Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 13, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001710
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Appellant: Mike Vaughan
Applicant: Shawside Development Limited
Subject: Zoning By-law
Description: Development of 23 single detached dwellings
Reference Number: BL 159-2021
Property Address: Part Lot 2, Concession 7
Municipality/UT: St. Thomas/Elgin County
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001710
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-21-001710
OLT Case Name: Vaughan v. St. Thomas (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(25) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended and subsection 19(1) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, S.O. 2021, c. 4, Sched. 6
Motion By: Shawside Development Limited
Purpose of Motion: Request for an Order Dismissing the Appeal
Heard: In writing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel*/Representative |
|---|---|
| Shawside Development Limited | Quinto Annibale* and Alexandra Whyte* |
| Michael Vaughan | Self-represented (in absentia) |
DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
BACKGROUND
1On October 18, 2021, Council of the City of St. Thomas (“City”) approved Zoning By-law No. 159-2021. The By-law granted the permissions necessary for Phase 8 of a previously approved development to proceed by specifically creating eighteen single lots, and further, by providing for the consolidation of parts of lots to be merged with remnant part lots in Phase 7 of lands being Part of Lot 2, Concession 7.
2On November 18, 2021, Michael Vaughan appealed the passing of By-law No. 159-2021. Mr. Vaughan was the sole Appellant.
3The Appeal was scheduled for a preliminary Case Management Conference (“CMC”) on July 25, 2022, in front of this Member, at which time Mr. Vaughan, the sole Appellant to By-law No. 159-2021, was in attendance for a portion of the video proceeding. Over the course of the CMC, the Tribunal was advised that Mr. Vaughan had failed to respond to requests from the other Parties attempting to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List in accordance with the direction of the Tribunal.
4The Tribunal advised Mr. Vaughan both during the course of the hearing, and in the written disposition, that his appeal must be framed in the form of issues that both fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and are authentic land use issues worthy of adjudication.
5Mr. Vaughan was given a series of deadlines to comply with the Order and subsequent directions of the Tribunal, specifically to file his Issues List for the consideration of the Tribunal no later than August 26, 2022. Following the passage of that deadline, the Tribunal again directed Mr. Vaughan to comply with the direction of the Tribunal by September 9, 2022, failing which, the Tribunal would consider his appeal abandoned.
6Mr. Vaughan failed to respond in any way to the direction of the Tribunal.
NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISMISS
7On November 18, 2022, Shawside Development Limited (“Shawside”) filed a Notice of Motion seeking relief pursuant to s. 34(25) of the Planning Act, that the appeal against By-law No. 159-2021 be dismissed without a hearing, citing the following grounds:
(1) The Appeal is not made in good faith or is frivolous or vexatious as the Notice of Appeal contends that the passage of the zoning by-law “is a violation of human rights, Wetlands #1, Rich People can Wait”, and other incoherent assertions.
(2) The Appeal is made solely for the purpose of delay, as Mr. Vaughan is the sole Appellant and has not responded to any of the numerous requests from the Parties and the Tribunal to substantiate his contentions. To date, there has been no suggestion of any intention to provide sustainable evidence.
(3) The Appellant has not responded to any direction or cautions from the Tribunal to fulfill his obligations as an Appellant.
8The Tribunal awaited the expected Responding Motion, and when by December 31, 2022, had received nothing from the Respondent/Appellant, Mr. Vaughan, the Tribunal scheduled the written Motion for February 14, 2023, and commenced its deliberation.
9On February 16, 2023, the Tribunal received an Accessibility accommodation request from the Appellant, advising that all materials/communications be provided through the postal service, as opposed to email.
10On, February 27, 2023, the Tribunal served hard copies of the Motion materials at Mr. Vaughan’s address, as specified in his accommodation request, with explicit instructions as to the expectations of him to respond as an Appellant. All pertinent extracts from the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedures were provided to Mr. Vaughan in hardcopy to guide and assist in the execution of this obligation.
11To date, nothing has been received from Mr. Vaughan, and the writer has confirmed that there has been no form of communication from the Appellant with any Tribunal staff, seeking clarification, assistance or otherwise.
12The Tribunal therefore returned to the motion brought by Shawside pursuant to s. 34(25) of the Planning Act, and further, in light of the circumstances specific to this appeal, the Tribunal put its mind to s. 19(1) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, which provides the Tribunal the authority, on the motion of any party, or on its own initiatives, to dismiss a proceeding without a hearing:
(b) if the party who brought the proceeding has not responded to a request by the Tribunal for further information within the time specified by the Tribunal;
(c) if the Tribunal is of the opinion that the proceeding has no reasonable prospect of success.
13The Tribunal agrees with all of the grounds cited by Shawside, and elects to invoke s. 19(1)(c) as the primary grounds for the Dismissal. The Appellant has consistently failed to rise to the threshold of bringing any authentic land use planning grounds in support of the appeal, and in fact, has failed to respond to any direction from the Tribunal. Therefore, as forewarned in the Tribunal’s direction notice emailed September 1, 2022 by the Case Coordinator under the direction of the writer, the Tribunal has determined the Appeal to have no reasonable prospect of success.
ORDER
14THE TRIBUNAL HEREBY ORDERS the Appeal brought by Michael Vaughan against By-law No. 159-2021 is dismissed.
“Sharyn Vincent”
SHARYN VINCENT
VICE-CHAIR
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.