Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 04, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000704
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Eve-Marie Chamot
Subject: By-law No. 2024-44
Description: Appealing passing of By-Law Number 2024-44
Reference Number: ZBLA-2024-03
Property Address: 19647 Opeongo Line
Municipality/UT: Madawaska Valley
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000704
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000704
OLT Case Name: Chamot v. Madawaska Valley (Township)
Heard: December 11, 2024 in writing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Eve-Marie Chamot (“Appellant”)
Self-represented
Township of Madawaska Valley (“Township”)
Tony E. Fleming
Spencer Putman
DECISION DELIVERED BY L.P. YOU ON DECEMBER 11, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1This appeal arises under subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R. S. O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, by Ms. Chamot (the “Appellant”), with respect to the passing of the Zoning By-law Amendment No. 2024-44 (“ZBA”) by the Township of Madawaska Valley (“Township”).
2The Township approved ZBA adds general provisions defining storage containers and regulating their use on lands within the Township. The primary purpose of the ZBA is to establish performance standards for storage containers and limit their number to one storage container per lot in the Residential Zone, and one Storage Container per 4050 square metres of lot area in the Commercial, Industrial and Rural Zone.
EXHIBITS
3The following Exhibits were marked during the hearing:
Written Submission of Eve-Marie Chamot dated November 28, 2024 marked as Exhibit 1;
Written Submissions of the Township dated November 29, 2024 marked as Exhibit 2;
Sworn affidavit of Forbes Symon marked as Exhibit 3;
Order sought by the Township dated November 29, 2024 marked as Exhibit 4; and,
Written response of Eve-Marie Chamot to the written submissions of the Township dated December 10, 2024 marked as Exhibit 5.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
4The Appellant was self-represented and expressed her opinions detailed as follows:
The Township cannot make new definitions through zoning instruments under the Planning Act;
The definition of the storage container in the ZBA was broad and the ZBA will regulate all receptables, including flowerpots and cardboard boxes;
There are no examples of similar bylaws regulating storage containers in Ontario; and,
The regulation of storage containers is ultra virus to the Planning Act as the storage containers are not buildings or structures defined in and regulated under the Act.
5The Tribunal qualified Mr. Symon, a Registered Professional Planner (“RPP”), a full member of the Ontario Professional Planners Institute and a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners with over 37 years of planning experience, to assist the Tribunal with professional evidence in the area of land use planning.
6Mr. Symon opined that the ZBA appropriately provides a definition of the Storage Container, which limits storage containers to those designed to be transported on vehicles. In addition, Mr. Symon’s Affidavit confirms that the Township Planning team had carried out appropriate research on similar by-laws of other municipalities regulating land use and storage containers prior to submitting the staff report with a recommendation for the passing of the ZBA.
7Mr. Symon stated in his Affidavit that the Renfrew Official Plan (“Renfrew OP”) functions as the local official plan for the Township and provides directions and abilities to municipalities to use zoning by-law to regulate land use and outdoor storage, such as storage containers, and further to ensure such accessory structures are consistent with the aesthetics and village/rural character of the community.
8Mr. Symon’s written statement states out that the Township Zoning By-law No. 2006-26 (“ZB”), in part, provides Zoning By-laws with directions to regulate buildings or structures and contains provisions for storage trailers. Mr. Symon further opined that the Township ZB is insufficient and the ZBA reflects a modest adjustment and improvement to the existing regime that maintains the overall intent and purpose of the Township ZB.
9The Tribunal has reviewed Mr. Symon’s planning evidence in his expert witness statement that provided a proper response to the Appellant’s concerns. The Tribunal is satisfied with the response and the evidence provided in Mr. Symon’s Affidavit.
10The Tribunal accepts the opinion evidence of Mr. Symon as presented in his witness statement, and similarly finds that the Zoning By-law Amendment:
a. has regards for the relevant matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Planning Act, R. S. O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended:
b. is consistent with the 2024 Provincial Planning Statement;
c. conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Renfrew County Official Plan and maintains the general intent and purpose of Township of Madawaska Valley Zoning By-law;
d. reflects the principles of good land use planning; and,
e. represents the public interests.
ORDER
11THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is dismissed.
“L.P. You”
L.P. YOU
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.