Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: July 17, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004258
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Stremma (St. George) GP Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: To redevelop the subject lands from a golf course to a 306 unit residential subdivision
Reference Number: PS2-OPA1-ZBA14-22-RC
Property Address: 269 German School Road
Municipality/UT: Brant/Brant
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004258
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004258
OLT Case Name: Stremma (St. George) GP Inc. v. Brant (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Stremma (St. George) GP Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To redevelop the subject lands from a golf course to a 306 unit residential subdivision
Reference Number: PS2-OPA1-ZBA14-22-RC
Property Address: 269 German School Road
Municipality/UT: Brant/Brant
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004259
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004258
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Stremma (St. George) GP Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description: To redevelop the subject lands from a golf course to a 306 unit residential subdivision
Reference Number: PS2-OPA1-ZBA14-22-RC
Property Address: 269 German School Road
Municipality/UT: Brant/Brant
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004260
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004258
Heard: June 19, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative
Stremma (St George) GP Inc.
Mark Flowers
County of Brant
Brian Duxbury Rochelle Welchman
Losani Homes (1998) Ltd Empire Communities (St George) Ltd Riverview Highlands (St George) Holdings Ltd
Paul DeMelo
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY G.A. CROSER ON JUNE 19, 2024 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1This Settlement was convened to hear planning evidence provided in support of the agreement reached between Stremma (St George) GP Inc. (the “Appellant”) and the County of Brant (“County”) with respect to an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”), Zoning By-law Amendment Application (“ZBLA”), and proposed Plan of Subdivision (“DPOS”) commenced respectively under subsections 22(7), 34(11), and 51(34) of the Planning Act (“Act”). The Appeals related to the Appellant’s proposal for the development of 269 German School Road (“Subject Lands”).
2The original applications for the OPA, ZBLA and DPOS were submitted to the County and deemed complete as of April 27, 2022. On August 4, 2022, an appeal was filed with the Tribunal for the County’s failure to make a decision on the Applications within the statutory timeframes. A Hearing of the Merits was scheduled; however, following revisions to the applications (“Revised Proposal”) as a result of feedback received from County staff and other discussions between the County and the Appellant, a settlement was reached and presented to the Tribunal.
3The following exhibits were marked at the onset of the hearing:
Exhibit 1: Affidavit of Anne Wynveen
Exhibit 2: Document Book of Stremma (St. George) GP Inc.
SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA
4The Subject Lands are located in the northeast quadrant of the German School Road and Brant Road (Highway No. 24) intersection and are within the settlement area of St. George in the County of Brant. At present, the Subject Lands are occupied by the Oaks of St. George Golf Club and includes buildings and surface parking related to this use as well as wooded areas and other natural features. It is an irregular shaped site with a total area of 56.6 hectares (138.8 acres) with broken frontage of approximately 214 metres and 97 metres along German School Road. The broken frontage is due to three existing parcels of land fronting along German School Road, which are each occupied by a single detached residential dwelling.
REVISED PROPOSAL
5The revised OPA, ZBLA, DPOS and draft conditions that are the subject of this Settlement included the following revisions from the initial applications. An expanded natural heritage system, an updated street network, consolidated stormwater infrastructure, and increased parkland dedication. The mix of unit types has expanded to include street townhouses as well as a mixed-use block that is anticipated to have townhouses as well as permission for neighbourhood commercial uses and a nursing home.
6The updated road network will include two connections to German School Road and a four-metre road widening has been included along the German School Road frontage. The revised DPOS has consolidated the three Storm Water Management (“SWM”) Ponds from the original proposal into a single SWM pond. Throughout the neighbourhood, pedestrian walkways have been added to provided to improve pedestrian connectivity throughout the development. The revised DPOS includes two public parks. The western park block is centrally located within the neighbourhood allowing for a variety of recreational activities and a flexible park design. The eastern park block is intended for more passive park uses, such as walking trails or a dog park. The ultimate design of these parks will be determined by the County.
7The western portion of the subject site will be reserved for future development. A future development application(s) will be required to define an appropriate land use, and address site access and servicing, as well as natural heritage feature delineation and protection.
PLANNING EVIDENCE
8Anna Wynveen was qualified to provide expert opinion evidence in the area of land use planning. Paul DeMelo, counsel for the three other Parties in this matter, had no questions or comments with respect to Wynveen’s testimony and stated that the other Parties in this matter had no objection to the Settlement.
9It was the Wynveen’s opinion that the revised proposal had regard for matters of Provincial interest set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act (“Act”), and that the revised DPOS had regard for the criteria set out in Section 51(24) of the Act. With respect to consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, the Planner commented that the Applications met this requirement, pointing to the range of housing options that will be provided by the development while protecting natural heritage features.
10Similar characteristics of the Revised Proposal were used by the Planner to demonstrate conformity with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 (“Growth Plan”). Wynveen commented on the fact that the proposed development is intensification within the built boundary of the settlement area of St. George and as such was an appropriate location for intensification and infill. In addition, Wynveen touched upon policies with respect to the achievement of “complete communities” as defined in the Growth Plan as the proposal will provide new housing in a variety of forms, a mixed-use block along the German School Road frontage, and new public parkland.
11The Subject Lands are currently designated ‘Parks and Recreation’ with areas designated ‘Natural Heritage System’ in the County of Brant Official Plan (“CBOP”). The Site-Specific Policy Area 26 (“SSPA 26”) also applies to the site. SSPA 26 was added to the subject site through the OLT approval of OPA 8. OPA 8 implements the Council-endorsed St. George Area Study and St. George Area Study Addendum Report. In addition to introducing SSPA 26, OPA 8 also added Section 2.8 to the CBOP to further guide development in St. George.
