1306497 Ontario Inc. v. Vaughan (City), 2023 CanLII 64039

Ontario Land Tribunal / Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: July 12, 2023

CASE NO.: OLT-22-004498

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1306497 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit a transit-oriented development which includes residential towers, as well as amenity, retail and office space

Reference Number: OP.21.021

Property Address: 88 Steeles Avenue West

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004498

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004498

OLT Case Name: 1306497 Ontario Inc. v. Vaughan (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1306497 Ontario Inc.

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

Description: To permit a transit-oriented development which includes residential towers, as well as amenity, retail and office space

Reference Number: Z.21.043

Property Address: 88 Steeles Avenue West

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004499

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004498

BEFORE:

KURTIS SMITH MEMBER

Wednesday, the 12th day of July, 2023

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that further to the Decision issued on June 26, 2023, the Procedural Order, as agreed to between the Parties and attached hereto as Schedule “A”, shall be in force and effect for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing, which is scheduled to commence on April 22, 2024. The Tribunal has set aside five days for the hearing.

“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.

SCHEDULE A

ISSUE DATE: CASE NO(S).:

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1306497 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit a transit-oriented development which includes residential towers, as well as amenity, retail and office space

Reference Number: OP.21.021

Property Address: 88 Steeles Avenue West

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004498

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004498

OLT Case Name: 1306497 Ontario Inc. v. Vaughan (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1306497 Ontario Inc.

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

Description: To permit a transit-oriented development which includes residential towers, as well as amenity, retail and office space

Reference Number: Z.21.043

Property Address: 88 Steeles Avenue West

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004499

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004498

PROCEDURAL ORDER

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 video hearing will begin on April 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. at: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/709076365

Access Code: 709-076-365

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 5 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.

4. The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1.

5. 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.

6. 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 the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.

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.

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.

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 January 23, 2024 (date – at least 90 days prior to the start of the hearing) and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. 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.

10. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before February 12, 2024 (– at least 70 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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 co-ordinator on or before February 22, 2024 (date – at least 60 days prior to the start of the hearing).

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.

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’ evidence, as in paragraph 13 below.

13. On or before March 8, 2024 (date – at least 45 days prior to the start of the hearing), the parties shall provide copies of their [witness and] expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

14. On or before March 8, 2024 (date – at least 45 days prior to the start of the hearing), 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.

15. On or before March 28, 2024 (date – at least 25 days prior to the start of the hearing) the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

16. On or before April 12, 2024 (date – at least 10 days prior to the start of the hearing), 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.

17. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within twenty (20) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before April 12, 2024 (date – at least 10 days prior to the start of the hearing).

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.

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 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

21. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before April 15, 2024 (date – at least 7 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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.

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.

This Member is [not] seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

BEFORE: Name of Member: Date:

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

Attachment 1

[1] LIST OF APPELLANTS, PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

Appellant / Party: 1306497 Ontario Inc. Representative: Joel Farber, Matthew Rutledge Contact Information: Fogler Rubinoff LLP 77 King Street West, Suite 3000 North Tower, TD Centre Toronto, ON M5K 1G8 (t) (416) 365-3707 / (f) (416) 941-8852 jfarber@foglers.com mrutledge@foglers.com

Appellant / Party: City of Vaughan Representative: Bruce Engell Contact Information: WeirFoulds LLP 66 Wellington Street West TD Bank Tower, Suite 4100 Toronto, ON M5K 1B7 (t) (416) 947-5081 / (f) (416) 365-1876 bengell@weirfoulds.com

Representative: Gurnick Pehar Contact Information: City of Vaughan 2141 Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan, ON L6A 1T1 (t) (905) 832 8585 Ext. 8385 Gurnick.Pehar@vaughan.ca

Appellant / Party: Regional Municipality of York Representative: Bola Ogunmefun Contact Information: The Regional Municipality of York Legal & Court Services Department 17250 Yonge Street, 4th Floor Newmarket, ON L3Y 6Z1 (t) 1(877) 464-9675 / (f) (905) 895-3768 bola.ogunmefun@york.ca

