Kash Tag Development Inc. v. Carleton Place (Town), 2025 CanLII 50802

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 27, 2025

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004623

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 12(2), O. Reg. 173/16 – Refusal of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: Kash Tag Development Inc.

Subject: Class III Development Permit

Description: To permit the construction of six (6) street-facing townhome dwelling units fronting on Queen Street

Reference Number: DP3-03-2021

Property Address: 160 Miguel Street

Municipality/UT: Town of Carleton Place

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004623

OLT Case Name: Kash Tag Development Inc. v. Carleton Place (Town)

Heard: April 24, 2025 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties Kash Tag Development Inc. ("Appellant") Counsel Jennifer Savini

Parties Town of Carleton Place ("Town") Counsel Laura Robinson Emma Blanchard

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY L.P. YOU ON APRIL 24, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1This appeal arises under s. 12(2), O. Reg. 173/16 under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended ("Act"), by the Appellant, regarding the refusal of the Town for a Class III Development Permit Application ("Application") to facilitate the construction of six street-facing townhouses fronting on the lands municipally known as 160 Miguel Street ("Subject Lands").

2This Hearing was originally scheduled as a Merit Hearing. The Parties advised the Tribunal in writing that they had reached a settlement and jointly requested the Tribunal to convert the Hearing to approve the settlement proposal ("Settlement Proposal"). Therefore, this Hearing is converted to a hearing to discuss the planning instruments in the settlement.

CONTEXT

3The Subject Lands are a corner lot at the intersection of Miguel Street and Queen Street. The Subject Lands are approximately 2,135.7 square metres in area, with frontage on Miguel Street and Queen Street of 44.7 metres. The southern property line of the Subject Lands shares a boundary with the Coleman Street Road allowance and Trans Canada Trail. The Subject Lands are currently vacant.

4The lands to the north, south, and east of the Subject Lands are composed of low-density residential uses and designated "Residential" in the Town's Official Plan (2015) ("Town OP") and Development Permit By-law ("Town Permit By-law"). The lands to the west of the Subject Lands are occupied by the Active Living Centre and a park. The Active Living Centre is located in the historically designated Canadian Pacific Railroad Station and is designated "Mississippi Transitional Sector" in the Town OP and Town Permit By-law.

5Municipal services (water and sanitary) are available for the development on the Subject Lands on both Queen Street and Miguel Street.

6The Appellant sought the approval of the permit to construct the townhomes fronting on Queen Street.

7Town staff recommended the approval of the permit, subject to the conditions below, as imposed in their staff report ("Report") to the Committee of the Town ("Town Committee"):

1. That approval is granted for the development in accordance with the plans identified in a Development Agreement; and,
2. That the development includes the installation of one tree per dwelling unit and an additional four trees planted specifically in the exterior side yard on Coleman Street, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services.

The Town Committee refused the Application, despite the Town staff's recommendation, due to concerns about compatibility of the proposed development to the surrounding neighbourhood with respect to position relative to the road, architectural proportions, and volumes of defined space.

8The County of Lanark Sustainable Communities Official Plan ("County OP") delineates the Town as a "Settlement Area". The Town OP designates the Subject Lands as "Residential".

9The Subject Lands are designated as "Residential" in the Town Permit By-Law. The purpose of the "Residential" designation is to provide an array of residential uses ranging from detached dwellings to four-storey apartment dwellings.

10Disposition of the matter is a settlement proffered by the Parties for the consideration of the Tribunal. The Settlement Proposal includes revised plans and drawings and addresses the Town Committee's concerns about compatibility by increasing the exterior side yard setback to Miguel Street and to require tree planting within the increased setback area. The Parties jointly request the Tribunal to approve the Settlement Proposal, subject to the conditions detailed as follows:

1. Execution of a Development Agreement in a form satisfactory to the Town's Director of Development Services. This is a standard requirement in the Town, to ensure that a proposed development proceeds in accordance with the approvals granted and also specifies the financial guarantees and fees required by the Town to ensure the completion of the works described in the Development Agreement Permit.
2. The development is to proceed in substantial compliance with the approved plans and reports listed in Schedule "A" to the Minutes. The Town identified minor additional revisions that required to the otherwise approved site servicing, grading and landscape plan, regarding the location of trees, fencing and a catch basin, as well as the requirements for basement sump pumps to be installed. The required revisions are specified in the Minutes.
3. The Town requires as a condition of approval that revised plans and drawings that identify these minor revisions to be delivered to the satisfaction of the Town at the time that the Appellant applies for a building permit.
4. The Town also requires as a condition of approval that each dwelling unit be constructed with a basement sump pump.

EXHIBITS

11The Tribunal confirms that it has received, reviewed, and considered the following materials and submissions:

• Witness statement, Acknowledgement of Expert's Duty, and Minutes of Settlement contained in the Affidavit of Niki Dwyer (marked as Exhibit 1).

REQUESTS FOR STATUS

12The Tribunal received no request for Party or Participant status prior to and at the Hearing.

NOTICE OF HEARING

13There is no issue with service of the Notice of this Hearing.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

14The Tribunal recognized Ms. Niki Dwyer, a registered Professional Planner and a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planning 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.

15Ms. Dwyer confirmed that Town staff remained the same with regard to their position on recommending the approval of a Class III Development Permit subject to the conditions under paragraph [10] above.

