JTG Holdings Ltd. v. West Lincoln (Township), 2023 CanLII 92325

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: October 03, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000470

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: JTG Holdings Ltd.

Appellant: Phelps Homes Ltd.

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 63

Description: (OPA 63) implements a detailed Secondary Plan for the lands added to the Smithville Urban Area.

Reference Number: D.10.12.OPA-22-0035 / OPA 63

Property Address: Smithville Master Community Plan Area

Municipality/Upper Tier: Township of West Lincoln/ Region of Niagara

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000470

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000470

OLT Case Name: JTG Holdings Ltd. v. West Lincoln (Township)

Heard: August 18, 2023 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Phelps Homes Ltd. And JTG Holdings Ltd.

Jennifer Meader Jessica De Marinis

Regional Municipality of Niagara

Scott Crocco Alexander Suriano

Township of West Lincoln

Tom Hanrahan Thomas Richardson (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY GREGORY J. INGRAM ON AUGUST 18, 2023, AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This is the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) with respect to the appeal by Phelps Homes Ltd. and JTG Holdings Ltd. (“Appellant”) brought pursuant to s. 17(36) of the Planning Act against the decision of the Township of West Lincoln (the “Township”) to adopt Official Plan Amendment No. 63 (“OPA 63”) which implements a Secondary Plan for the lands added to the Smithville Urban Area. The boundary expansion is being implemented through the concurrent Township of West Lincoln Official Plan Amendment 62 (“OPA 62”). OPA 63 incorporates the Master Community Plan land use designations and policies as well as the natural heritage, infrastructure and transportation systems mapping and policies for the planned growth of Smithville into the Township of West Lincoln Official Plan. Preparation for the Secondary Plan started in early 2021 and was adopted by the Township on August 11, 2022. The amended OPA 63 was approved by the Region of Niagara ("Region") Council on April 20, 2023.

2The Appellant owns properties legally described as part of lots 3, 6, 8 and Plan M-97, which totals 198 acres within the Smithville Master Community Plan area and is appealing the adoption of OPA 63 in its entirety and specifically identified issues related to conformity with provincial and regional policy documents, natural heritage system, transportation, water and wastewater servicing and the implementation plan.

3The Tribunal is satisfied that the Affidavit of Service provides satisfactory evidence that the proper notice of today’s CMC has been provided and, as such, no further notice is required for these proceedings. The Affidavit of Service was marked as Exhibit 1.

STATUS REQUESTS

4The Tribunal received four written requests for Party Status. An overview of each applicant's interest as landowners in the district was provided by their counsel, Russell Cheeseman. Mr. Cheeseman indicated that his clients were part of the Smithville Landowners group who made submissions to the Township throughout the public process. He confirmed that he would act on behalf of his clients as a collective in support of OPA 63 and has no intention of slowing the process if granted Party Status.

5Party Status applications were received from:

a. ON 1734234 Inc.

b. ON 2650687 Inc.

c. Allan and Janet Schutten

d. Evertje and Theodore Kingma (Tek Corporation and Kingma Petek)

6The Appellant initially objected to ON 2650687’s Party Status request but upon further discussion indicated she would not “make this [application] into an issue”. The Region and Township supported all Party Status requests.

7The Tribunal granted Party Status to each of the applicants and recognized that they would be represented by Mr. Cheeseman.

8There was one Participant Status request received by the Tribunal from Linda Sivyer. She indicated that she is an active member of the Community for Responsible Growth West Lincoln citizens group and on consent of the Parties, Ms. Sivyer was granted Participant Status.

MEDIATION

9The Parties have agreed to participate in Tribunal-led mediation and attended the first meeting immediately following the CMC. It is the intention of the Parties to participate in mediation over the next four to six months in the hope of reaching a settlement and, as such, they requested that a second CMC be scheduled in February 2024 to either present a Settlement proposal to the Tribunal or finalize a plan for a Merit Hearing in June 2024.

NEXT STEPS

10The Appellant acknowledged the concerns expressed by the other Parties concerning the breadth of the issues presented and agreed that further refinement would benefit the process. The Appellant agreed to provide the Tribunal with an updated draft of the Procedural Order (“PO”) on or before September 12, 2023.

