Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

CORRECTION NOTICE

OLT CASE NO(S).:

OLT-22-004393

DECISION ISSUE DATE(S):

January 18, 2023

CORRECTION NOTICE ISSUE DATE:

March 20, 2023

RE: Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc. Meaford (Municipality)

Correction to: Paragraph [12] – the access code is changed from: “709-076-365” to “719-383-509”.

Originally:

Corrected to:

12Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GotoMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event by calling to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or toll free: 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 709-076-365.

12Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GotoMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event by calling to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or toll free: 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 719-383-509.

“Euken Lui”

EUKEN LUI

ACTING REGISTRAR

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.

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE:

January 18, 2023

CASE NO(S).:

OLT-22-004393

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22 (7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant:

Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc.

Subject:

Request to amend the Official Plan – neglect to make a decision

Description:

Propose a five-storey residential condominium building on Trowbridge Street East and 12 Bayfield Street

Reference Number:

OPA29

Property Address:

23 and 37 Trowbridge Street East and 12 Bayfield Street

Municipality/UT:

Meaford/Grey

OLT Case No:

OLT-22-004393

OLT Lead Case No:

OLT-22-004393

OLT Case Name:

Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc. v. Meaford (Municipality)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant:

Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc.

Subject:

Application to amend the Zoning By-law – neglect to make a decision

Reference Number:

Z06-2021

Property Address:

23 and 37 Trowbridge Street East and 12 Bayfield Street

Municipality/UT:

Meaford/Grey

OLT Case No:

OLT-22-004394

OLT Lead Case No:

OLT-22-004393

Heard:

December 5, 2022 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc.

Olivia Rasekhi and Jason Park

Municipality of Meaford

Harold Elston and Carly Emmett

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED ON DECEMBER 5, 2022 BY S. BRAUN AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) with respect to appeals brought pursuant to s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) of the Planning Act by Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc. (“Appellant”), against the failure of the Municipality of Meaford to decide on applications for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) in relation to the property located at 23 and 37 Trowbridge St. E. and 12 Bayfield St (“subject property”/“site”).

2The Tribunal received an Affidavit of Service dated November 4, 2022 confirming that Notice of this CMC was properly given and, as such, no further notice of future hearing events is required. In response to the Notice, no requests for Party status were received, but the following individuals sought Participant status:

• Christine Codrington

• Caryn Colman

• Kimberly Grafton

• Vivian Grant

• Elizabeth Harris

• Robyn Hunter

• Susan Johnston

• Jim Molineux

• David Roach

• Rosamund Rossetti

• Cindy Slee

• Pamela Solursh

• James Sullivan

3Counsel for the Appellant objected to the granting of Participant status to all the above-named individuals, save and except for Jim Molineux, who resides relatively close to the subject property. It was submitted that the remainder of those seeking status in the proceedings lack a direct connection to the subject property given that they reside well beyond 120 metres (“m”) thereof, with some residing as far as nine kilometres away. As such, it was submitted the proposed development would not directly impact these individuals.

4Counsel for the Municipality described the subject property as a “prominent” site in Meaford and explained that any development which occurs thereon will be of importance to the entire community, not just those who reside within 120 m. As such, it was submitted that any residents of Meaford who submitted a request for Participant status in advance of the CMC should be granted such status.

5Based upon the submissions of counsel for the Municipality, the Tribunal found it appropriate to grant Participant status to the individuals set out in paragraph 2 (above). The Tribunal directed that, should any or all of the Participants intend to file a written statement for consideration at the hearing, they must do so in accordance with the deadline specified in the attached Procedural Order (“PO”) governing the proceedings.

6As a number of the Participant Status Request Forms raised similar issues with the proposed development, the Tribunal explained that repetition does not improve the merit of an argument, nor does the Member or Panel presiding over the hearing assign greater weight to a concern based upon the number of times that concern is raised. For the sake of efficiency, the Tribunal encouraged co-ordination between interested individuals who share common concerns and suggested such individuals may wish to consider submitting a joint written statement(s) to avoid undue repetition.

