Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: April 17, 2025

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-001051

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: 1000190525 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Minor Variance

Description: To facilitate the construction of row dwellings

Reference Number: D13-24/24

Property Address: 224 Maple Street

Municipality/UT: Bracebridge/Muskoka

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-001051

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-001051

OLT Case Name: 1000190525 Ontario Inc. v. Bracebridge (Town)

Heard: January 14, 2025 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
1000190525 Ontario Inc. (“Appellant / Applicant”)	Aaron Platt, Katryna Vergis-Mayo
Town of Bracebridge (“Town”)	Harold Elston

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY L.P. YOU ON January 14, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1This appeal arises under s. 45 (12) of the Planning Act, R. S. O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, by the Appellant, regarding the Minor Variance Application ("Application”) to facilitate the construction of row dwellings at the lands municipally known as 24 Maple Street (“Subject Lands”). The Application was refused by the Committee of Adjustment (“COA”) of the Town.

2This hearing was originally scheduled as a Merit Hearing. The Parties advised the Tribunal in writing that they had reached a settlement. Therefore, this Hearing is converted to a hearing to discuss the planning instruments in the settlement.

CONTEXT

3The Subject Lands are located approximately 35 meters west of the intersection of Maple Street and Dudley Drive/Sherwood Drive. The site has a total area of 4,167.95 square meters (1.0299 acres) with a frontage of 43.02 meters along Maple Street. The Subject Lands contains an existing single-detached dwelling unit.

4The Subject Lands are located within the “Urban Centre” designation in the District of Muskoka Official Plan. The site is within the Urban Centre Boundary and is designated as “Multiple Residential” as per “Schedule B-Urban Residential Land Use” of the Town Official Plan (“Town OP”). The Urban Boundary and Multiple Residential designation in the Town OP identify lands where higher density development shall be located.

5The Town’s Zoning By-law No. 2016-088 (“Town ZB”) zones the Subject Lands as “Residential Four (R4)”, which permits higher-density development types including but not limited to, Row Dwellings, Group Housing, and Apartment Dwellings.

6Disposition of the matter is a settlement proffered by the Parties for the consideration of the Tribunal. The proposed development includes 19 row dwelling units with 14 additional dwelling units for a residential density of 45.5 units per hectare. The dwelling units are three stories in height with a single access off Maple Street onto a 6.0-meter-wide private condominium road.

7The Town’s staff report recommends the approval of the Application subject to the conditions as imposed in the report. Despite the recommendation from the Town’s staff, the COA denied the Application.

EXHIBITS AND SUPPORT DOCUMENTS

8The Tribunal confirms that it has received, reviewed and considered the following materials and submissions:

1. Document Book (total five documents) (marked as Exhibit 1);
2. the witness statement of Kevin Bechard, dated January 6, 2025 (marked as Exhibit 2);
3. Draft order (marked as Exhibit 3);
4. Participant Statements filed with the Tribunal in the names of:
   • John Sisson and Robin Hiltz’s statement (marked as Exhibit 4)
   • Geoffrey Holt’s statement (marked as Exhibit 5)
5. The Parties oral and written submissions in support of the settlement; and,
6. The Minutes of Settlement between the Corporation of the Town of Bracebridge and 1000190525 Ontario Inc. dated January 10, 2025 (marked as Exhibit 6).

REQUESTS FOR STATUS

9The Tribunal addressed and granted two written requests from the below individuals for Participant Status at the hearing:

1. Geoffrey Holt
2. John Sisson and Robin Hiltz

NOTICE OF HEARING

10There is no issue with service of the Notice of this hearing.

FINDS AND ANALYSIS

11The Tribunal recognized Mr. Bechard, a registered Professional Planner and a full member of Ontario Professional Planners with extensive knowledge of and experience in the land use planning field, as being qualified to assist the Tribunal with expert opinion evidence in the area of land use planning for the matter before the Tribunal.

12Mr. Bechard held the opinion that the settlement proposal provides an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities within the Town community and facilities for residential intensifications and the efficient use of land, resources, infrastructure, and public service facilities. Mr. Bechard further stated that this development would enhance the housing affordability in the Town by providing additional residential units in some units of the development.

13The Tribunal understands that the settlement proposal before the Tribunal was reached through the cooperative efforts of the Parties.

14Mr. Bechard provided detailed oral testimony and written opinion evidence responding the concerns raised in the Participant Statements and the Tribunal is satisfied that the responses and the proposed settlement addressed the concerns.

15The Tribunal accepts the uncontested opinion evidence of Mr. Bechard as presented in his witness statement and oral testimony, and similarly finds that the settlement proposal:

• has regard to the relevant matters of provincial interest found in s. 2 of the Planning Act, R. S. O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended (“Act”);
• is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024,
• meets the four tests set out in s. 45(1) of the Act;
• reflects principles of good land use planning; and,
• represents public interest.

ORDER

16THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed, and the variances to the Town Zoning By-law No. (2016-088) are authorized in the form set out in Attachment 1 and subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 2 to this Order.

“L.P. You”

L.P. YOU MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal Website: 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

List of Variances

Section 3.2.3.3 of Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2016-088 The minimum required lot area is 4,754 m² (1.17 acres) in the Residential Type 4 (R4) zone). In this case, the lot area will be 4,167.95 m² (1.03 acres).

Section 3.2.3.3 of Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2016-088 The minimum required front yard setback for a lot with row dwellings is 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) in the Residential Type 4 (R4) zone. In this case, the front yard setback will be 6.94 metre (22.8 feet).

Section 3.2.3.3 of Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2016-088 The minimum required west interior side yard setback for a lot with row dwellings is 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) in the Residential Type 4 (R4) zone. In this case, the west interior side yard setback will be 2.19 metres (7.2 feet).

Section 3.2.3.3 of Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2016-088 The minimum required rear yard setback for a lot with row dwellings is 10.5 metres (34.4 feet) in the Residential Type 4 (R4) zone. In this case, the rear yard setback will be 5.01 metres (16.4 feet).

Section 3.2.3.3 of Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2016-088 The maximum permitted lot coverage is 35% for the entire lot for group housing (more than one residential building on a lot) in the Residential Type 4 (R4) zone. In this case, the maximum permitted lot coverage is 36%.

Section 3.2.3.3 of Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2016-088 The minimum required landscaped area is 40% for group housing (more than one residential building on a lot) in the Residential Type 4 (R4) zone. In this case, the minimum required landscaped area is 26%.

ATTACHMENT 2

Conditions of Approval

The minor variances approved subject to this Order are conditional upon the buildings permitted by said minor variances being generally located as shown on the conceptual site plan included as Appendix “A” to this Order.

Appendix “A"

Conceptual Site Plan