Appellant / Party: City of Markham Representative: Andrew Biggart, Tina Kapelos Contact Information: Ritchie Ketcheson Hart & Biggart LLP 206 - 1 Eva Road Toronto, ON M9C 4Z5 (t) 416-622-6601 / (f) 416-622-4713 abiggart@ritchieketcheson.com tkapelos@ritchieketcheson.com

Appellant / Party: Yonge-Steeles Landowners Group Inc. Representative: Ira Kagan, Sarah Kagan, Jason Park Contact Information: Kagan Shastri DeMelo Winer Park LLP 188 Avenue Road Toronto, ON M5R 2J1 (t) (416) 368-2100 x226 / (f) (416) 324-4224 ikagan@ksllp.ca / skagan@ksllp.ca / jpark@ksllp.ca

Appellant / Party: 72 Steeles Holdings Limited and 7040 Yonge Holdings Limited Representative: Chris Barnett Contact Information: Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP 100 King Street West 1 First Canadian Place Suite 6200, P.O. Box 50 Toronto, ON M5X 1B8 (t) (416) 862-6651 / (f) (416) 862-6666 cbarnett@osler.com

Appellant / Party: Development Group (100 SAW) Inc. Representative: Tom Halinski, Sidonia Tomasella Contact Information: Aird & Berlis LLP 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Brookfield Place Toronto, ON M5J 2T9 (t) (416) 865-7767 / (f) (416) 863-1515 thalinski@airdberlis.com stomasella@airdberlis.com

Appellant / Party: Mizrahi Constantine (180 SAW) Inc. Representative: Brendan Ruddick, Quinto Annibale Contact Information: Loopstra Nixon LLP 135 Queens Plate Drive, Suite 600 Toronto, ON M9W 6V7 (t) (416) 748-4757 / (f) (416) 746-8319 qannibale@loonix.com bruddick@loonix.com

Appellant / Party: Yonge & Steeles Developments Inc. Representative: Daniel Artenosi, Natalie Ast Contact Information: Overland LLP 1101 - 5255 Yonge Street Toronto, ON M2N 6P4 (t) 416-730-0338 / (f) 416-730-9097 dartenosi@overlandllp.ca nast@overlandllp.ca

Appellant / Party: Auto Complex Ltd. Representative: Susan Rosenthal, Kyle Gossen Contact Information: Davies Howe LLP 425 Adelaide Street West, 10th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C1 (t) (416) 263-4500 / (416) 263-4519 susanr@davieshowe.com kyleg@davieshowe.com

Appellant / Party: Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation for the Diocese of Toronto, in Canada Representative: David Tang, Jesse White Contact Information: Miller Thomson LLP 40 King Street West, Suite 5800 Scotia Plaza, P.O. Box 1011 Toronto, ON M5H 3S1 (t) (416) 597-6047 / (f) (416) 595-8695 dtang@millerthomson.com tjwhite@millerthomson.com

Appellant / Party: 398 Steeles Avenue West Inc. and Associated Vaughan Properties Limited Representative: Mary Flynn-Guglietti Contact Information: McMillan LLP Brookfield Place 181 Bay Street, Suite 4400 Toronto, ON M5J 2T3 (t) (416) 865-7256 / (f) (416) 865-7048 mary.flynn-guglietti@mcmillan.ca

Participant: SpringFarm Ratepayers Association Contact Information: Jordan Max (t) (905)-881-7963 springfarmra@gmail.com

Attachment 2

ISSUES LIST

Consolidated Issues of the Parties

1. Do the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment (collectively, the “Proposal”) have regard to matters of provincial interest set out in Section 2 h, i, j, k, m, n, o, p, q, and r of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended?

2. Is the Proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 including but not limited to Sections 1.1.1 a), b), c), e), f), g); 1.1.3.2 a)-f); 1.1.3.3; 1.1.3.4; 1.1.3.6; 1.2; 1.4.3; 1.5.1a)-b); 1.6.6.1, 1.6.6.7; 1.6.7; 1.6.8; 1.7.1.b) and 1.8.1a), b), e) and the applicable definitions therein?

3. Is the Proposal in conformity with the applicable policies of A Place to Grow, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020, including but not limited to Sections 1.2.1; 2.2.1.3.c); 2.2.1.4.a), d), e); 2.2.4.9.a) and c); 2.2.4.9.11; 2.2.5.3; 2.2.5.4 and the applicable definitions therein?