7Unfortunately, there appeared to be some transmission/copy issues making it difficult to read the entirety of the Status Request Forms received from Robyn Hunter and Pamela Solursh. While the Member and the Parties were able to glean enough information from the Forms to determine at least some of the concerns raised by these individuals, Ms. Hunter and Ms. Solursh are directed to resubmit clear and readable copies of their request forms to the Tribunal and to both Parties as soon as possible. They may reach out to the Case Co-ordinator should they require assistance

8Following the Tribunal’s ruling on the requests for status, Counsel for the Appellant requested clarifying information from Elizabeth Harris with respect to whether she intended to seek such status on behalf of the Meaford Heritage Advisory Committee (“Advisory Committee”) or as an individual. Unfortunately, Ms. Harris was not present at the CMC to provide such clarification. The Tribunal granted Ms. Harris Participant Status as an individual and directs that, if it was her intention to seek Participant Status on behalf of the Advisory Committee, she must advise the Tribunal and both Parties as soon as possible and submit the Advisory Committee’s written statement for consideration at the hearing in accordance with the deadline specified in the PO. The presiding Member or Panel will consider the request at the beginning of the hearing and the Parties will have an opportunity to make oral submissions with respect to the request at that time.

9With respect to opportunities for settlement, the Parties indicated that they are aware of the availability of Tribunal-assisted mediation and are aware of how they may avail themselves of this resource. They further indicated that, while they remain open to exploring same as a means of resolving the issues under appeal, they are not in a position to do so at this stage of the proceeding. As such, the Parties requested the scheduling of an eight-day (“8-day”) video hearing, which is scheduled to commence at 10:00 a.m. on October 2, 2023. Parties should note that the Tribunal will not sit on Monday, October 9, 2023, in observance of Thanksgiving Day.

10Parties and Participants and anyone seeking Party or Participant status are asked to log in to 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/719383509

Access code: 719-383-509

11Parties 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.

12Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or toll free: 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 709-076-365.

13Individuals 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 earing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

14Following the CMC, counsel for the Appellant revised a draft PO and Issues List (“IL”) in accordance with the Tribunal’s directions and submitted a finalized version thereof with the consent of the Municipality (attached hereto as Schedule 1), which shall govern the proceedings leading up to and including the scheduled hearing.

15The Tribunal inquired as to whether there were any other matters to be addressed which might assist in the fair, just and expeditious resolution of this matter. The Parties indicated there were none.

16There will be no further notice and this Member is not seized but may be available for case management should scheduling permit.

17It is so ordered.

“S. Braun”

S. Braun

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 (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.

SCHEDULE 1

Ontario Land Tribunal 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Telephone: (416) 212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248 Website: olt.gov.on.ca

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire 655 rue Bay, suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Téléphone: (416) 212-6349 Sans Frais: 1-866-448-2248 Site Web: olt.gov.on.ca

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004393

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22 (7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – neglect to make a decision

Description: Propose a five-storey residential condominium building on Trowbridge Street East and 12 Bayfield Street

Reference Number: OPA29

Property Address: 23 and 37 Trowbridge Street East and 12 Bayfield Street

Municipality/UT: Meaford/Grey

OLT Case No: OLT-22-004393

OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004393

Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280

OLT Case Name: Ontario Inc. v. Meaford (Municipality)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – neglect to make a decision

Reference Number: Z06-2021

Property Address: 23 and 37 Trowbridge Street East and 12 Bayfield Street

Municipality/UT: Meaford/Grey

OLT Case No: OLT-22-004394 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004393

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The Tribunal orders that:

1. The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.

Organization of the Hearing

2. The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:

Date: Monday, October 2, 2023 – Thursday, October 12, 2023 (save and except Monday, October 9, 2023)

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/719383509

Audio only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or toll free: 1-888-299-1889

Audio-only access code: 719-383-509

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 8 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible. The procedural order deadlines are generally found in Attachment “1” to this Order.

[1]

4. The parties and participants identified at the Case Management Conference are listed in Attachment “2” to this Order.

[2]

5. The Issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment “3” to this Order. 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.

[3]

6. The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment “4” hereto. 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 the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.

[4]

7. 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.

[5]

8. Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.

