Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 08, 2022
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002042 (Formerly, PL200546)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Ms. Asha R. Batra Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of the City of Richmond Hill to adopt the requested amendment Existing Designation: “Rural and Hazard Land” Proposed Designated: “Industrial and Hazard Land” Purpose: To permit the development of industrial uses and open storage areas Property Address/Description: Part of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5, Concession 3, City of Richmond Hill Municipality: City of Richmond Hill Approval Authority File No.: D01-87033 OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002042 Legacy Case No.: PL200546 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002042 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL200546 OLT Case Name: Batra v. Richmond Hill (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Ms. Asha R. Batra Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 189-78 - Neglect of the City of Richmond Hill to make a decision Existing Zoning: “Rural (R) Zone” Proposed Zoning: “General Industrial Zone” and “Flood (F) Zone” Purpose: To permit the development of industrial uses and open storage areas Property Address/Description: Part of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5, Concession 3, City of Richmond Hill Municipality: City of Richmond Hill Municipality File No.: D02-87058 OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002044 Legacy Case No.: PL200547 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002042 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL200546
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Ms. Asha R. Batra Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision - Failure of the City of Richmond Hill to make a decision Purpose: To permit the development of industrial uses and open storage areas Property Address/Description: Part of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5, Concession 3, City of Richmond Hill Municipality: City of Richmond Hill Municipality File No.: D03-87083 OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002045 Legacy Case No.: PL200548 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002042 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL200546
Heard: February 9, 2022 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Asha Batra (“Applicant/Appellant”) | Jane Pepino and Matthew Di Vona |
| City of Richmond Hill (“City”) | Carlton Thorne |
| Region of York (“Region”) | Bola Ogunmefun |
| Environmental Defence | Philip Pothen |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY A. CORNACCHIA ON FEBRUARY 9, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1During the second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) for this matter, the Tribunal dealt with the issue of whether a motion to adjourn should be scheduled and whether any adjustments should be made to the schedule for the preparation of the preliminary written motion scheduled during the first CMC (“Preliminary Motion”).
BACKGROUND
2The Applicant filed an appeal due to the City’s failure to make decisions on a proposed Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) Application, a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) Application, and a draft Plan of Subdivision (“PoS”) Application.
3These applications were submitted in 1987 to permit the development of an industrial PoS on lands legally described as Part Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5, Concession 3, in the City (“Subject Lands”). The Subject Lands are located in the West Gormley area of the City, are approximately 100 hectares (“ha”) in size and are bounded by the Canadian National Railway (“CNR”) to the west, Bethesda Side Road to the north, Highway 404 to the east and Stouffville Road to the south. The exact land area covered by the original PoS is unclear.
4A City Council resolution dated May 13, 2020 was passed confirming that the Subject Lands are transitioned pursuant to s. 15 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act. The resolution outlines reasons why the applications should proceed and under what conditions any approval should be given. The Tribunal is not able to determine if there is a report from staff providing advice to Council to support this resolution.
5City Council requested that the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (“Minister”) provide formal confirmation of the transitional status of the Subject Lands and to issue a Minister’s Zoning Order to permit General Industrial uses on these lands. The request for a Minister’s Zoning Order was not granted.
6At the first CMC, it was decided that before the merits of the appeal could be addressed, it was important to deal with two threshold issues namely:
- Does the Tribunal have the jurisdiction and is the matter properly before the Tribunal to hear this private application?
- What is the extent of land area that is the subject of this appeal? (collectively, “Threshold Issues”)