OBG Golf Inc. v. Georgian Bay (Township), 2025 CanLII 83054

ISSUE DATE: August 13, 2025

CASE NO.: OLT-25-000183

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: OBG Golf Inc.

Subject: Site Plan

Description: To permit development of a 1 storey maintenance building

Reference Number: S21-40

Property Address: 31 Leduc Lane L0K 1S0

Municipality: Georgian Bay/Muskoka

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000183

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000183

OLT Case Name: OBG Golf Inc. v. Georgian Bay (Township)

Heard: July 28, 2025 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

OBG Golf Inc. (“Applicant/Appellant”)

Gerard Borean

Georgian Bay (“Township”)

Colin Leger

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION DELIVERED BY T.F. NG ON JULY 28, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1The matter before the Tribunal was a three-day hearing converted to consider a settlement proposal (“Settlement”) of the Appellant’s appeal of Site Plan Application (“SPA”/the “Application”).

2The purpose of the Application was to facilitate the development of a one storey maintenance building with an area of 648 sq metres(m²) on the Oak Bay Golf Club lands known as 31 Leduc Lane (the "subject land/property/site") in the Township.

3Following this Settlement, a draft of the Site Plan Approval Conditions was provided.

4At the outset, Mr. Borean, for the Appellant, indicated that the matter of costs was not resolved, and he will submit before commencement of the hearing, his client's request for an award of costs. Mr. Leger countered that a costs request should be applied for through a motion. The Tribunal agreed and directed that the Appellant could, if it wished, file a motion for costs after the hearing is concluded.

5Celeste Phillips, a Registered Professional Planner, on behalf of the Appellant, provided a witness statement and affirmed testimony in support of the Settlement. She was qualified to give expert opinion evidence in land use planning matters. Her statement was marked as Exhibit 2.

6The Township called its Director of Planning, Derek Witlib, who was qualified to give expert opinion evidence in land use planning matters. His witness statement was marked as Exhibit 4.

7The Tribunal, having reviewed the documents, the Settlement, and the testimonies of Ms. Phillips and Mr. Witlib, allows the appeal in part, for the reasons set out below.

PLANNING EVIDENCE

8Ms. Phillips and Mr. Witlib, each individually, from their respective perspectives (and as described in their respective witness statements), explained the historical background to the SPA and the Settlement. Both witnesses gave a general overview of the policy framework in support of the Application and Settlement.

9In the oral testimonies of both witnesses, as regards to the timelines of review by the Township of the SPA, the Applicant averred to delays in the review process through changes in planning management staff and multiple meetings with the planning department that allegedly failed to address the SPA. The Township, however, averred that the current planning director could not speak to matters before his appointment - and as the overall Oak Bay development, of which the maintenance building was a small part - the multiple meetings had listed the SPA as low priority.

10The relevant policy framework includes the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 ("PPS"), the Muskoka District Official Plan ("MOP") and the Township's Official Plan ("OP"). Both witnesses opined that the Settlement and SPA represent good land use planning and they recommended approval of the SPA subject to the Site Plan Approval Conditions.

Ms. Phillips' testimony

AREA CONTEXT

11The subject land is located west of Highway 400, on the south side of District Road 5 (Honey Harbour Road), in the Port Severn Settlement Area, in the District of Muskoka.

12The Oak Bay development is a fully serviced residential development with a variety of housing types, with both freehold and condominium tenures. A notable feature of the development is the Oak Bay golf course, with Golf Course Road running through the centre of the ownership.

13The Oak Bay development is developed in various phases.

14The property is part of the golf course ownership. Currently, golf course maintenance equipment is located within several containers that are located at 31 Leduc Lane.

15The construction of a Maintenance Building at 31 Leduc Lane has been contemplated since 2018 and would serve to accommodate the golf course maintenance equipment such as various grass cutting mowers, as well as equipment parts and pesticide storage, all within a permanent building.

16A Maintenance Building is a permitted accessory use to the main use of the land, that being the golf course.

17On October 14, 2021, the Appellant filed an Application for Site Plan Approval with the Township.

18On May 10, 2022, the then-Planning Director (C. Aspila) recommended in a Staff Report that Planning Council adopt a by-law for the proposed Site Plan Agreement.

19The Planning Council meeting that day recommended that staff confirm the setback from nearby lands that are zoned Environmental Protection. (The Township's Zoning By-law requires a 15 metre (“m”) setback from the boundary of any Environmental Protection zone).

20On July 5, 2022, Acting Planning Director J. Gaudet (C. Aspila had resigned) recommended by a Staff Report, that Planning Council adopt a by-law for the proposed Site Plan Agreement. The July 5, 2022, Staff Report confirmed compliance with the required 15 m setback from the Environmental Protection zone and recommended approval subject to shifting the building slightly to comply with an interior setback standard.

21Planning Council referred the matter back to Township staff, expressing concern about runoff from the wash pad (where the grass clippings are removed from the lawn mowers).