[6]

Requirements Before the Hearing

9. A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before Tuesday, August 8, 2023, and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’s Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified. Any challenges to the witness, including qualifications of a witness to give opinion evidence in the area of expertise proposed shall be made by motion in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules and notice of same must be served on the other parties on or before Monday, September 18, 2023.

[7]

10. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, August 11, 2023, and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case coordinator on or before Friday, September 15, 2023.

[8]

11. 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 paragraph 13 below. 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.

[9]

12. 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 paragraph 13 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’s evidence, as in paragraph 13 below.

[10]

13. On or before Friday, August 18, 2023, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case coordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

[11]

14. On or before Friday, August 18, 2023, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

[12]

15. On or before Monday, August 28, 2023, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

[13]

16. On or before Monday, September 25, 2023, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

[14]

17. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case coordinator a written response to any written evidence within ten (10) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

[15]

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case coordinator on or before Friday, September 22, 2023.

[16]

19. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

[17]

20. 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.

[18]

21. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Monday, September 25, 2023 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.

[19]

22. All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7.

23. 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.

[20]

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

ATTACHMENT “1”

SUMMARY OF KEY DATES

Date

Hearing Event

Tuesday, August 8, 2023

Exchange of List of Witnesses and the order in which they will be called – para. 9

Friday, August 11, 2023

Expert Witness Meeting – para. 10

Friday, August 18, 2023

Exchange of Witness Statements – para. 13 Delivery of Participant Statements – para. 14

Monday, August 28, 2023

Confirmation to Tribunal if all reserved hearing dates are still required – para. 15

Exchange of Reply Evidence/Statements – para. 17

Friday, September 15, 2023

Filing of Statement(s) of Agreed Facts and Issues – para. 10

Monday, September 18, 2023

Notice of Motion (if required) to challenge witness(es) – para. 9

Friday, September 22, 2023

Filing of Joint Document Book – para. 18

Monday, September 25, 2023

Exchange of Visual Evidence – para. 16

Filing of Hearing Plan – para. 21

Notification to Tribunal and Parties if witness not to provide oral evidence – para. 20

Monday, October 2, 2023

Contested Hearing (if required) – para. 2

ATTACHMENT “2”

PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES

GLEN RHESA McCRABB, 299077 ONTARIO INC. and 1862280 ONTARIO INC.

Jason Park / Olivia Rasekhi Devine Park LLP 2302 - 250 Yonge Street Toronto, ON M5B 2L7

T: 416.645.4572 / 416.645.4532 E: jason.park@devinepark.com / olivia.rasekhi@devinepark.com

MUNICIPALITY OF MEAFORD

Harold G. Elston Barrister and Solicitor 391 First Street, Suite 303 Collingwood, ON L9Y 1B3

T: 705.443.8183 E: counsel@haroldelston.com

Carly Emmett Barriston Law 151 Ferris Lane, Suite 202 Barrie, ON L4M 6C1

T: 705.792.9200 E: cemmett@barristonlaw.com

PARTICIPANTS

Jim Molineux T: 519.538.3133 E: mmol@rogers.com

Elizabeth Harris T: 519.538.0111 E: lizjharris@outlook.com

David Roach

T: 416.347.4212

E: dbroach1955@gmail.com

Caryn Colman T: 647.850.6085 E: caryn.colman@gmail.com

Susan Johnston T: 905.751.6054 E: silkwalks@gmail.com

Rosamund Rossetti T: 519.538.1866 E: rosamundr@aol.com

Kimberly Grafton T: 519.538-3542 E: baybreeze7@sympatico.ca

Cindy Slee T: 226.668.7221 E: cindyslee@rogers.com

Christine Codrington T: 519.538.0238 E: chriscod@bmts.com

Vivian Grant T: 905.407.6970 E: vjjgrant@gmail.com

Robyn Hunter T: 519.538.3411

E: divingloons@gmail.com

James Sullivan T: 226.974.5349 E: jimmy.works@rogers.com

Pamela Solursh

T: 519.538.0416

E: psolursh@rogers.com

ATTACHMENT “3”

ISSUES LIST

Municipality of Meaford

I – Planning Issues

1. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard to the following matters of provincial interest: Planning Act, s. 2 (a), (d), (h), (n), and (r)?

