Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 18, 2026
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000509
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: 2251942 Ontario Inc. o/a Park View Homes
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: To permit the construction of 79 townhouse units and 16 apartment units
Reference Number: CHA-OPA4
Property Address: PIN 54148-0437 LT and PIN 54158-0436 as per description on Transfer registered as PT74174
Municipality/UT: Champlain/Prescott-Russell
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000509
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000509
OLT Case Name: Park View Homes v. Champlain (Township)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: 2251942 Ontario Inc. o/a Park View Homes
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit the construction of 79 townhouse units and 16 apartment units
Reference Number: Z-02-2024
Property Address: PIN 54148-0437 LT and PIN 54158-0436 as per description on Transfer registered as PT74174
Municipality/UT: Champlain/Prescott-Russell
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000510
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000509
Heard: March 4, 2026 By Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| 2251942 Ontario Inc. | J. Habr, E. Bratton (in absentia) |
| CN Rail | I. Banach, D. Pateman |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. DEBOER ON MARCH 4, 2026 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal scheduled a hearing in accordance with Rule 12 of Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure to review the proposed settlement between 2251942 Ontario Inc. (“Appellant”) and CN Rail. The Appellant had filed appeals with the Tribunal due to the Township of Champlain’s (“Township”) refusal of the Official Plan Application (“OPA”) the Zoning By-law Application (“ZBA”) pertaining to the addresses municipally known as PIN 54148-0437 LT and PIN 54158-0436 (“Subject Lands”).
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
2When considering appeals filed pursuant to s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) of the Act, the Tribunal must have regard to matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act. Decisions of the Tribunal affecting planning matters must be consistent with the applicable policies of the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS 2024”), and in this matter, conform to the United Counties of Prescott and Russell Official Plan, 2022 (“UCOP”), and the Township of Champlain Zoning By-law No. 2000-75 (“By-law 2000-75”).
SUBJECT LANDS AND SURROUNDING AREA
3The Subject Lands are made up of 2 properties located beside each other. The two parcels have an approximate total area of 3.66 hectares and are within the settlement boundary of Vankleek Hill in the Township of Champlain. The Subject Lands are located southwest of Main Street East and northwest of Newton Road. The two properties are bisected by Hibbard Street.
4The proposed planning instruments would amend an existing plan of subdivision to increase the total number of residential units from 56 to 95 units. The total unit mix is proposed to be 79 townhouses and a 16-unit multi-residential block and would make use of the existing municipal services.
5The changes made to the proposed planning instruments would mitigate any potential impacts from the adjacent CN Rail operations on the future residents of the development.
6The Appellant began the application process in August of 2023 to prepare the planning rationale in support of the proposed revisions to the existing Draft Plan of Subdivision, along with the OPA and ZBA. This report was completed and submitted to the Township on December 8, 2023. The OPA and ZBA applications were reviewed and subsequently refused by the Township on April 11, 2024. As a result of the refusal, the Appellant filed an appeal of the OPA and ZBA application on April 19, 2024.
7At the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”), which the Tribunal conducted on September 27, 2024, CN Rail was approved as an added Party and the Township and the County stated that they would not be participating nor taking a position in the appeals.
SUBMISSIONS
8Prior to the commencement of the hearing, the Tribunal received the following documents and marked said documents as exhibits to the hearing:
Exhibit 1: Affidavit of Tracy Zander and related planning documents; comprising 251 pages
Planning Evidence
9The Appellant presented Ms. Tracy Zander to provide oral evidence along with her Affidavit. Based on the curriculum vitae presented in Exhibit 1, the Tribunal qualified Ms. Zander as an expert in land use planning and her Affidavit and oral testimony would reflect her expert opinions on the matter before the Tribunal.
10Ms. Zander opined that throughout the discussions between the Parties, many changes were made to modify the planning instruments that ended up addressing the issues that CN had brought forward. As a result of the discussions, the Parties were able to prepare updated planning instruments to present to the Tribunal for review and possible approval.
11As a result of the agreement between the Parties, Ms. Zander opined that the proposed OPA would amend the Township’s Official Plan to redesignate the Subject Lands from a “Low Density Residential Policy Area” to a “Medium Density Residential Policy Area” to permit the increase in the density and total number of residential units.