4. Is the Proposal in conformity with the applicable policies of the York Region Official Plan 2010, including but not limited to Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 7?

5. Is the Proposal appropriate in light of the approved York Region Official Plan 2022, including but not limited to Chapters 2 and 4?

6. Is the Proposal in conformity with the applicable policies, goals, and objectives of the Vaughan Official Plan 2010 (VOP 2010) Volume 1 and the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan (YSCSP), which include but are not limited to:

   • Building heights;
   • Transition to existing residential;
   • Urban design policies - VOP 2010 sections 9.1.1 - Public Realm, 9.1.2.1.b - Urban Design and Built Form, section 9.1.2.3 - 9.1.2.9, 9.2.1, 9.2.2., 9.2.3 (nos. 5 and 6);
   • YSCSP sections 3, 4, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.9, 7.3, 8 and Table A;
   • Official Plan policies respecting affordable housing;
   • Mandatory retail provisions along Steeles Avenue West;
   • Pre and post subway/bus rapid transit population limits of the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan;
   • Water and servicing capacity allocation;
   • Orderly development with adjacent and other lands within the Yonge Steeles Secondary Plan Area;
   • Cost sharing;
   • Coordination with surrounding municipalities, external and provincial agencies;
   • Requirements for planned parks and public open space and their location, including but not limited to VOP 2010 Section 7.3, and Section 4.0, Schedule 4 (South) and Schedule 8 (South) of the YSCSP;
   • Sub-surface Pedestrian Connection;
   • Private roads/mews, connections, and service access;
   • New public roads, location and Rights of Way, including EW1 and NS1; and
   • Transportation infrastructure and policy requirements.

7. Does the relief requested through the zoning by-law amendment conform with the land use designations of the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan?

8. Does the conceptual site plan provided for the purposes of rezoning adequately address issues of compatibility, including but not limited to the interface between adjacent development sites, related to loading, private road connections, landscaping and related matters?

9. Does the Proposal appropriately provide for or contribute to community service, community facilities and public uses?

10. Does the Proposal appropriately address matters of parkland provision (or “cash-in-lieu”) and dedication of lands for community infrastructure and public rights of way within the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan area in a comprehensive manner?

11. Given the population limits in the YSCSP, can the development proceed prior to the Yonge North Subway Extension becoming available?

12. In the event that the Tribunal allows the appeals, in whole or in part, what are the appropriate matters that should be addressed through the use of a Holding Symbol “(H)”, in conformity with the City of Vaughan VOP 2010, Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan, and City practices, and to ensure orderly and appropriate development?

13. Does the Proposal appropriately address the timing and phasing of development within the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan area?

14. Does the Proposal provide adequate transportation infrastructure and an appropriate transportation network and conform with the Yonge and Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan?

15. Has the Appellant demonstrated through submitted functional road design drawings that the road, property impacts, and required ROW, and associated design components are appropriate in light of the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan, the City of Vaughan engineering design criteria and standard drawings?

16. Does the Proposal appropriately address phasing of the development of the Subject Lands relative to the development of other lands in the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan area including, but not limited to, the required transportation infrastructure, appropriate easements to facilitate the planned private road network illustrated on Schedule 8 of the YSCSP, and land dedication, including the extension of Royal Palm Drive and Powell Road and how they will be constructed in the interim and ultimate conditions?

17. Is the Transportation Study prepared following the City of Vaughan TIS Guidelines? Does the TIS appropriately address the pre- and post-subway development limits and required transportation connections specified by YSCSP?

18. Has the applicant provided an appropriate Traffic Impact Study (“TIS”) consistent with the recommendations of York Region’s Transportation Mobility Plan Guidelines for Development Applications (November 2016), and does it identify the traffic impacts of existing and proposed development(s) in the surrounding area?

19. Does the TIS appropriately address the transportation infrastructure needs of the proposed development, such as a fine grid road network as identified in the approved Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan and Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan - Table A?

20. Has the applicant identified and provided an appropriate Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan, to the satisfaction of the Region?

