAND TRIBUNAL HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1. THAT Section 8.3 Special Exceptions R1 Zone, applicable to Zone Code R1-54, is hereby amended as follows:

R1-54

Notwithstanding any provision of this By-law to the contrary, within any area zoned R1-54 on Schedule “A” hereto, the following development standards shall apply:

• Interior Side Yard Setback (Minimum): 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 metres on the other side, provided that any side yard that is less than 1.2 metres shall abut a side yard that is a minimum of 1.2 metres. Any permitted encroachment shall be at least 0.3 metres to the lot line. On lots with an interior lot line abutting a rear yard, a minimum setback of 1.2 metres shall be required.

• Height (Maximum): 11.0 metres

• Exterior Side Yard (Minimum): 3.0 metres

All other provisions of the By-Law shall apply.

2. THAT this By-Law shall come into force on the day it is approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal.

ENACTED AND PASSED this 2nd day of May, 2024.