Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: August 23, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000381
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Dotty Lake Retreats Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: To permit the construction of four-storey 24 unit stacked townhouses
Reference Number: OZS22-015
Property Address: 140 Hadati Road
Municipality/UT: Guelph/Wellington
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000381
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000381
OLT Case Name: Dotty Lake Retreats Inc. v. Guelph (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Dotty Lake Retreats Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit the construction of four-storey 24 unit stacked townhouses
Reference Number: OZS22-015
Property Address: 140 Hadati Road
Municipality/UT: Guelph/Wellington
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000382
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000381
Heard: August 01, 2023 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative
Dotty Lake Retreats Inc.
Jennifer Meader
City of Guelph
Allison Thornton Ian White (Student at Law)
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY G.A. CROSER ON AUGUST 01, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) to be heard on the appeals of non-decisions by the City of Guelph (“City”) for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBLA”), brought under subsections 22(7) and 34(11) respectively of the Planning Act, for the property known Municipally as 140 Hadati Road (“Subject Property”).
2The Subject Property is currently zoned ‘Convenience Commercial’. The purpose of the site specific OPA and ZBLA is to facilitate the re-development of the site with a new stacked townhouse building with twenty-four residential units and surface parking.
3The Tribunal entered into evidence as Exhibit ‘1’ in these proceedings the Affidavit of Service of V. Peacock sworn on July 19, 2023, and is satisfied that it demonstrated proper notice, therefore no further notice is required in these proceedings.
PARTY AND PARTICIPANT STATUS
4The Tribunal received a Party Status request from Colin Lam. Mr. Lam lives on an adjoining street to the Subject Property. He sought Party Status to represent the ‘public interest’ at the hearing event and was aware of potential cost exposure. Mr. Lam stated that he had not retained any experts, but was prepared to cross examine witnesses at a future merit hearing.
5The Tribunal provided Mr. Lam with an overview of the differences between Party and Participant Status, and the Tribunal’s expectations with respect to the former. While Mr. Lam may have a direct interest in the appeal and may be affected by the Tribunal’s decision, his ability to assist the Tribunal in reaching its decision remains unclear as creating awareness of ‘public interest issues’ can be achieved via Participant Status.
6Counsel for the Applicant opposed the granting of Party Status to Mr. Lam. Counsel pointed out that many of the Issues raised by Mr. Lam in his Request for Status were matters outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction, such as snow removal. It was noted by Counsel that there was presently no Issues List and therefore nothing under which Mr. Lam, if granted non-Appellant Party status, could shelter his appeal. However, the Sheltering rule is not applicable in this instance as the appeals are based upon subsections s.34(11) and s.22(7) of the Planning Act.
7The City took no position with respect to the granting of Party Status for Mr. Lam.
8The Tribunal decided that a decision on Mr. Lam’s application for Party Status would be postponed until the second CMC.
9The Tribunal received a Participant Status request from Ms. Leslie Boultbee. There were no objections from the Parties, and Participant Status was granted to Ms. Boultbee by the Tribunal.
SECOND CMC
10The Parties did not produce a draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and Issues List (“IL”) in advance of this CMC. However, Counsel for the Applicant noted that it was engaged with the City in settlement discussions. The Parties were reminded that Tribunal-led mediation is available and may be accessed by contacting the Case Coordinator.
11The Parties requested that a second CMC be scheduled in approximately three months. If settlement discussions were fruitful, then the second CMC would be converted into a settlement hearing. If not, then the second CMC would be utilized to request dates for a hearing on the merits.
12To ensure that the second CMC is productive, the Parties are requested to submit the following to the Case Coordinator no later than seven (7) days in advance of the CMC date;
a. If a settlement is to be presented:
i. A copy of any executed Minutes of Settlement, if available;
ii. A copy of all supporting documents that will be relied upon in evidence;
iii. A Planning Affidavit or evidence outline of a qualified Planner or Expert who will provide evidence in support of the settlement, along with a copy of their Curriculum Vitae and executed Acknowledgement of Expert’s Duty; and
iv. A draft Order for consideration and approval by the Tribunal.
b. If there is no settlement, and Parties will be requesting hearing dates:
i. A draft PO in the Tribunal’s standard form; and
ii. A draft IL.
HEARING
13Parties 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:
Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. (one-day CMC)
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/656004293
Access Code: 656-004-293
Audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 Toll Free: 1-888-299-1889
14Parties 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 available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html.
15Persons 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 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373 The Access Codes are indicated above.
16Individuals 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 video hearing 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.
CONSOLIDATION OF THE TWO APPEALS
17As the Parties are the same for both appeals and with the consent of the Parties, the Tribunal consolidated the two appeals as per Rule 16.1 of the OLT Rules of Practice and Procedure.
OTHER MATTERS
18The 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.
ORDER
19THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:
a. Leslie Boultbee is granted Participant Status.
b. A second CMC is scheduled to take place via Video Hearing on Tuesday, October 3, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., and one (1) day has been set aside.
c. The Parties are to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues list by no later than Tuesday, September 26, 2023, or in the alternative, submit an affidavit in support of settlement, draft Order, and any other documents the Parties intend to rely on in support of a proposed settlement.
16The Member is not seized but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise.
17No further notice will be provided.
“G.A. Croser”
G.A. CROSER
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.