Millwick Acquisitions Corp. v. Orangeville (Town), 2023 CanLII 85338

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: September 13, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000411

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

Applicant/Appellant: Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

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

Description: To permit the development of a mixed-use development containing up to fifty-four townhouse dwelling units and a multi-unit commercial retail building on the subject lands

Reference Number: OPZ-2020-03

Property Address: 780 Broadway

Municipality: Town of Orangeville

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000411

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000411

OLT Case Name: Millwick Acquisitions Corp. v. Orangeville (Town)

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

Applicant/Appellant: Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

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

Description: To permit the development of a mixed-use development containing up to fifty-four townhouse dwelling units and a multi-unit commercial retail building on the subject lands

Reference Number: OPZ-2020-03

Property Address: 780 Broadway

Municipality/UT: Town of Orangeville

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000412

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000411

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

Subject: Site Plan – Appeal of failure to make a decision

Description: To permit the development of a mixed-use development containing up to fifty-four townhouse dwelling units and a multi-unit commercial retail building on the subject lands

Reference Number: SPA – 2020-10

Property Address: 780 Broadway

Municipality: Town of Orangeville

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000413

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000411

Heard: September 1, 2023 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Millwick Acquisitions Corp.	Meaghan McDermid
Town of Orangeville	Andrew Biggart

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY GREGORY J. INGRAM ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1This is the second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) for the above-noted matter. Millwick Acquisitions Corp. (“Appellant”) filed an appeal against the Town of Orangeville Council for failing to make a decision on applications to amend the Official Plans of the County of Dufferin and the Town of Orangeville, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law, and Site Plan which is required to facilitate the proposed redevelopment of lands known municipally as 780 Broadway (“Subject Property”) in the Town of Orangeville (“Town”).

2The Appellant is proposing to create a mixed-use development that would permit the construction of four three-storey “back-to-back” townhouse blocks with a total of 54 units, and a single, stand-alone multi-unit commercial building. Vehicular access to the site would be provided through one entrance location on Broadway and parking would be available underground for residents and above ground for commercial activities (the “Proposal”).

3The Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) seeks to redesignate the Subject Property from Service Commercial to a site-specific Neighbourhood Commercial, which would permit low-density, multiple residential uses. The Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) seeks to rezone the Subject Property from C3 (Service Commercial) to C2 (Neighbourhood Commercial Special Exception Zone) which would permit both commercial and residential uses in either stand-alone or multi-use buildings. In addition, site-specific development criteria are proposed to address specific details such as permitted uses, building height, number of dwelling units and required yards. The subject property is currently vacant.

4During the first CMC, the Tribunal heard a request for Party Status from OPTrust Amaranth 1 Inc / OPTrust Amaranth 2 (“OPTrust”), which was opposed by the Appellant. The Town did not have a position on the request for Party Status. OPTrust shared its own Issues List for consideration as part of its presentation to the Tribunal.

5A draft Procedural Order (“PO”) was received by the Tribunal and the Appellant on August 10, 2023, from the Town. The Parties requested additional time to finalize a draft PO and IL, which was granted by the Tribunal.

6On consent of the Parties, it was agreed that a second CMC would include a status update and presentation of an agreed-upon draft PO for review and approval by the Tribunal. The Party Status request would also be addressed.

REQUEST FOR STATUS

7To summarize, OPTrust owns two parcels of land in the vicinity of the Subject Property, with one immediately adjacent to the Subject Property across Broadway (Highway 9) and zoned General Commercial (C1-4(H)) in the Township of Amaranth. Their application for Party status is based on a concern for land use compatibility should the Appellant’s proposal be approved. OPTrust is concerned that the introduction of increased residential density into this area could adversely impact the permitted and potential uses of their employment lands. The Appellant did not support the OPTrust request for Party status given that the parcel adjacent to the Subject Property is currently vacant, zoned to permit accessory dwelling units, and does not permit industrial use. Ms. McDermid opined that adding OP Trust would add time, additional witnesses and costs, which would unfairly prejudice her client.

8The Parties and OPTrust were provided with an opportunity to provide additional comments related to the Party Status request at this CMC and none were provided. OPTrust responded to questions of clarification from the Tribunal related to permitted uses on their adjacent property and confirmation that the property is currently vacant. Counsel for OPTrust indicated that there are currently no active applications for the adjacent property and it was confirmed that accessory dwellings are currently a permitted use on the adjacent property owned by OPTrust.

