Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: December 15, 2022
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004020
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Appellant: 1077955 Ontario Inc.
Appellant: 2575950 Ontario Inc.
Appellant: 2595286 Ontario Inc.
Appellant: Carson Reid Homes Ltd. & South Edge Ltd.
Appellant: Gordon Street Inc.
Appellant: Ikonkar Group Inc. and 2298667 Ontario Inc.
Appellant: Neumann Group
Appellant: Options for Homes
Appellant: The Corporation of the Township of Puslinch
Appellant: Thomasfield Homes Limited
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 79
Municipality/UT: City of Guelph
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004020
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004020
OLT Case Name: Carson Reid Homes Ltd. & South Edge Ltd. V. Guelph (City)
Heard: December 6, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Township of Puslinch | Steven O’Melia |
| 2021 Gordon Street Inc., 2093 Gordon Street Inc., Michael and Sarah Watt (“Gordon Street Inc.”) | Scott Snider, Shelley Kaufman (in absentia) |
| Herbert Neumann, Frank Cerniuk, Sieben Holdings Limited, H and J Produce Limited, McEnery Industries Limited (“Neumann Group”) | Scott Snider, Shelley Kaufman (in absentia) |
| 2575950 Ontario Inc. | Jennifer Meader |
| 2595286 Ontario Ltd., Pinegrove Developments Inc. | Eric Davis, Kevin Thompson (in absentia) |
| Carson Reid Homes Ltd., South Edge Ltd. | Eric Davis, Kevin Thompson (in absentia) |
| Ikonkar Group Inc., 2298667 Ontario Inc. | Eric Davis, Kevin Thompson (in absentia) |
| Options for Homes Non-Profit Corporation (Greater Toronto Area) | Cynthia MacDougall, Matthew Schuman |
| 1077955 Ontario Inc. | Denise Baker, Raj Kehar (in absentia) |
| Thomasfield Homes Ltd., Springfield Golf & Country Club | Brendan O’Callaghan, Jasmine Fraser, Eileen Costello (in absentia) |
| City of Guelph | Allison Thornton, Colin Leger, Peter Pickfield (in absentia), Neil MacIsaac (Student-At-Law) |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HARDY ON DECEMBER 6, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The City of Guelph (“City”) adopted Official Plan Amendment No. 79 through By-law No. (2022)-20712 (“OPA 79”), introducing the Clair-Maltby Secondary Plan (“Secondary Plan”). The Secondary Plan deletes existing land use policies and designations that apply to the Clair-Maltby lands, amending schedules and adding a new Section to the City Official Plan that includes the new policies, schedules, and corresponding definitions for the Clair-Maltby Secondary Plan.
2The appeals are brought pursuant to ss. 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”) by entities and property owners that are affected by the Plan.
3On December 6, 2022, the Tribunal held its first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) to organize the appeals, address status requests and establish next steps in this proceeding.
4There were no issues raised with service of Notice of the CMC and as such, no further notice is required. The Tribunal was in receipt of the Affidavit of Service of Notice of the CMC which was marked as Exhibit 1 to this CMC.
STATUS REQUESTS
5Prior to the CMC, the Tribunal received two requests for Party status on behalf of landowners in the Clair-Maltby area: Timberworx Custom Homes Inc. (“Timberworx”) and Foundation for the Support of International Medical Training Inc. (“FSIMT”). The Tribunal reviewed the requirements under Rule 8.3 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure that Non-Appellant Parties:
“…may not raise or introduce a new issue in the proceeding. The non-appellant party may only participate in these appeals of municipal decisions by sheltering under an issue raised in an appeal by an appellant party and may participate fully in the proceeding to the extent that the issue remains in dispute.”
6Jonathan Minnes, Counsel for Timberworx, submitted that Timberworx owns 376 Maltby Road East and has an adjacent interest in 344 Maltby Road East, both of which are located within the Secondary Plan. Representatives of Timberworx have been involved in the public consultation process and Mr. Minnes advised the Tribunal that experts have been retained to provide evidence at a merit hearing.
7The City consented to the Party status request of Timberworx subject to Timberworx identifying under which appeals it intends to shelter. None of the Appellants raised any objections to the Party status request.
8Given the obvious interest of Timberworx in the Secondary Plan, the Tribunal granted the request for Party status and directed Timberworx to identify the appeals under which it will shelter in accordance with Tribunal Rule 8.3.
9Mike Marcolongo, representative of FSIMT, submitted that FSIMT owns 2162 Gordon Street which is located within the Secondary Plan. FSIMT have been involved in the public consultation process and Mr. Marcolongo advised the Tribunal that experts have been retained to provide evidence to the Tribunal at a merit hearing. Mr. Marcolongo further advised the Tribunal that FSIMT has retained Analee Baroudi as Counsel, however, Ms. Baroudi was unavailable to attend the CMC.
10The City consented to the Party status request of FSIMT subject to FSIMT identifying under which appeals it intends to shelter. Brendan O’Callaghan, Counsel for Thomasfield Homes Ltd., raised concerns with the late filing by FSIMT of the Party status request. Mr. O’Callaghan noted that the request makes reference to his client’s issues, and he has not had an opportunity to review the request nor get instructions from his client. Matthew Schuman, Counsel for Options for Homes Non-Profit Corporation (Greater Toronto Area), agreed with Mr. O’Callaghan that the late filing did not provide enough opportunity for a full review of the request.
