Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
July 28, 2021
CASE NO(S).:
PL190556
The Ontario Municipal Board (the “OMB”) and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the “LPAT”) is continued under the name Ontario Land Tribunal (the “Tribunal”), and any reference to the Ontario Municipal Board or Local Planning Appeal Tribunal in any publication of the Tribunal is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Mi Yuk Li
Subject:
Application amend Zoning By-law No. 2010-100Z - Refusal of Application by City of Greater Sudbury
Existing Zoning:
R1-5 Low Density Residential One
Proposed Zoning:
R1-5(Special) Low Density Residential One Special
Purpose:
To permit a shared-housing facility with a maximum of 12 guest rooms
Property Address/Description:
1305 Barry Downe Road
Municipality:
City of Greater Sudbury
Municipality File No.:
751-6/19-8
LPAT Case No.:
PL190556
LPAT File No.:
PL190556
LPAT Case Name:
Li v. Greater Sudbury (City)
Heard:
June 8, 2021 by video hearing and July 26, 2021 by telephone conference call
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel*/Representative
Mi Yuk Li
Self-represented
City of Greater Sudbury
K. Gravelle* (on June 8, 2021) and S. Watt* (on July 26, 2021)
DECISION DELIVERED BY HUGH S. WILKINS AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This Decision arises from a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) regarding the appeal brought by Mi Yuk Li (“Appellant”) of the refusal by the City of Greater Sudbury (“City”) of a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment relating to the property located at 1305 Barry Downe Road (“subject property”).
2At the CMC, the Tribunal addressed requests for status, the identification of issues, the preparation of a draft Procedural Order, opportunities for settlement discussions, and the setting of hearing dates.
3At the CMC, Barry Zyma, Helen Nicholas, and Joscelyne Landry-Altmann each requested Participant status. Each of these persons lives in the vicinity of the subject property or was involved in the process before City Council when it considered the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment. None of these requests were opposed and the Tribunal granted Participant status to each person, as requested.
4At the CMC, the Parties agreed to prepare and file an Issues List and draft Procedural Order. They subsequently filed drafts on June 24, 2021. On July 26, 2021, the Tribunal held a telephone conference call with the Parties at which further inputs on the proposed issues were made and the draft Issues List was revised. The Tribunal has reviewed and approves the revised Issues List and Procedural Order.
5The Parties expressed little optimism about pursuing settlement discussions or mediation and requested that the Tribunal schedule a one-day hearing. The Tribunal encourages the Parties to work together and consider engaging in settlement discussions to either narrow or resolve the issues. The Tribunal scheduled a one-day hearing for October 2021.
ORDER
6The Tribunal orders that Barry Zyma, Helen Nicholas, and Joscelyne Landry-Altmann are Participants in this proceeding.
7The Tribunal approves the Issues List and Procedural Order attached as Schedule 1 to this Order and Decision.
8The Tribunal orders that the hearing will commence by video hearing on Thursday, October 7, 2021 commencing at 10 a.m. One day has been set aside.
9Parties 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:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/475401477
Access code: 475-401-477
10Parties and Participants are asked to set up the video hearing 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.
11Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling: +1 (647) 497-9373 and (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889. The access code is 475-401-477.
12Individuals 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 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.
13There will be no further notice.
14This Member is not seized.
“Hugh S. Wilkins”
HUGH S. WILKINS
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.
ISSUE DATE: July 28, 2021 CASE NO(S).: PL190556
PROCEEDING COMMENDED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended:
Applicant and Appellant: Mi Yuk Li
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2010-100Z – Refusal of Application by City of Greater Sudbury
Property Address/Description: 1305 Barry Downe Road
Municipality: City of Greater Sudbury
Municipal File No.: 751-6/19-8
OLT Case No.: PL190556
OLT File No.: PL190556
OLT Case Name: Li v. Greater Sudbury (City)
- The Tribunal may vary or add to these rules at any time, either on request or as it sees fit. It may alter this Order by an oral ruling, or by another written Order.
Organization of the Hearing
The hearing will begin on Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
The length of the hearing will be about 1 day. The length of the hearing may be shortened as issues are reordered as settlement is achieved.
The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1.
The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.
The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3 to this Order. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on consent or by Order of the Tribunal.
Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.
Requirements Before the Hearing
A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal, the other parties and to the municipal clerk a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before July 30, 2021. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before September 1, 2021 to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. The experts must prepare a list of agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing and provide this list to all of the parties and the municipal Clerk.
An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in section 12. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony.
Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in section 12. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in section 12.
On or before September 2, 2021, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the municipal Clerk of the City of Greater Sudbury.
On or before August 30, 2021, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.
Parties may provide to all other parties and file with the Clerk a written response to any written evidence within seven (7) days after the evidence is received.
A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal.
A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least seven (7) days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.
The parties shall prepare and file a hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before September 8, 2021 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.
Documents may be delivered by personal delivery, registered or certified mail or email, or otherwise as the Tribunal may direct. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Tribunal’s Rules (Rule 7) on this subject. Material delivered by mail shall be deemed to have been received five business days after the date of registration or certification.
No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.
This Member is not seized.
So orders the Tribunal.
BEFORE:
Name of Member:
Date:
____________________________
TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR
Attachment 1
LIST OF PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS
Parties
- Mi Yuk Li
340 Hyland Drive
Sudbury ON P3E 1S4
Email: jennyli6888@gmail.com
Tel: 416-605-6888
- City of Greater Sudbury
Stephen Watt
391 First Street
P.O. Box 202, Suite 205 Collingwood ON L9Y 1B3 Email: swatt@municipal-law.ca Tel: 416-977-9874
Participants
- Barry Zyma
1237 Barry Downe Road
Sudbury ON P3A 3V6
Email: just.barry50@gmail.com
- Helen Nicholas
1356 Barry Downe Road
Sudbury ON P3A 3V7
- Joscelyne Landry-Altmann
200 Brady Street Street
P.O. Box 5000, STN “A”
Sudbury ON P3A 5P3
Email: joscelyne.landry-altmann@greatersudbury.ca
Attachment 2
ISSUES LIST
NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the Tribunal or any party that the issue is either relevant or appropriate. The identification of an issue on this list by a party indicates that party’s intent to lead evidence or argue that the issue is relevant to the proceeding, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other parties the case they need to meet. Accordingly, no party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the Tribunal.
APPELLANT’S ISSUES:
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment conform with the Growth Plan for Northern Ontario, policy 4?
Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, policies 1.1.1 (b), 1.4.1 and 1.4.3 (a)?
Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and does it conform with Growth Plan Growth Plan for Northern Ontario in regard to any applicable policies in them on:
a. renting housing?
b. affordable housing?
c. population growth and needs?
d. maintaining quality of life?
CITY’S ISSUES:
Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with policies 1.1.3.3 and 1.1.3.4 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020?
Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment conform with policies 2.3.1(f), 2.3.1(g), 2.3.3(8), 2.3.3(9)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (g), 2.3.3(10), 3.2.1(1) and 3.2.1(6) of the Official Plan for the City of Greater Sudbury?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment conform with the Growth Plan for Northern Ontario?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment represent good planning?
Attachment 3
ORDER OF EVIDENCE
Evidence-in-Chief
Mi Yuk Li
City of Greater Sudbury
Reply Evidence (if any)
- Mi Yuk Li