11The Parties agreed to support the development of an updated draft PO by Monday, September 12, 2023, and, upon review, the Tribunal would confirm the Merit Hearing of Monday, June 3, 2024, via video conferencing for 19 days.

12On September 11, 2023, the Tribunal received an update from the Appellant indicating that a revised Issues List ("IL”) had been provided to the Region, Township, and other Parties on September 1, 2023. The Appellant also indicated that all Parties met on September 11, 2023, to discuss outstanding issues and potential further revisions, however written comments were not received by the Appellant in time to provide the Tribunal with an update by the agreed-upon date.

13The Tribunal granted an extension for the submission of the PO to September 20, 2023.

14The Draft PO was received by the Tribunal on September 20, 2023. The Tribunal reviewed and approved the PO, as presented, and agreed to by the Parties, which is attached to this decision as Schedule 1.

15The Parties agreed that there are four main areas of concern related to this matter and expect that 16 witnesses will be required, and they requested that the Tribunal schedule a four-week hearing.

16A Merit Hearing is scheduled to begin on June 3, 2024, at 10 a.m. by video for 19 days and ending on or before June 28, 2024.

17The Tribunal scheduled a second CMC at the request of all Parties to be held by video on Thursday, February 22, 2024, at 10 a.m. Should the Parties reach a settlement, they may request that the CMC be converted to a settlement hearing. In the event there is a settlement hearing, the Parties are directed to submit to the Case Coordinator on or before Thursday, February 8, 2024, the following:

a. executed Minutes of Settlement, if available;

b. copies of all supporting documentation/materials to be relied upon at the settlement hearing;

c. the affidavit of a land use planner and/or other relevant expert(s) in support of the settlement;

d. the terms of any draft order submitted for consideration and approval by the Tribunal;

e. copies of relevant draft instruments; and

f. any other materials upon which the Parties wish to rely in support of the requested Orders of the Tribunal at the settlement hearing.

18The hearings are scheduled to proceed by video as follows:

Second Case Management Conference

February 22, 2024, at 10 a.m. GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/709076365 Access code: 709-076-365 Audio-only line: (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373 Audio-only access code: 709-076-365

19-Day Merit Hearing

June 3, 2024, at 10 a.m. GoTo Meeting: https://meet.goto.com/278736685 Access code: 278-736-685 Audio-only telephone line: (Toll Free) 1 888 455 1389 or +1 (647) 497-9391 Audio-only access code: 278-736-685

19Parties and participants 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.

20Parties and participants 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

21Persons 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.

22Individuals 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.

23The member is not seized and no further notice is required.

ORDER

24The Tribunal Orders as follows:

1. Party status is granted to ON 1734234 Inc., ON 2650687 Inc., Allan and Janet Schutten and Evertie and Theodore Kingma in this proceeding.

2. Participant status is granted to Linda Sivyer in this proceeding.

3. The Appellant is to provide a status update to the Tribunal by February 8, 2024, indicating whether the Parties are moving toward a settlement.

4. A Second Case Management Conference will occur via video on February 22, 2024, and may be converted to a settlement hearing.

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

6. A hearing in this proceeding will occur via video commencing on June 3, 2024, at 10 a.m. Nineteen days have been set aside.

“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-23-000470

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended

Applicants/Appellants: JTG Holdings Ltd. and Phelps Homes Ltd.

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 63

Property Address/Description: Smithville Master Community Plan Area

Municipality/Upper Tier: Township of West Lincoln; Regional Municipality of Niagara

Municipal File No.: OPA 63/D.10.12.OPA-22-0035

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000470

OLT File No.: OLT-23-000470

OLT Case Name: JTG Holdings Ltd. v. West Lincoln (Township)

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 June 3, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. virtually.

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is nineteen (19) 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 February 9, 2024 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 23, 2024 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 March 1, 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 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; by 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 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 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 witness statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

15. On or before April 26, 2024, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

16. On or before April 26, 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.

17. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence on or before April 19 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 May 17, 2024.

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 May 27, 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.

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.

