King’s Bay Golf Club Limited v. Kawartha Lakes (City), 2024 CanLII 65200

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: July 04, 2024

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000815

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: King’s Bay Golf Club Limited

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: Proposed redevelopment of existing golf course into 44 lots for single detached dwellings and open space

Reference Number: D01-2022-003

Property Address: 27 Stub Road

Municipality: City of Kawartha Lakes

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000815

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000815

OLT Case Name: King’s Bay Golf Club Limited v. Kawartha Lakes (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: King’s Bay Golf Club Limited

Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application – failure to make a decision

Description: Proposed redevelopment of existing golf course into 44 lots for single detached dwellings and open space

Reference Number: D05-2022-001

Property Address: 27 Stub Road

Municipality: City of Kawartha Lakes

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000816

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000815

OLT Case Name: King’s Bay Golf Club Limited v. Kawartha Lakes (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: King’s Bay Golf Club Limited

Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – failure to make a decision

Description: Proposed redevelopment of existing golf course into 44 lots for single detached dwellings

Reference Number: D06-2022-001

Property Address: 27 Stub Road

Municipality: City of Kawartha Lakes

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000817

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000815

OLT Case Name: King’s Bay Golf Club Limited v. Kawartha Lakes (City)

Heard: June 25, 2024 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
King’s Bay Golf Club Limited (“Applicant”)	Steven C. Ferri Mandy Ng Jacob R.W. Damstra
City of Kawartha Lakes (“City”)	David Germain

DECISION DELIVERED BY K.R. ANDREWS AND J. DENYES AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Final Order

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1This Appeal arises following a non-decision by the City with respect to applications for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”), Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) and Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”).

2The lands subject to the applications are located east of Stub Road, surrounding Southcrest Drive and Crescent Moon Lane, and are municipally known as 27 Stub Road (the “Subject Lands”). The Subject Lands were previously the site of King’s Bay Golf and Country Club, a nine-hole golf course surrounded by the existing residential community of King’s Bay. The Subject Lands are approximately 51.1 hectares (126.3 acres) in size. The surrounding community generally consists of single detached dwellings.

3The Applicant’s original applications filed with the City of Kawartha Lakes (“City”) sought approval of planning instruments to facilitate the development of 44 single detached residential dwellings and associated blocks for open space, parkland, servicing, and public roads. Upon receiving comments from the City, commenting agencies, and the public, the Applicant’s plans were modified as follows:

• A single Parkland Block was established in a publicly accessible location;
• Residual Open Space Blocks were added to the rights-of-way of Streets B and C in order to consolidate land being conveyed to the City;
• A Block to recognize the storm drainage features was added (instead of existing storm pond blocks), as well as an access roadblock to the storm drainage features, to provide access to the storm drainage features for future maintenance;
• Two Blocks were added to provide 0.3 metres reserves along Streets B and C;
• A Block was added for water production/infrastructure;
• Minor revisions were made to remove any residential lotting fabric from environmental constraints; and
• Blocks for fire storage tanks were added.

4Following revising its applications with the City, the Applicant filed the present Appeal upon the City’s failure to make a decision with respect to approval.

5Since then, however, the Parties have reached a settlement. As a result, the disposition of the matter has now come before the Tribunal as a settlement hearing. To enable settlement, the Parties informed the Tribunal that they have agreed on the following changes to the Applicant’s plans:

• Removal of the parkland block and including these lands within the open space blocks, which are all planned to be conveyed into public ownership; and
• Fire Storage Blocks were relocated.

6The purpose of the OPA is to amend Policy 31.11.2 of the City’s Official Plan, as it pertains to the Subject Lands, to increase the permitted maximum number of single detached residential lots of the “Shoreline” designation, which is necessary to enable the proposed development.

7The purpose of the ZBA is to rezone the Subject Lands to further enable the proposed development from:

• Tourist Commercial Exception Three (C3-3) Zone;
• Tourist Commercial Exception Four (C3-4) Zone;
• Environmental Protection Exception Five (EP-5) Zone; and
• Environmental Protection Exception Five (EP-6) Zone.

To:

• Rural Residential Type Three Exception (RR3-X) Zone;
• Rural Residential Type Three Exception (RR3-XX) Zone;
• Development Reserve (DR) Zone; and
• Environmental Protection Exception Five (EP-6) Zone.

Evidence and submissions

8In assessing the proposed settlement, the Tribunal confirms that it has received, reviewed, and considered the following evidence, materials, and submissions:

i. The uncontested opinion evidence of Matthew Cory (“Expert Cory”), a Registered Professional Planner and a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners, presented orally and contained within his written outline of evidence marked as Exhibit 15;

ii. The following documents, marked as Exhibits 11-13, respectively:

• Witness Statements Book of the Applicant dated May 13, 2024;
• Joint Document Book of the Parties dated May 13, 2024 (Volumes 1-6); and
• Visual Evidence Book of the Applicant dated May 13, 2024.

iii. Participant statements filed with the Tribunal in the names of:

• Kawartha Conservation;
• King’s Bay Residents Association;
• Mike Wilson;
• Denise Elzinga and Fred Elzinga;
• Jim Wakeford and Angela Wakeford;
• Chris Dares and Nancy Dares;
• Kevin Casquenette and Charlene Casquenette;
• Carol Forde and Jack Forde;
• Gary Gaudet and Barbara Federchuk;
• Steve Wilkins;
• Samantha King and Justin Mahal; and
• NewCo (1000539069 Ontario Inc.).

iv. The Parties’ oral submissions in support of the settlement; and

v. A draft Order jointly submitted to give effect to the relief sought.

Decision

9The Tribunal understands that the above-noted evidence of Expert Cory and the Parties reflects revisions to the applications before the Tribunal that were reached through the cooperative efforts of the Parties.

10The Tribunal accepts the opinion evidence of Expert Cory, as presented, and similarly finds that the subject applications, as revised, have regard to those applicable matters of provincial interest found in section 2 of the Planning Act, are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, conform to the A Place to Grow; Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020, and otherwise represent good land use planning. The Tribunal further finds that the ZBA application conforms to the City of Kawartha Lakes Official Plan, 2012, as amended, and the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and related conditions also have appropriate regard for the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

ORDER

11THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:

1. The Appeal pursuant to subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act is allowed, in part, and the Official Plan for the City of Kawartha Lakes is amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order;

2. The Appeal pursuant to subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act is allowed, in part, and the Township of Mariposa Zoning By-Law No. 94-07 is hereby amended as set out in Attachment 2 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk of the City of Kawartha Lakes to assign a number to this By-law for record-keeping purposes;

3. The Appeal pursuant to subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act is allowed, in part, and the Draft Plan shown on the plan prepared by R-PE Surveying Ltd. dated December 20, 2021, as set out in Attachment 3 to this Order, is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Attachment 4 to this Order; and

4. Pursuant to subsection 51(56.1) of the Planning Act, the City of Kawartha Lakes shall have the authority to clear the conditions of Draft Plan approval and to administer final approval of the Plan of Subdivision for the purposes of subsection 51(58) of the Act. If there are any difficulties implementing any of the conditions of Draft Plan approval, or if any changes are required to be made to the Draft Plan, the Tribunal may be spoken to.

“K.R. Andrews”

K.R. ANDREWS

MEMBER

“J. DENYES”

J. DENYES

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

ATTACHMENT 2

ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT 4