12OPA 8 redesignated the subject site, and other lands, as a “Secondary Urban Settlement Area” (“Secondary Urban”), and SSPA 26 established a policy overlay which provides specific exceptions for the Subject Lands. Wynveen stressed that the designation of Secondary Urban should not be interpreted as meaning it is a lower priority for growth or development or restricting growth. Rather, the Secondary Urban area is based on the limited availability of servicing systems. SSPA 26 clarifies that the Secondary Urban designation is principally related to the availability of services and shall not limit the redevelopment potential of the subject site. Furthermore, SSPA 26 provides that a land use designation change may be required to redevelop the site, including for new residential development, which will require planning justification to support the redesignation.
13Wynveen also drew the Tribunal’s attention to Policy 2.2.5.2 that states in recognition of the limited opportunities for intensification that the County shall encourage intensification within the existing built boundary/built-up area wherever possible. Wynveen’s planning opinion was that the Revised Proposal conformed with the CBOP.
14Wynveen explained that the County had adopted a new Official Plan on May 30, 2023 (“CBOP 2023”) that is presently under review by the Ministry. Wynveen noted that CBOP 2023 was not in force and so was informative but not determinative with respect to the Revised Proposal. The policies from SSPA 26 have been included in CBOP as Site-Specific Policy Area – STG1. Wynveen The planner remarked that the policies in CBOP 2023 are “nearly identical” to the in-force CBOP, and that the new plan removes the concept of primary and secondary settlement areas. The Planner opined that the Revised Proposal recognized and had appropriate regard for the intent of the CBOP 2023.
15Lastly, with respect to the County of Brant Comprehensive Zoning By-law 61-16, as amended, the Tribunal was informed that the Subject Lands are primarily zoned Recreational Facilities (OS2) with areas of Natural Heritage (NH) and Suburban Residential (SR). Residential uses are not permitted in either the OS2 or NH zone, the SR zone applies to the area along the German School Road frontage which permits single-detached residential dwellings.
16The proposed ZBLA reflects the DPOS, refines the boundaries subject to the NH zone, and introduces areas subject to the NH1 zone which applies to natural heritage buffers. The revised ZBLA also introduces the Open Space (OS1) zone on the pumping station block, SWMP block, and areas of the future development block outside of the natural heritage boundaries. The two parks have been zoned Recreational Facilities (OS2) in the revised ZBLA. Further, amendments include zones for single-detached dwellings as well as areas that will permit street rowhouse units with site-specific performance standards, back-to-back rowhouse units, and commercial uses.
PARTICIPANT STATEMENTS
17Wynveen provided their commentary on the Participant Statements received with respect to the Revised Proposal. It was noted that the nature of the concerns identified relate to stormwater management, drainage, agricultural impacts related to water flows, water quality, water and wastewater capacity, traffic volume, the sufficiency of the surrounding road network, road safety, natural heritage and environmental impacts, built heritage and community character, school capacity, the appropriateness of the subject site for growth, over-development and whether there is need for the subject development, establishing a negative precedent for future development, and the need for a comprehensive master plan for St. George.
18In Wynveen’s opinion, the concerns noted in the Participant Statements were addressed through the Revised Proposal, associated draft plan conditions, and Agreed Statement of Facts, the latter being submitted to the Tribunal in preparation for the Merit Hearing. Wynveen stated that the proposed development will not negatively impact the character of St. George, that it will conform to the built form, that it was an appropriate level of intensification, and supported that achievement of the County’s growth targets.
TRIBUNAL FINDINGS
19The Tribunal accepts the uncontested and uncontroverted opinion evidence of the Appellant’s Planner. The Revised Proposal will support the achievement of a variety of policy directions through development within the built boundary of the settlement area of St. George with a range of housing options, a mixture of uses structured on a network of new public roads, parkland, and natural heritage features. The Tribunal is satisfied that the Revised Proposal is representative of good land use planning that is in the public interest.
20Counsel for the Appellant requested that the Tribunal issue the Order with respect to the proposed planning instruments. In addition, the Tribunal was informed that the County requested that the Appellant prepare an amendment to CBOP 2023. The Tribunal was asked to provide a conditional Order with respect to the required amendment to the CBOP 2023.
ORDER
21THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeals under subsections 22(7), 34(11) and 51(34) of the Planning Act are allowed.
22THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT:
Amendment No. 17 to the County of Brant Official Plan, 2012 is approved in accordance with Schedule A of Attachment “A” to this Order;
Amendment No. 2 to the County of Brant Official Plan (A Simply Grand Plan, 2023) is approved in accordance with Schedule B of Attachment “A” to this Order, conditional upon this Official Plan being approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and coming into effect;
The Zoning By-law Amendment to the County of Brant Zoning By-law 61-16, as amended, is approved in accordance with Attachment “B” to this Order; and
The Draft Plan of Subdivision is approved in accordance with Attachment “C” to this Order, subject to the Conditions of Draft Plan Approval attached to this Order as Attachment “D”.
23AND THE TRIBUNAL FURTHER ORDERS that, in accordance with subsection 51(56.1) of the Planning Act, the County of Brant is provided the authority to give final approval of the Plan of Subdivision for the purposes of subsection 51(58) of the Planning Act, subject to subsection 51(56.2) of the Planning Act.
24The County of Brant is authorized to assign by-law numbers to the Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-law Amendment in Attachments “A” and “B” to this Order for record-keeping purposes.
25The Tribunal may be spoken to by the parties with respect to the implementation of this Order.
“G.A. Croser”
G.A. CROSER
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.