24. A summary of the filing dates is attached as Attachment 4.

This Member is [not] seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

ATTACHMENT 1

PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS

Parties

1. Phelps Homes Ltd. & JTG Holdings Ltd.

Turkstra Mazza Associates

15 Bold Street

Hamilton, ON L8P 1T3

Jennifer Meader

Tel: 905.529.3476

Email: jmeader@tmalaw.ca

2. Regional Municipality of Niagara

1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way

Thorold, ON L2V 4T7

Alexander Suriano

Email: asuriano@airdberlis.com

Scott Crocco

Email: Scott.Crocco@niagararegion.ca

3. Township of West Lincoln

Sullivan Mahoney LLP

40 Queen Street

St. Catherines, ON L2R 6Z2

Thomas G. Hanrahan

Tel: 905.688.0494

Email: thanrahan@sullivan-mahoney.com

Thomas Richardson

Tel: 905.688.0494

Email: trichardson@sullivan-mahoney.com

4. 2650687 Ontario Ltd.

Russell Cheeseman

Tel: 416.955.9529

Email: rdcheese@aol.com

5. Allan and Janet Schutten

Russell Cheeseman

Tel: 416.955.9529

Email: rdcheese@aol.com

6. Trek Corporation and Kingma Petek LLP

Russell Cheeseman

Tel: 416.955.9529

Email: rdcheese@aol.com

7. 1734234 Ontario Limited

Russell Cheeseman

Tel: 416.955.9529

Email: rdcheese@aol.com

Participants

1. Linda Sivyer

Tel: 905.541.5935

Email: rsivyer@gmail.com

ATTACHMENT 2

ISSUES LIST

NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the OLT or any party that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is either appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing. The identification of an issue on this list by a party indicates that party’s intent to lead evidence or argue that the issue is relevant to the proceeding, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other parties the case they need to meet and shall not be construed as the OLT having jurisdiction over such matters in each circumstance. Accordingly, no party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the OLT.

General/Policy Documents

1. Does OPA 63 have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest, as set out in section 2 of the Planning Act, and sections 2(a), (f), (h), (i), (j), (l), (m), (n), (q), and (r) in particular?
2. Is OPA 63 consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”)? In particular:
   1. Part IV – Vision for Ontario’s Land Use Planning System, including but not limited to, the policies related to housing, housing densities, natural heritage, and infrastructure;
   2. Policy 1.1.1 a), b), e), g);
   3. Policy 1.1.3.2;
   4. Policy 1.1.3.4;
   5. Policy 1.1.3.6;
   6. Policy 1.1.3.7;
   7. Policy 1.2.1;
   8. Policy 1.4.1;
   9. Policy 1.4.3;
   10. Policy 1.6.1; and
   11. Policy 1.6.6.1.
   12. Policy 2.1.3;
   13. Policy 2.1.4; and
   14. Policy 2.1.5.
3. Does OPA 63 conform with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 as amended (“Growth Plan”)? In particular:
   1. Guiding Principles: 1st bullet; 4th bullet; 5th bullet; 7th bullet
   2. Section 2.1 – Context: 3rd paragraph; 6th paragraph; 8th paragraph; 10th paragraph; 11th paragraph; 12th paragraph; 13th paragraph
   3. Policies:

i. 2.2.1.4

ii. 2.2.6.1

iii. 2.2.6.2

iv. 2.2.6.3

v. 2.2.7.1

4. Section 3.1 – Context: 2nd paragraph; 4th paragraph; 6th paragraph; 9th paragraph; 12th paragraph
5. Policies:

i. 3.2.1.1

ii. 3.2.1.2

iii. 3.2.2.1

iv. 3.2.2.4

v. 3.2.3.1

vi. 3.2.3.2

vii. 3.2.6.2

viii. 3.2.7.2

6. Section 4 – Context and Policies

i. 4.1 – Context: 6th paragraph

ii. 4.2.2.1

iii. 4.2.2.2

iv. 4.2.2.6

v. 4.2.2.7

4. Does OPA 63 conform with the Region of Niagara Official Plan? In particular:
   1. Chapter 1:

i. Introductory Section – 4th paragraph

2. Chapter 2:

i. Section 2.1 – Objective

ii. Policy 2.1.1.4

iii. Section 2.2 – Regional Structure 4th paragraph and Objectives a., d., e.

iv. Policy 2.2.1.1 – b., c., d.i, e., f., i., k.

v. Policy 2.2.2.25

vi. Policy 2.2.4.1

vii. Section 2.3 – Objectives a., b.