9The Tribunal denied the request for Party Status of OPTrust and found that granting the request would adversely impact the fair, just, and expeditious determination of the issues in this proceeding (Tribunal Rule 1.6) and notes in considering this request the Tribunal must balance the interests of adjacent landowners, the Town, and the Appellant. The Tribunal finds that the request for Party Status would not assist the Tribunal in adjudicating effectively and completely the issues in this proceeding as per Tribunal Rule 8.2, which states that in granting Party Status the “presence [of a Party] is necessary to enable the Tribunal to adjudicate effectively and completely on the issues in the proceeding.” The Tribunal finds that the Issues List agreed to by the Appellant and the Town addresses the primary concerns raised by OPTrust and it is anticipated they will be addressed by the expert witnesses of the Appellant and the Town.

10The Tribunal extended to OPTrust the option of requesting Participant Status in the proceedings with the consent of the Parties. Counsel for OPTrust indicated that they would consult with their client and submit a Participant Status application on or before September 8, 2023, if so desired.

11The Tribunal received notification from counsel for OPTrust on September 7, 2023, indicating that they would not be requesting Participant status.

UPDATE AND PLANNING

12Ms. McDermid provided an update to the Tribunal and indicated that there has been no reduction in the IL but there is a better understanding between the Parties related to the scope of the issues. She indicated that greater specificity provided by the town on the issues will be incorporated into the draft already submitted to the Tribunal. Mr. Biggart indicated support for this plan and consented that a final draft be re-submitted for Tribunal consideration and approval. The Parties requested that 15 days be scheduled for a Hearing of merits given the number of witnesses they expected would be required.

13The Parties indicated that they would remain open to mediation but felt it was premature to consider a formal move in that direction at this time.

14The Tribunal directed the Parties to finalize a draft PO and IL and submit it to the Case Coordinator on or before September 8, 2023 for consideration and approval by the Tribunal.

15The Tribunal received and approved the draft PO and IL on September 7, 2023.

16Appended to this Decision and Order as Schedule 1 is the PO and IL which will now govern all further pre-hearing procedural requirements and the hearing of this Appeal.

HEARING OF THE MERITS

17At the request of the Parties, the Tribunal scheduled a 15-day Hearing, which will commence at 10 a.m. by video on Monday, May 27, 2024.

18Parties 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://meet.goto.com/558205565

Access Code: 558-205-565

19Parties 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

20Persons 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: 558-205-565.

21Individuals 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 Hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

22The Parties are aware of the availability of Tribunal-led mediation. Parties are of the opinion this may be a possible path and understand that they may request mediation at their convenience. At this time, they continue to work together to focus the issues and prepare for a Hearing of merits if required.

23No further notice will be required.

24The Member is not seized and may support the Parties in relation to any Case Management scheduling issues.

ORDER

25The Tribunal Orders:

1. The Party Status request of OPTrust Amaranth 1 Inc. and OPTrust Amaranth 2 Inc., who are the owners of the lands legally known as Pt Lot 1, Concession 1, Des Pt 2 Plan 7R5679 and Parts 1 and 2 Plan 7R4443, save and except Part 1 Plan 7R4650 and Parts 1 and 2, Plan 7R4757, in the Township of Amaranth, County of Dufferin, is denied.

2. The Procedural Order found in Schedule 1 is approved and comes into full force and effect.

“Gregory J. Ingram”

GREGORY J. INGRAM

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

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000411

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

Applicant/Appellant: Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

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

Description: To permit the development of a mixed-use development containing up to fifty-four townhouse dwelling units and a multi-unit commercial retail building on the subject lands

Reference Number: OPZ-2020-03

Property Address: 780 Broadway

Municipality: Town of Orangeville

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000411

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000411

OLT Case Name: Millwick Acquisitions Corp. v. Orangeville (Town)

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

Applicant/Appellant: Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

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

Description: To permit the development of a mixed-use development containing up to fifty-four townhouse dwelling units and a multi-unit commercial retail building on the subject lands

Reference Number: OPZ-2020-03

Property Address: 780 Broadway

Municipality/UT: Town of Orangeville

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000412

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000411

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

Subject: Site Plan – Appeal of failure to make a decision

Description: To permit the development of a mixed-use development containing up to fifty-four townhouse dwelling units and a multi-unit commercial retail building on the subject lands

Reference Number: SPA – 2020-10

Property Address: 780 Broadway

Municipality: Town of Orangeville

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000413

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000411

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 Monday, May 27, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. by video conference. No further notice shall be required.

3. The length of the hearing is three (3) weeks. 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. With the exception of the resolution of issues, 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 Monday, January 29, 2024, and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Acknowledgement of Expert’s Duty Form, 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 Tuesday, February 27, 2024 to use their best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting(s), the experts must prepare and the Parties shall file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT Case Co-ordinator on or before Wednesday, March 13, 2024.

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 the 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 Thursday March 28, 2024, 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 Thursday, March 28, 2024, 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 Monday, April 22, 2024, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required. If the parties agree that no hearing dates are intended to be released from the Tribunal’s calendar, no party is required to advise the Tribunal of anything further in this regard.

16. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence on or before Monday, April 29, 2024, in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

17. On or before Monday, May 13, 2024, 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.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Friday, May 17, 2024.

19. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Tuesday, May 21, 2024 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.

20. 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.

21. 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.

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 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.

24. A summary of the various procedural dates is contained in Attachment 4.

This Member is not seized.

So Orders the Tribunal.

Attachment 1

LIST OF PARTIES

1. Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

Meaghan McDermid Davies Howe LLP 425 Adelaide Street West, 10th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C1 meaghanm@davieshowe.com Tel: (416) 263-4514 Fax: (416) 977-8931

2. Town of Orangeville

Andrew Biggart Ritchie Ketcheson Hart & Biggart LLP 1 Eva Road, Suite 206 Etobicoke, ON M9C 4Z5 abiggart@ritchieketcheson.com Tel: 416.622.6601

Attachment 2

ISSUES LIST

The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issues, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing.

TOWN OF ORANGEVILLE

1. Do the proposed applications for Official Plan amendment, Zoning By-law amendment and Site Plan Approval (the “proposed applications”) have regard to the matters of provincial interest set forth in Section 2 of the Planning Act, specifically including but not limited to the following matters:

i. (f) the adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems;

ii. (h) the orderly development of safe and healthy communities;

iii. (h.1) the accessibility for persons with disabilities to all facilities, services and matters to which this Act applies;

iv. (l) the protection of the financial and economic well-being of the Province and municipalities

v. (j) the adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing;

vi. (p) the appropriate location of growth and development;

vii. (q) the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;

viii. (r) the promotion of built form that,

(i) is well-designed,

(ii) encourages a sense of place, and

(iii) provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant?

2. Are the proposed applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS, 2020”), specifically including but not limited to the following policies:

3. 1.1.1 Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by (a), (b), (c), (f)

4. 1.1.3.2(a) and (e)

5. 1.1.3.4

6. 1.2.1(d)

7. 1.4.3(b)

8. 1.6.6.1(b).1.3, (c) and (d)

9. 1.6.6.7(b), (c), (e) and (f)

10. 1.6.7.1

11. 1.6.8.1

12. 1.7.1(b) and (e)

13. 2.2.1(f).1 and (g).i ?

14. Do the proposed applications conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2019, specifically including but not limited to the following policies:

15. 2.2.6.2

16. 2.2.6.4

17. 2.2.7.1 (a),(b)

18. 3.2.2.2 (b),(f)

19. 3.2.6.2 (a)

20. 3.2.7.2 (b), (c)

21. 4.2.9.1 (a), (b) ?

22. Do the proposed applications satisfy the applicable policies of the Credit Valley, Toronto and Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection Plan under the Clean Water Act, 2006, particularly with respect to the wellhead protection areas that apply to the subject lands (WHPA-B, ICA-NaCl, WHPA-Q1/Q2) and specifically including but not limited to the following policies:

a) REC-1 [Planning Policies for Protecting Groundwater Recharge…]

b) DEM-1 and DEM-2 [Water-taking within the Tier 3 Water Budget WHPA-Q1]

c) SAL-1 [Application of Road Salt – Risk Management Plan]

d) SAL-3 [Application of Road Salt – Salt Management Plan]

e) SNO-1 [Storage of Snow]

f) DNAP-1 and DNAP-3 [Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid]

g) OS-3 [handling and storage of an organic solvent]?

5. Do the proposed applications conform to and maintain the intent and purpose of the County of Dufferin Official Plan; including but not limited to:

a. General Settlement Area Policies (Section 3.3.1)

b. Urban Settlement Areas (3.3.2)

c. New Greenfield Development (3.4.3)

d. Economic Development (3.6), Locations of Economic Activity (3.6.1)

e. Housing and Affordability (3.7)

f. Community Design (3.9.1)

g. Source Water Protection (5.4.2)

h. Transportation System (7.2)

i. Sewage and Water Systems (7.3)

j. Energy Conservation, Air Quality and Climate Change Adaptation (7.6)?

6. Do the proposed applications conform to and maintain the intent and purpose of the Town of Orangeville Official Plan, including but not limited to:

a. Do the proposed applications appropriately implement the Goals of the Official Plan, particularly with respect to:

i. Housing (Section B2.2 and E1,1);

ii. Commercial (B2.5 and E2.1);

iii. Services (B2.10 and H1);

iv. Community Form and Identity (B2.15);

v. Accessibility (B2.17)?

b. Do the proposed applications appropriately implement the General Policies of the Official Plan, particularly with respect to:

i. Community Form and Identify (D7); and

ii. Accessibility (D11)?