21. Are the proposed vehicular and bicycle parking rates appropriate and in conformity with the policies of YSCSP?

22. Does the Proposal meet the objectives and have regard for the guidelines set out in City-Wide Urban Design Guidelines performance standard(s),

    • 4.3 Public Realm Framework,
    • 5.2.1 Building Orientation and Location,
    • 5.2.2 Microclimate and Sky View,
    • 5.2.6 Servicing and Storage Area,
    • 5.2.7 Private Roads,
    • 5.2.10 Screening and Fencing,
    • 5.2.16 Utilities,
    • 5.3.2 High-rise Building Envelope,
    • 5.3.3 Mid-rise Building Envelope,
    • 5.3.4 Low-rise Building Envelope,
    • 5.3.6 Built Form Transition,
    • 5.3.7 Separation Distances,
    • 5.3.8 Threshold and Entrances
    • 5.2.14 Public Art,
    • 6.2.4 Internalized Courtyards,
    • 6.2.5 Urban Squares,
    • 6.2.7 Publicly Accessible Interiors,
    • 6.2.8 Privately Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces,
    • 7.2 Mixed-use Buildings, and
    • 7.4.2 Urban Retail Format?

23. Does the Proposal meet the objectives and have regard for the guidelines set out in Yonge Steeles Corridor Urban Design Guidelines & Streetscape Plan?

24. Does the Proposal appropriately address all matters related to land use compatibility, including but not limited to, noise, vibration, and air quality impacts?

25. Does the Noise and Vibration Feasibility Study, accompanying the Zoning Amendment Application, adequately assess the potential noise and vibration impacts from both stationary and transportation sources on the proposed sensitive land use?

26. Has a letter of reliance, in conformance with the City’s template, been provided for the City’s reliance on the submitted Phase One and Two ESA reports?

27. For the proposed change in property use from industrial/commercial to a more sensitive use of residential/parkland, has a Record of Site Condition (RSC), under O. Reg. 153/04, been filed on the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Environmental Site Registry?

28. Is there adequate servicing capacity (including water supply, wastewater, and stormwater) to support the Proposal along with the development of the balance of the Secondary Plan as per the requirements of the City Council endorsed Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan?

29. Has a revised Functional Servicing and Storm Water Management Report been provided to address water, storm, and sanitary sewer servicing needs of the Proposal and ultimate build-out of the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan Area (south), to the satisfaction of the City and other agencies?

30. Does the Proposal appropriately address and secure the coordination and cost-sharing of infrastructure so as to ensure the development of the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan area in a comprehensive manner?

31. Does the Proposal represent good planning and is it in the public interest?

Additional Issues of Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation for The Diocese of Toronto, in Canada

32. Does the proposed development at 88 Steeles Avenue West conform with the approved Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan in respect of road locations, mid-block east-west pedestrian connections, built form distance separations, driveways and the continuation of existing uses?

33. Do any modifications to the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan proposed by the Appellant impact on the current use or the future redevelopment potential of 92 Steeles Avenue West?

34. Does the proposed site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment instrument proposed by the Appellant impact on the current use or the future redevelopment potential of 92 Steeles Avenue West?

35. Does the proposed development negatively or inappropriately impact the current use or future redevelopment potential of 92 Steeles Avenue West, including with respect to the proposed location and configuration of driveways and walkways.

Note: The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing or a motion

If any modifications are made to the proposed development as a result of discussions between the Appellant and the Parties to this matter, the Issues List may be further refined and revised.

Attachment 3

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. 1306497 Ontario Inc.
2. City of Vaughan
3. City of Markham
4. Region of York
5. Private landowner parties: a. Yonge-Steeles Landowners Group Inc.; b. 72 Steeles Holdings Limited and 7040 Yonge Holdings Limited; c. Development Group (100 SAW) Inc.; d. Mizrahi Constantine (180 SAW) Inc.; e. Yonge & Steeles Developments Inc.; f. Auto Complex Ltd.; g. 398 Steeles Avenue West Inc and Associated Vaughan Properties Limited; and h. Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation for the Diocese of Toronto (St. Paschal Baylon Church)

Attachment 4

Meaning of terms used in the Procedural Order:

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’ 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’ 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.