22On October 21, 2022, Tatham Engineering corresponded with the Director of Operations for the Township to address concerns about stormwater management, wash pad runoff, and the equipment maintenance area. A Functional Servicing Report was also provided by Tatham Engineering.

23On December 16, 2022, Acting Planning Director J. Gaudet confirmed that because of changes to the planning process in Ontario, Township staff now had the authority for Site Plan Approval, not Planning Council, and there would be no need to return to Planning Council with the proposed Site Plan.

24On March 12, 2025, the Appellant appealed pursuant to Section 41 (12) of the Planning Act, respecting the municipality's failure to approve the Site Plan Application.

25As a result of recent correspondence from the Township, the Site Plan Drawings (architectural and landscape) have been revised.

26The revised Site Plan drawings dated June 18, 2025, attached as Appendix F to Ms. Phillips' Statement respond to all of the changes requested in the May 29, 2025, correspondence from Garrod Pickfield, on behalf of the Township.

27The Landscape Drawings and Letter of Credit calculations for Civil and Landscape works, and Site Plan Agreement were referred. The Site Plan Agreement has also been reviewed with minor revisions suggested.

28Ms. Phillips' opinion was that the Site Plan Approval documents before the Tribunal address the items set out in Section 41 (4) of the Planning Act, respond to changes requested by the Township planners and the Township's consultants, comply with zoning requirements and represent good planning.

29Accordingly, she recommended that the Tribunal approve the Site Plan drawings and the Site Plan Agreement for the proposed Maintenance Building.

Mr. Witlib's testimony

Site Context

30The proposed development site occupies approximately 0.6 hectares (“ha”) (1.48 acres) of a larger 18.81-ha (46.48 acres) parcel that supports an existing golf course. The site has 92.28 m (302.8 feet) of frontage on Leduc Lane, which is a municipal road that is maintained year-round. The land is in the serviced settlement area of Port Severn in the Township. The land is within lands legally described as Part of Lot 32, Concession 2, formerly in the geographic Township of Baxter, now in the Township of Georgian Bay. The golf course is integrated within a larger phased residential subdivision that is currently being developed. The proposed development site is somewhat isolated from the other golf course buildings, with the golf clubhouse and other amenities located approximately 500 m to the east and on a different parcel of land.

31The proposed development of the lands is for:

A one-storey, 860 m² (9257 square foot) building to store maintenance equipment and materials associated with the operation of the golf course; and outdoor parking, a loading area, an outdoor equipment wash pad and stormwater management features.

32The storage and maintenance of golf course equipment is already occurring on the subject land, largely outdoors, with shipping containers providing some indoor storage. Surrounding land uses consist of residential uses to the north, west and east, and a golf course to the south.

33The subject land is located within Port Severn and is:

Within a "Settlement Area" as defined in the Provincial Planning Statement 2024 (PPS);
Designated "Urban Centre" by the District of Muskoka Official Plan (MOP);
Designated "Urban Centre" and "Open Space" by the Township of Georgian Bay Official Plan (OP); and Zoned Open Space 1 - Exception 5 (OS1-5), Environmental Protection 1 (EP1), Environmental Protection 1 - Exception 6 (EP1-6) and Environmental Protection 2 (EP2) by Township of Georgian Bay By-law No. 2014-75 (the "Township Zoning By-law"). The proposed development site is located within the OS1-5 Zone, immediately adjacent to an EP1 Zone.

34Site plan approval is required for the proposed development of the subject land. Pursuant to Section 41(1) of the Planning Act (the "Act").

35The OP states in Section I.5.1.2: "In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, the total area within the corporate limits of the Township of Georgian Bay is described as a Site Plan Control area and is designated as such in a Site Plan Control By-law adopted by the Township."

36Township of Georgian Bay By-law 2025-045 (Site Plan Control By-law) designates the whole of the municipality as a Site Plan Control area and delegates authority for Site Plan Approval to the Township's director of Planning.

37In October of 2021, the Applicant submitted a Site Plan Approval application for the proposed maintenance building.

38Between November 2022, and March 2023, the Applicant, Township Staff and their respective engineering consultants exchanged design comments and submissions, which resulted in the following documents being submitted to the Township in March of 2023:

Site Plan, SRN Architects, Dwg. No. A100, Rev. 11, March 17, 2023 (the "Proposed Site Plan");
Planting Plan, EnvisionTatham, Dwg. LP-1, March 7, 2023 (the "EnvisionTatham Planting Plan");
"Oak Bay Development - Golf Course Maintenance Facility Functional Servicing Report," Tatham Engineering, March 15, 2023 (the "FSR").

39From October 2023 to August 2024, Mr. Witlib attended bi-weekly meetings with the Applicant and their consultants with respect to advancing their planned developments.

40On March 12, 2025, the Township received a notice of appeal from the Applicant with respect to the Application.