16Ms. Dwyer confirmed that she oversaw the Report to the Town Committee and held the same opinion as in the Report for the matter before the Tribunal. In the Report, Town staff provided an overview of the proposal and evaluation of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 ("PPS 2020"), County OP, Town OP and Town Permit By-law. Ms. Dwyer supported the opinion in the Report, which indicated that the PPS 2020 was effective at the time of the submission of the Application to the Town.

17Ms. Dwyer demonstrated that the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 ("PPS 2024") was also considered and indicated that the Settlement Proposal was consistent with the PPS 2024.

18Ms. Dwyer agreed with the opinion in the Report that the Settlement Proposal reflected efficient development patterns in Settlement Areas to optimize the land use, resources, infrastructure, and public services facilities pursuant to the applicable policies in the PPS 2020 and policy 2.3 of the County OP. Ms. Dwyer adopted the opinion in the Report that the development would provide a mixed range of housing to enhance the Town's ability to achieve the growth target and to improve the housing affordability within the Town community, without negative impacts to natural and cultural resources in the surrounding areas.

19Ms. Dwyer supported the evaluation of the Town Permit By-law in the Report that the Settlement Proposal had demonstrated compliance to the performance standards set out in the Town Permit By-law, and that the built form would enhance the historic development pattern of the Town community.

20The Tribunal understands that the Settlement Proposal before the Tribunal was reached through the cooperative efforts of the Parties.

21The Tribunal accepts the uncontested opinion evidence of Ms. Dwyer, as presented in her witness statement and oral testimony, and similarly finds that the Settlement Proposal:

• Has regard to relative matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of Act;
• Is consistent with the PPS 2024;
• Conforms to the County OP, Town OP, and Town Permit By-law;
• Reflects principles of good land use planning; and
• Represents the public interest.

ORDER

22THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal is allowed in part, and the Town is hereby ordered to issue a provisional Class III Development Permit, subject to the conditions as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order; and
2. The fulfillment of the conditions in Attachment 1 is to be secured pursuant to the Minutes of Settlement contained in the Exhibit 1.

"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

CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

(a) The Parties will execute a Development Agreement in a form satisfactory to the Town's Director of Development Services, which shall be required prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Development and shall be registered on title to the Property.

(b) The Development will proceed in substantial compliance with the approved plans and reports listed in Schedule "A" to this Attachment, subject to the following required revisions:

a. Notwithstanding the location of trees to be planted described in the plans in Schedule "A", the owner of the Property (the "Owner") shall ensure that all trees are planted at least 1.5m from underground service laterals.

b. Notwithstanding the proposed location of fencing described in the plans in Schedule "A", the Owner shall install fencing complete with gates to provide access to each townhome. The location of the fencing shall be as described in the Site Plan Drawing.

c. Notwithstanding details to the contrary shown on the plans described in Schedule "A", the Owner shall alter the design of catch basin #1 and the lead on the Town's property to protect the pipe from freezing to the satisfaction of the Town.

d. Notwithstanding details to the contrary shown on the plans described in Schedule "A", the Owner acknowledges and agrees that each unit will be constructed with a basement sump pump to the satisfaction of the Town.

(c) The Owner shall deliver revised Site Servicing and Grading Plans, and a revised Landscape Layout Plan in accordance with the amendments required in the above sections 1.1 (b)(i-iv), to the satisfaction of the Town, at the time that the Owner applies for building permits for the construction of the Development.

(d) The Owner shall construct each unit with a basement sump pump to the satisfaction of the Town.

SCHEDULE "A"

APPROVED PLANS AND REPORTS

1. Approved Reports:

1.1. Adequacy of Public Servicing Report Prepared: W Elias & Associates Dated: April 2022 (Rev 0)

1.2. Stormwater Management Report Prepared: W Elias & Associates Dated: April 2022 (Rev 0)

2. Approved Plans / Drawings

2.1. Proposed Site Plan Drawing No. SP1 Prepared by: Advance Engineering Revision: 01 – For Town Review (2023-11-30) Dated: June 2023

2.2. Landscape Layout Plan Drawing No. L1-1 Prepared by: Lashley and Associates Revision: 4 – Revised for SPA (2023-12-11) Dated: April 2021

2.3. Site Servicing Drawing No. SE-1 and SE-2 Prepared by: Advance Engineering Revision: 4 – Townhouses Layout (2023-12-11) Dated: December 2023

2.4. Grading Plan Drawing No. GR-1 and GR-2 Prepared by: Advance Engineering Revision: 4 – Townhouses Layout (2023-12-11) Dated: December 2023

2.5. Proposition Façade MDV Drawing No. IA DE 2 Prepared by: J.Dagenais Architecte + Associates Revision: 6 – Commentaires Dated: October 2021

2.6. Proposition Façade MDV Drawing No. 2A DE 2 Prepared by: J.Dagenais Architecte + Associates Revision: 6 – Commentaires Dated: October 2021

2.7. Proposition Façade MDV Drawing No. IB DE 2 Prepared by: J.Dagenais Architecte + Associates Revision: 6 – Commentaires Dated: October 2021

2.8. Proposition Façade MDV Drawing No. 2B DE 2 Prepared by: J.Dagenais Architecte + Associates Revision: 6 – Commentaires