[21]

2. Is the proposed development consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) sections, 1.6, 1.6.6.7, 3.1, 3.1.6, and 3.1.7?

[22]

3. Does the proposed development conform with the Meaford Official Plan 2014 consolidation, sections B1.3.4, B1.3.5.2, B1.3.5.4, B1.3.6, B3.1.1, B3.1.2, C1, C2.1, C3, C3.1, C5, C6, C7, D1.9, D2.1, D2.2.3 , D2.4, D2.5.2, D2.6, D2.6.2, D2.6.3, D3.2.1.1, D3.2.1.3, D5, D7, E1.1.1., E1.3?

[23]

4. Does the proposed development conform with Downtown Meaford Heritage Conservation District Study Section 4.0 Guidelines for Managing Change to Property?

[24]

5. Is the proposed Official Plan Amendment appropriate?

[25]

6. Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment appropriate?

II – Engineering

7. Is there water and wastewater capacity available for the development?

8. Is the proposed stormwater management approach appropriate for controlling water on-site and are there improvements needed in the off-site outlets to the Bay?

9. Does the proposed servicing meet the most up to date Municipal Engineering Standards and is there water and wastewater capacity available in the distribution and collection systems and at the treatment plants?

10. Is the proposed road network adjacent to the proposed development appropriate, is it consistent with the most up to date Municipal Engineering Standards, and does it accommodate for the movement of servicing vehicles?

[26]

11. Do all intersections impacted by the development have the necessary intersection control methods to deal with increased traffic volumes from the development?

[27]

12. Is the traffic opinion letter adequate?

[28]

13. Is the Functional Service and Stormwater Management report adequate?

[29]

14. Will the proposed development ensure there is no impact to adjacent properties, buildings and infrastructure during construction and following completion of the development? What monitoring will be competed to confirm no impact has occurred to adjacent properties, building and infrastructure?

[30]

15. Is there adequate parking on site to accommodate the proposed development? And is does the development take into consideration the necessary safety measure and controls in the parking structure to deal with the site conditions?

[31]

16. Does the proposed development impact access or use of the unopened road allowance?

[32]

17. Does the proposed development impact the wastewater collection system syphon?

[33]

18. Does the proposed development provide for adequate snow storage on site?

[34]

19. Does the proposed development impact turnaround for snowplow equipment and access to the river to complete required maintenance including unblocking ice jams?

III – General

20. Does the proposal adequately provide for pedestrian and other public uses of the public right of way?

ATTACHMENT “4”

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc.

[35]

2. Municipality of Meaford

3. Reply by Glen Rhesa McCrabb, 299077 Ontario Inc. and 1862280 Ontario Inc. (if any)

ATTACHMENT “5”

DEFINITIONS

A party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. An unincorporated group cannot be a party and it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorisation from the party.

NOTE that a person who wishes to become a party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the case management conference (CMC), must ask the Tribunal to permit this.

A participant is an individual or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a party may do so). Section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A participant may also be asked questions by the parties should the Tribunal direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.

A participant must be identified and be accorded participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a participant does not have the rights of a party to make such requests of the Tribunal.

Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.

Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing.

A witness statement is a short written outline of the person’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss; and a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing.

An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness’s opinions on those issues and the complete reasons supporting their opinions and conclusions, and (5) a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of expert’s duty.

A participant statement is a short written outline of the person’s or group’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a statement of the participant’s position on the appeal; a list of the issues which the participant wishes to address and the submissions of the participant on those issues; and a list of reports or materials, if any, which the participant wishes to refer to in their statement.

Additional Information

A summons may compel the appearance of a person before the Tribunal who has not agreed to appear as a witness. A party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons through a request. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) The request should indicate how the witness’s evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the information provided in the request that the evidence is relevant, necessary or admissible, the party requesting the summons may provide a further request with more detail or bring a motion in accordance with the Rules.

The order of examination of witnesses is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:

• direct examination by the party presenting the witness;

• direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;

• cross-examination by parties of opposite interest;

• re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or

• another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Tribunal.