c. Is the proposed Official Plan amendment appropriate, taking into consideration the following policies:

i. Live/Work Balance (D9);

ii. Residential (E1), specifically: Residential Densities (E1.4), Neighbourhood Design (E1.9), and Intensification and Change (E1.11);

iii. Commercial (E2), specifically: General Policies (E2.3), Neighbourhood Commercial (E2.6), and Commercial Urban Design (E2.9)?

d. Do the proposed applications meet the Transportation policies of the Official Plan, particularly with respect to:

i. Goals (G1);

ii. Road Classification (G3);

iii. General Road Policies (G5)?

e. Do the proposed applications meet the Municipal Services policies of the Official Plan and do adequate services currently exist to accommodate the proposed development? If not, what is required?

f. Do the proposed applications satisfy the criteria for considering Official Plan Amendments found under the Implementation Section I12?

g. Have the proposed applications satisfied the Studies policies found under Section I18?

Urban Design

7. Do the proposed applications comprise good urban design?

8. Do the proposed applications adhere to the Town of Orangeville Design Guidelines dated August 2022, including but not limited to the following sections:

a) 2.0 Universal & Age-friendly Design;

b) 2.1 Sustainable & Climate Ready Design;

c) 2.2 CPTED;

d) 2.4 Site Plan Design Guidelines;

e) 2.5 Signage and Lighting;

f) 2.6 Landscaping;

g) 2.7 Built Form Design Guidelines;

h) 3.1 Commercial Areas; and

i) 3.4 Multiple Residential?

9. Does the proposed development complement the planned function of this location as a gateway location of the Town, in terms of urban design, architectural elements and material selection?

10. Do the proposed applications respond appropriately to the existing and planned context of surrounding lands?

11. Does the proposed development achieve sufficient transition to adjacent existing and planned built form of adjacent properties? Is there suitable transition in scale, building massing, height and intensity through setbacks, step-backs, landscaping and architectural design/material selection?

12. Does the proposed development include sufficient shared outdoor amenity space, in terms of location, design and function?

13. Does the proposed development provide for appropriate transition and compatibility with future development potential on the adjacent property at 810 Broadway based on its existing planned function?

Traffic and Access

14. Do the proposed applications appropriately address traffic impacts and access requirements under existing and future build-out conditions?

15. Does the proposed development accommodate potential pedestrian and vehicular access integration with the neighbouring property at 810 Broadway?

Municipal Services

16. Are existing municipal services available and suitable for the proposed development?

17. Are the proposed connections and/or extensions of municipal services appropriate for the proposed development and if so, what conditions would be appropriate to facilitate the construction and future maintenance obligations for such service connections and/or extensions?

18. Has the proposed development fulfilled all financial obligations, including cost reimbursement to the appropriate parties for any existing servicing infrastructure put in place to accommodate the future development of the subject lands. Alternatively, what condition(s) would be appropriate to ensure such obligations are satisfactorily fulfilled?

Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments

19. In the event that the appeals are allowed in whole or in part by the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), are the form and content of the draft Official Plan Amendment and amending Zoning By-law appropriate?

20. Do the requested site specific zoning regulations address compatibility between the proposed development, the existing community and the planned function of the immediate area, including: adequate setbacks from existing low density uses, maximum building heights and densities?

21. Are the proposed on-site required resident, residential visitor and commercial use vehicle parking rates appropriate for the proposed development.

Other

22. Do the proposed applications represent good planning and are they in the public interest?

23. In the event that the appeal of the application for site plan approval is allowed in whole or in part by the OLT, are the contents of the plans and drawings appropriate and what conditions of approval, if any, are appropriate?

24. In the event that the appeals are allowed in whole or in part by the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), what conditions would be appropriate and should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied?

a. The amending Zoning By-law is finalized in a form and content acceptable to the Town of Orangeville;

b. An Official Plan Amendment is finalized in a form and content acceptable to the Town of Orangeville;

c. A site plan agreement has been finalized and executed.

Attachment 3

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Millwick Acquisitions Corp.

2. Town of Orangeville

3. Millwick Acquisitions Corp. (if any reply)

ATTACHMENT 4

SUMMARY OF PROCEDURAL DATES

Date	Hearing Event
Monday January 29, 2024	Exchange of list of witnesses and the order in which they will be called
Tuesday February 27, 2024	Expert Witness Meetings prior to this date
Wednesday March 13, 2024	Experts’ Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues
Thursday March 28, 2024	Exchange of witness and expert witness statements/written evidence, evidence outlines for witnesses under summons
Thursday March 28, 2024	Exchange copy of written participant statement.
Monday April 22, 2024	Confirm with tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
Monday April 29, 2024	Exchange of reply witness statements
Monday May 13, 2024	Exchange of visual evidence
Friday May 17, 2024	Joint Document Book to be filed with Tribunal
Tuesday May 21, 2024	Parties to file preliminary hearing plan
Monday May 27, 2024	Hearing begins