41Mr. Witlib reviewed the drawings that the Appellant has recently provided with the Witness Statements of the Appellant's consultants: "Site Plan Application for Proposed Golf Course Maintenance Facility," SRN Architects.

42Mr. Witlib was satisfied that the drawings met all the requirements of the Township under the authority of Section 41 of the Planning Act.

43His opinion was that the proposed development of a golf maintenance building on the lands is: consistent with the PPS; conforms to the MOP and the OP; is a permitted use of the subject land pursuant to the Township Zoning By-Law; and represents good planning and is in the public interest.

44Mr. Witlib opined that the Site Plan Agreement, as revised, is reasonable, appropriate and in the public interest. The proposed Site Plan would facilitate the construction of an 860m², one storey maintenance building for the adjacent golf course. A revised Site Plan has been prepared by the applicant that demonstrates that the proposed building is beyond the 15 m setback to the EP zone. The land is zoned Open Space 1 Exception 5 (051-5) in Zoning By-law 2014-75, which permits a golf course. A maintenance building is a permitted accessory use to a golf course in accordance with the "Golf Course" definition in the Zoning By-law. Mr. Witlib stated that the proposal will comply with all required zoning provisions.

ANALYSIS/FINDINGS

45The Tribunal agrees with the opinion evidence of both Ms. Phillips and Mr. Witlib. The Tribunal finds that the Settlement has proper regard for the matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Planning Act ("Act"). In particular, s. 2(h) on the orderly development of safe and healthy communities, s. 2(n) the resolution of planning conflicts involving public and private interests and s. 2(p) on the appropriate location of growth and development.

Provincial Planning Statement, 2024

46The proposal is consistent with the policies of the PPS 2024. The proposed maintenance building is an efficient utilization of land that contributes to the Oak Bay Golf Club phased development within a settlement area. Section 2.3.1 of the PPS directs that settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development.

47To support the achievement of complete communities…strategic growth areas should be planned: s.2.4.1.2 b) "as focal areas for education, commercial, recreational and cultural uses". The subject land is in a settlement area and the proposal of a maintenance building is appropriate for the Golf Club's recreational use.

48The Settlement makes use of existing infrastructure and facilities with sufficient capacity to support the development, minimize stormwater run-off volumes, and does not negatively impact adjacent properties.

49The Tribunal finds that the SPA is consistent with the PPS.

MOP

50The subject land is designated Urban Centre under the MOP. The objective of the MOP is to "manage growth in a sustainable way that will make the most efficient use of land, infrastructure, public services and facilities". (MOP s.D1 a)).

51MOP s. D1 o) "encourage the establishment of an optimal balance between residential and non-residential uses, including the promotion of mixed uses on individual parcels of land and within settlement areas".

52The proposed maintenance building that is intended to provide storage of items and equipment used in the OBG Golf Club and its phased development, promote a sustainable development and a healthy community, improve physical and social environments, and provide recreation and leisure activities for a complete community. (MOP s.D20.1 b)).

53The Tribunal finds that the SPA conforms to the MOP.

54The subject land is designated Urban Centre and Open Space under the OP.

OP s.B 2.2.2 objective is "To recognize the Resort Commercial, service commercial, Marinas, and recreational sector as vital components of the Township's heritage and economic base, which should be supported, preserved and enhanced, and to diversify this economic foundation with small business and light industry".
OP s.B 2.3.1. speaks of "To recognize and build upon the various patterns of land use in the Township by accommodating compatible land uses in the Settlement Areas, Waterfront Designation, Waterfront Communities, and Rural Designation, and sustainable, compact growth within the Urban Centres".
OP s.B 2.4.1 states "To encourage the identification, maintenance and establishment of recreational and community facilities, parkland and trails as well as natural areas and open spaces".
OP s.B 2.4.2 "To encourage the provision of recreational opportunities that are accessible and inclusive for all ages and abilities".

55The Tribunal finds that the Settlement conforms to the OP and is good land use planning. The Appellant will execute a Site Plan Agreement generally covenanting and agreeing that no building or other works will be erected and/or constructed other than in conformity to the revised Site Plan.

56The Appellant has a Planting Plan to maintain the vegetation on the subject land in accordance with the revised Site Plan. Landscaping will uphold the prevalent natural green setting to maintain the area's character.

57The Appellant has provided a Functional Servicing Report that addressed the servicing maintenance and storm water management requirements of the proposed development and the Settlement.

CONCLUSION

58The Tribunal is satisfied that the Settlement represents good planning and that the proposed SPA has regard for the matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act, is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the MOP and the OP.

59The Tribunal will grant the appeal in part and approve the SPA subject to the Site Plan Approval Conditions.

ORDER

60THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed in part, and the Site Plan prepared by SRN Architects dated June 18, 2025 is approved subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 1 to this Order

“T.F. Ng”

T.F. NG

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