viii. Policy 2.3.1.1

ix. Policy 2.3.1.2

3. Chapter 3:

i. Policy 3.1.9

ii. Policy 3.1.9.6.1

iii. Policy 3.1.9.10.1

iv. Section 3.1.15

v. Section 3.1.16

vi. Section 3.1.17

4. Chapter 5: Objective a., b., c., d., e.

i. Policy 5.1.2

ii. Policy 5.1.3

5. Chapter 6:

i. Policy 6.1.4.7

ii. Policy 6.1.4.9

6. Chapter 7:

i. Policy 7.7.1.3

ii. Policy 7.9.1.3

iii. Policy 7.9.1

7. Schedule B - Regional Structure

8. Schedule C1 - Natural Environment System Overlay and Provincial Natural Heritage Systems

9. Schedule C2 - Natural Environment System - Individual Components and Features

10. Schedule C3 - Key Hydrologic Areas Overlay

11. Does OPA 63 meet the general intent and purpose of the Township of West Lincoln Official Plan? In particular:

    1. Objectives 5.2 b); c); j)
    2. Objectives 6.1.2 b); c)
    3. Policy 6.11.1 c);
    4. Natural Heritage Policies of Section 10 Natural Environment, and specifically:

i. 10.3.2(a)(i)

ii. 10.7.2

5. Schedule C1 – Natural Heritage Systems

6. Schedule C2 – NHS Environmental Protection Area

7. Schedule C3 – NHS Environmental Conservation Area

8. Schedule C4 – NHS Other Features

9. Schedule E12 – Smithville NHS

10. Does OPA 63 represent good planning and is it in the public interest?

Natural Heritage System

7. Is OPA 63’s natural heritage system approach, as set out generally in Policy 6.11.7.3 and Schedules “B-4”, “E-11”, “E-12”, appropriate? In particular:
   1. Is the identification of Restoration Areas on the lands owned by the Appellants, as described in OPA 63 Policies 6.11.7.3.1, 6.11.7.3.2, the preamble of Policy 6.11.7.3.16, Policy 6.11.7.3.16 and depicted in Schedules “E-11” and “E-12”, adequately and factually justified in the Subwatershed Study, and does it apply the Provincial Natural Heritage and PPS policies correctly?
   2. Is the identification of a 30% natural heritage coverage target, as described in OPA 63 Policies 6.11.7.3.2.f), 6.11.7.3.4.d), 6.11.7.3.4.h), 6.11.7.3.8.f), 6.11.7.3.14.c), and 6.11.7.3.16.c) iii) appropriate for urban areas, particularly as the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe reserves that coverage target for outside of settlement area boundaries?
   3. Is the identification of a 30% natural heritage coverage target, as set out in OPA 63 Policy 6.11.7.3.1, in conflict with the parent Official Plan for the Township of West Lincoln?
   4. Are the natural heritage policies that promote the 30% natural cover target, that set the 30m conceptual buffer width, and that set broad linkage widths too restrictive with respect to the ability of qualified professionals to complete science-based studies on natural heritage features and to recommend specific buffers, linkages, and restoration areas, supported by the results of those detailed studies, as set out in OPA 63 Policies 6.11.7.3.1, 6.11.7.3.2, 6.11.7.3.4, 6.11.7.3.14, 6.11.7.3.15 and 6.11.7.3.16 and Schedule “E-12”?
   5. Is it appropriate to presume that wetland evaluation is required for areas identified as both as Wetlands for Further Review and Other Wetlands, as described in Policies 6.11.7.3.3.f), 6.11.7.3.3.g), 6.11.7.3.3h), 6.11.7.3.3.i), 6.11.7.3.7.b) 6.11.7.3.7.c), 6.11.7.3.7.d), and 6.11.7.3.7.e), and Schedules “C-3”, “E-11”, and “E-12”?
   6. Is the prohibition on development and site alteration in Significant Woodlands, as contemplated by OPA 63 Policy 6.11.7.3.5 consistent with the PPS?
   7. Does the SWS and/or OPA 63 policy justify the specification of 200 metres width of Primary Linkage and 50 metres width of Secondary Linkage as set out in OPA 63 Paragraph 2 of Policy 6.11.7.3.15 a) and Schedules “E-11” and “E-12”) and does the 6.11.7.3.4.h) requirement to maintain or increase the area of Linkages whenever Linkage Area boundaries are refined appropriately constrain the location, width, and total area of linkages?

