Ontario Land Tribunal / Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 18, 2021
CASE NO(S).: PL210102
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(40) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: TPC at Marlwood Inc.
Subject: Failure of Town of Wasaga Beach to announce a decision respecting Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. OPA20/17
Municipality: Town of Wasaga Beach
LPAT Case No.: PL210102
LPAT File No.: PL210102
LPAT Case Name: TPC at Marlwood Inc. v. Wasaga Beach (Town)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: TPC at Marlwood Inc.
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2003-60 - Refusal or neglect of Town of Wasaga Beach to make a decision
Existing Zoning: Open Space (OS)
Proposed Zoning: Residential Type One Zone
Purpose: To permit single-detached dwellings
Property Address/Description: 31 Marlwood Avenue
Municipality: Town of Wasaga Beach
Municipality File No.: Z11/17
LPAT Case No.: PL210102
LPAT File No.: PL210103
Heard: June 16, 2021 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Town of Wasaga Beach | Harold Elston |
| TPC at Marlwood Inc. | Matthew Helfand |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY WILLIAM R. MIDDLETON ON JUNE 16, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1The Ontario Land Tribunal (“OLT” or “Tribunal”) convened a video hearing on June 16, 2021 to conduct the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in this proceeding. This matter involves an appeal by TPC at Marlwood Inc. (“Marlwood” or the “Appellant”) under: (a) s. 17(40) of the Planning Act, R.S.O 1990, c. P.13 of the failure by the Town of Wasaga Beach (“Town”) to make a decision to grant an amendment of the Town’s Official Plan; and (b) under s. 34(11) of the Act of the refusal of the Town to make a decision to grant an amendment of its Zoning By-law No. 2003-60. These appeals both pertain to the redevelopment of the lands and property located at the property known municipally as 31 Marlwood Avenue in the Town (“Subject Lands”). The Appellant currently seeks to build a total of 60 single detached dwellings on the Subject Lands, which surround a golf course (“Proposal”).
2The matters to be dealt with at this CMC were: (i) to consider any requests for Party or Participant status; (ii) to receive submissions concerning a draft Procedural Order; and (iii) to consider any further related matters raised by the Parties or Participants.
Requests for Party and Participant Status
3At the CMC, the following individuals sought Participant status in this proceeding: Frank Steele and Lorraine Steele; and Parkridge Communities Inc. (“Parkridge”) as represented by Liam Tapp. Frank and Lorraine Steele reside in a house in the golf course community adjacent to the Subject Lands. Parkridge is a developer which owns a housing development also adjacent to the Subject Lands.
4There were no objections from counsel for the Town or counsel for Marlwood to either request for Participant status described in paragraph [3] above. The Tribunal was satisfied that Mr. Steele, who agreed to be the sole Participant from his household, and Parkridge are appropriate Participants in this proceeding based upon the applicable provisions of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”) and the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021, S.O. 2021, c. 4.
5The Tribunal therefore granted Participant status to Mr. Steele and to Parkridge in this matter. Mr. Tapp who is employed as a planning technician with Parkridge agreed to ensure that an appropriate corporate resolution from Parkridge was filed with the Tribunal to confirm that he is authorized to be its representative. Subsequent to the CMC, the Tribunal received that resolution from Parkridge.
6No other persons present at the CMC sought Party or Participant status.
Procedural Order and Related Matters
7Counsel for the Town and Marlwood both made submissions concerning what they characterized as very good prospects for the settlement of all outstanding issues pertaining to the Proposal and this appeal. They also noted that considerable progress toward an overall resolution has been made as recently as May 2021 – prior to the CMC, counsel for Marlwood had filed with the Tribunal correspondence alluding to the settlement discussions which had occurred.
8In light of this, both counsel indicated that they believed the Parties would likely seek to have the Tribunal convene a settlement hearing in the late fall of 2021 although they requested it be first scheduled as a second CMC. However, due to impending summer vacations and the associated logistics of required negotiation meetings and Town Council sessions, counsel proposed that a second CMC be scheduled in either late October or early November. They submitted that this second CMC could be converted to a settlement hearing upon filing of the required materials by the Parties.
9The Tribunal consistently supports reasonable and timely efforts by Parties to any proceeding to reach a settlement without the requirement for further hearing events. The Tribunal reminded counsel of the availability of Tribunal mediators to assist them if and as required.
10On the other hand, the Tribunal’s view is that it is always in the best interests of the Parties and the public to advance the Tribunal proceedings in a reasonable way. Therefore, the Tribunal urged the Parties to reach agreement on a draft Procedural Order in time for the second CMC if it turns out that a satisfactory settlement cannot be achieved by then. Counsel for the Parties have agreed to do so.
ORDER
11The Tribunal therefore makes the following Orders:
(a) A second CMC will be scheduled by the Tribunal to take place on Tuesday, November 2, 2021 at 10 a.m., as follows:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/154796749
Access Code: 154-796-749
Parties and Participants are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections.
Parties and Participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line: Toll-Free 1-888-455-1389 or +1 (647) 497-9391. The access code is 154-796-749.
Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the CMC hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
(b) Prior to the second case management conference described in paragraph [11] (a) above, the Parties shall submit to the Tribunal a draft Procedural Order in agreed form and content or, failing such agreement, with an explanation of any areas of disagreement;
(c) In the event that the Parties successfully achieve a resolution of all outstanding issues raised in this appeal, they shall file a request for a settlement hearing in accordance with the Rules and shall forthwith advise the Tribunal that they wish to have the settlement hearing be scheduled at the earliest available date according to the Tribunal’s calendar or, alternatively, on Tuesday, November 2, 2021 commencing at 10 a.m. as otherwise described above in paragraph [11] (a).
“William R. Middleton”
WILLIAM R. MIDDLETON
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.