12Ms. Zander continued with her opinion that the ZBA would consolidate multiple zones within the Subject Lands to a single “R3-Exception Zone”. This exception would permit townhomes and multi-unit dwellings to exist. The R3-Exception Zone would permit the lot frontage to be reduced from 6 metres (“m”) to 5.5m. The ZBA would also permit the minimum interior yard setback to be reduced from 3m to 1.5m and re-establish a total building height of 9m from 10m. The 9m total height limit is the current maximum height permitted within the existing Residential Zones within the Township.
[Section 2](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html#sec2_smooth) of the [Planning Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html)
13It was Ms. Zander’s opinion that the settlement proposal before the Tribunal has appropriate regard to matters of provincial interest as per s. 2 of the Act. The proposed planning instruments are not affecting any identified ecological systems, natural areas, agricultural lands or resources within proximity to the Subject Lands. The planning instruments will allow, inter alia, the proposed development to be serviced by existing municipal services. The proposal will bring new residential development in a compact form of townhouses and multi-unit residential housing in an established residential area while making use of the existing road network. Ms. Zander opined that the proposed planning instruments have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest.
PPS 2024
14Ms. Zander continued with her opinion that the proposed planning instruments are consistent with the applicable policies of the PPS 2024. The planning instruments will contribute to an appropriate range of housing options and densities. The planning instruments will help support the achievement of a complete community within the established settlement area. The planning instruments will allow the proposal to make efficient use of the existing municipal services while minimizing the amount of new road infrastructure and servicing to support the proposed development. The Subject Lands are in close range to various amenities and community services, and the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Mitigation measures have been put into place due to the proximity to the existing CN Rail line. These mitigation measures are intended to minimize the potential conflicts along the rail corridor. As such, Ms. Zander opined that the planning instruments are consistent with the applicable policies of the PPS 2024.
UCOP
15It was Ms. Zander’s opinion that the planning instruments would allow the proposed development to align with the applicable policies and objectives of the UCOP. Specifically, the proposed R3-7 zoning aligns with the objectives of Schedule B1 and complies with s. 3.3.13 of the UCOP. This section of the UCOP protects the efficient and effective movement of goods and the continued viability of CN Rail’s operations. The agreement between the Appellant and CN Rail demonstrates how this section has been taken into regard and has been met.
By-law 2000-75
16Ms. Zander opined that the proposed planning instruments will establish a consistent zoning across the Subject Lands to permit the construction of the proposed townhouses and multi-unit residences. The zoning changes will meet the intent of the existing zoning standards and will bring back into effect the building height limit of 9m. Ms. Zander continued to opine that this zoning change will provide a zoning that conforms to the By-law 2000-75.
Conclusions and Recommendations
17It was Ms. Zander’s opinion that the settlement proposal before the Tribunal has regard for matters of provincial interest as per s. 2 of the Act. The settlement proposal is consistent with the PPS 2024 and conforms with the applicable policies of the UCOP and the Zoning By-law 2000-75 and should be approved in the form presented.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
18Having received the uncontroverted evidence and expert opinion of Ms. Zander, and the Tribunal receiving the uncontested opinions of the Parties in support of the proposed planning instruments before the Tribunal, the Tribunal accepts the evidence of Ms. Zander, and the Tribunal is satisfied that the OPA and the ZBA meet the statutory tests.
19The Tribunal finds that the settlement proposal is a matter of provincial interest as per Section 2 of the Act as it will provide needed density and housing options within a settlement area. The Tribunal finds that the settlement has demonstrated that it is consistent with the applicable policy framework of the PPS 2024 as the proposal will help promote efficient land use and an intensification that is in a compact form.
20The Tribunal finds that the proposal, as presented, has demonstrated its conformity to the UCOP and to By-law 2000-75.
21The Tribunal finds that the proposal is designed to fit harmoniously within the existing neighbourhood while providing an appropriate amount of residential density within a settlement area.
22The Tribunal finds that the planning instruments as presented should be approved.
ORDER
23THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed and that the Official Plan Amendment is approved as attached below as Attachment 1 to this Order.
24THE TRIBUNAL FURTHER ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed and the Zoning By-law Amendment is approved as attached below as Attachment 2 to this Order.
“S. deBoer”
S. DEBOER
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
Attachment 2