11Given the concerns raised by some Appellants, the Tribunal granted FSIMT provisional Party status. The Tribunal directed FSIMT to circulate future correspondence and documents to all Appellants and Parties, including the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed FSIMT to attend the second CMC prepared to identify the appeals under which it will shelter in accordance with Tribunal Rule 8.3 and the Tribunal will re-visit the issue of Party status at that time.
12The Tribunal received one joint request for Participant status from Silvercreek Guelph Developments Limited, D Four Guelph Developments Limited and Fieldgate Commercial Developments Limited (“Observers”). Matt Helfand, Counsel for the Observers, clarified that the Observers were not seeking Participant status but were seeking to maintain a watching brief. There were no objections from the Appellants nor the City to this request.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT
13Counsel for all Parties concur that there is the prospect for resolution of some of the appeals and the potential of reducing the issues should the appeals proceed to a merit hearing. Allison Thornton, Counsel for the City, noted that it was very early in the process and as such, no formal settlement discussion had occurred to date.
NEXT STEPS
14On the eve prior to the CMC, a draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and Issues Lists were circulated to the City, the Appellants and provided to the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted concerns with the draft Issues Lists being duplicative and requiring substantial refinement prior to being reviewed and approved by the Tribunal.
15Ms. Thornton requested a second CMC be scheduled to review and approve the PO and Issues Lists and set dates for a hearing. Ms. Thornton noted that there has not been sufficient time to review the PO and Issues Lists with City planners to determine how much time would be required for a merit hearing. Further, the Issues Lists contain duplication and do not include the issues of the Township of Puslinch. Ms. Thornton submitted that it would be appropriate to schedule the merit hearing at the second CMC when the Issues Lists are more refined.
16Scott Snider, Counsel for Gordon Street Inc. and Neumann Group, advised the Tribunal that he has taken the lead organizing the Appellants, with the exception of the Township of Puslinch. Mr. Snider agreed with Ms. Thornton that a second CMC was appropriate but urged the Tribunal to schedule an 8 week merit hearing at this CMC. Mr. Snider submitted that scheduling the hearing at the second CMC will further delay resolution of the appeals. He noted that there is no prejudice to any party if the merit hearing is scheduled at this CMC and that a hearing of this length is difficult to organize for all Counsel involved so it is imperative that it gets into the Tribunal’s calendar and Counsels’ calendars. Mr. Snider further noted that if it is determined that phasing of the hearing is appropriate then it could be organized within the scheduled hearing dates, or in the alternative, dates could be given back to the Tribunal’s calendar. Denise Baker, Counsel for 1077955 Ontario Inc., agreed with Mr. Snider and noted that Counsel have been working cooperatively to date and no prejudice would be suffered if an 8 week merit hearing were scheduled at this CMC.
17The Tribunal finds the request for a second CMC reasonable given the large number of Appellants involved in this proceeding and as such, directed that a second CMC be scheduled for February 17, 2023. The Tribunal directed the Appellants to continue to work cooperatively to refine the Issues Lists and directed Mr. Snider to provide the Tribunal with a draft Procedural Order and consolidated Issues List on or before February 13, 2023. At the second CMC, the Parties are expected to be prepared to: finalize the Procedural Order and all related matters thereto; update the Tribunal on the outcome of any settlement efforts and the status of their respective appeals, and discuss whether any issues are appropriate for Tribunal-led mediation. In addition, at the second CMC Timberworx and FSIMT are expected to be prepared to identify under which issues they intend to shelter. The Tribunal will re-visit the provisional Party status of FSIMT at the second CMC.
18Upon considering the submissions of Counsel, the Tribunal determined that no prejudice would be suffered by any Parties in scheduling the hearing at this CMC. Further, in the interest of efficiency, it is appropriate to schedule the hearing well in advance to ensure all Counsel are available. The Tribunal directed that the hearing be scheduled for eight weeks commencing January 22, 2024.
ORDER
19The Tribunal orders that Timberworx Custom Homes Inc. is granted Party status in this proceeding.
20The Tribunal orders that Foundation for the Support of International Medical Training Inc. is granted provisional Party status in this proceeding.
21The Tribunal orders that a second Case Management Conference in this matter will be held by video hearing on Friday February 17, 2023 commencing at 10:00 a.m.
22The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/278736685
Access Code: 278 736 685
23Persons 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 as indicated above.
24Parties 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.
25Parties 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
26Individuals 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.
27The Tribunal directs Mr. Snider to submit a final draft Procedural Order with consolidated Issues List to the Tribunal on or before February 13, 2023.
28The Tribunal orders that the hearing in this matter will be held by video hearing on Monday, January 22, 2024 commencing at 10:00 a.m. Eight weeks have been set aside. For clarity, the last day set aside for the hearing in this matter is Friday, March 15, 2024.
29The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/442599157
Access Code: 442 599 157
30Persons 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 as indicated above.
31Parties 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.
32Parties 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
33Individuals 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.
34The Member is not seized, however, will remain available for case management subject to the Tribunal’s calendar.
35No further notice will be given.
“C. Hardy”
c. hardy
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.