Transportation

8. Do the transportation policies in OPA 63, as set out below, provide enough clarity on how flexibility in OPA 63 will be applied by the Township for the approval of road design alternatives and at what stage in the development process? Should criteria be developed to clarify what design parameters would be considered by the Township that would not require an amendment to OPA 63?

   1. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.f)
   2. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.g)
   3. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.h)
   4. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.i)
   5. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.j)
   6. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.k)
   7. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.l)
   8. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.m)
   9. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.n)
   10. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.o)
   11. Policy 6.11.7.4.4.s)
   12. Policy 6.11.7.4.6 g)

9. Should the OPA 63 policies and schedules set out below identify areas to be protected for public transit planning implementation through a transit plan to be included as a schedule to OPA 63?

   1. OPA 63 Purpose – 6th bullet
   2. 6.11.7.1.3k)
   3. 6.11.7.4.4.r)
   4. Schedule F
   5. 6.11.7.4.5 Smithville Bypass Road Corridor
   6. 6.11.7.4.6 Road Improvements for Block Plan Areas
   7. 6.11.7.4.7 Active Transportation & Trail System
   8. 6.11.7.5.3.b)

Water and Wastewater Servicing

10. Does OPA 63 Policy 6.11.7.4.2 appropriately consider the most cost-effective and efficient servicing solutions, including consideration of alternative servicing solutions and the relationship between the servicing options, the phasing policies, life-cycle costing, and the financing of this growth?

Density

11. Are the proposed densities for residential uses, as set out in Policies 6.11.7.2.1, 6.11.7.2.2, 6.11.7.2.3, and 6.11.7.2.5, 6.11.7.5.2, 6.11.7.5.4 and in Schedules “B-4”, “E-11”, sufficient to provide the full range of housing types in the Secondary Plan?

Implementation

12. Does OPA 63, and specifically the Policies and Schedules set out below, provide for timely implementation of the Secondary Plan, including but not limited to appropriate Block Plan and Process for Block Plans, and appropriate Master Environmental Servicing Plans?

    1. Policy 6.11.7.6.1
    2. Policy 6.11.7.6.2
    3. Policy 6.11.7.6.3
    4. Policy 6.11.7.6.4
    5. Schedules "E-6”, “E-9”, “E-10”, and “E-14”

13. Should OPA 63 Policy 6.11.7.6.3 and Schedule “E-14” include the Appellants’ Lands as a first phase of development in the Secondary Plan area?

14. Should OPA 63 Policy 6.11.7.6.3 c) and Schedules “E-6”, “E-9”, “E-10” and “E-14” require employment lands and commercial and open space lands in Phases 1D, 2A, and 2B to proceed prior to Phases 3 and 4? Is it appropriate to include phasing of residential and employment together so that latter residential phases can only proceed when the employment and commercial lands have been developed in Phases 1D, 2A, and 2B?

15. Is OPA 63, specifically Purpose – 7th bullet; Policy 6.11.7.1.1; Policies 6.11.7.6.1; and Policies 6.11.7.6.3 c), e), premature without the completion of the full life cycle costing of the infrastructure plans and the establishment of policies and requirements for payment of costs?

16. Should OPA 63 contain policies to ensure the fair sharing of costs of constructing local services among benefitting lands?

17. What studies/reports should have to be updated if an EA update is undertaken for any of the infrastructure proposed through OPA 63?

NOTE: Issue 7 shall be scoped to the Appellants’ Lands, with the exception of those issues relating to the 30% natural heritage coverage target, which shall remain plan-wide issues, along with all other issues on the Issues List.

ATTACHMENT 3

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Phelps Homes Ltd. & JTG Holdings Ltd.
2. Township of West Lincoln
3. Regional Municipality of Niagara
4. 2650687 Ontario Ltd.
5. Allan and Janet Schutten
6. Trek Corporation and Kingma Petek LLP
7. 1734234 Ontario Limited
8. Phelps Homes Ltd. & JTG Holdings Ltd. in reply

ATTACHMENT 4