Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: October 09, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000381
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: MacDonald Rose Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit development of 11 freehold townhouse dwelling units
Reference Number: Z-1613.65
Property Address: 358 Reynolds Street
Municipality/UT: Oakville/Halton
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000381
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000381
OLT Case Name: MacDonald Rose Inc. v. Oakville (Town)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(39) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: MacDonald Rose Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Refusal
Description: To permit development of 11 freehold townhouse dwelling units
Reference Number: 24T-23003/1613
Property Address: 358 Reynolds Street
Municipality/UT: Oakville/Halton
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000382
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000381
Heard: September 18, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties Counsel
MacDonald Rose Inc. Russell Cheeseman Stephanie Fleming
Town of Oakville Nadia Chandra James Potma (articling student)
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. I. MOLINARI ON september 18, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in respect of appeals filed pursuant to s. 34(11) and 51(39) of the Planning Act by MacDonald Rose Inc. against the refusal by the Town of Oakville of Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications. The purpose of the applications is to facilitate the development of 11 freehold townhouse dwelling units on the property known municipally as 358 Reynolds Street.
NOTICE
2An Affidavit of Service sworn on August 12, 2024, attesting to the giving of notice for this proceeding, was marked as Exhibit 1. There were no concerns raised regarding the notice, and the Tribunal was satisfied that proper notice of the CMC was provided. In this regard, no further notice is required.
PARTIES / PARTICIPANTS
3The Tribunal was in receipt of a request for Participant status from Dan Prosser, citing concerns related to privacy, fencing, landscaping, shadows, sidewalks, the preservation of existing trees, density, lot coverage, balconies, setbacks, heritage preservation, and construction issues.
4There were no objections to the Participant status request and Mr. Prosser was granted Participant status as he has a genuine and direct interest in the matter and could assist the Tribunal in making its decision.
5There were no additional requests for Party or Participant status either before or during the CMC.
DRAFT PROCEDURAL ORDER
6The Tribunal was not in receipt of a draft Procedural Order (“DPO”) nor an Issues List (“IL”). Ms. Chandra confirmed that the IL will be complete and in its final form by Monday, September 23, 2024 and the Parties agreed to submit the final DPO with the IL attached to the Tribunal by that date in order to be attached to the Decision.
7After the CMC, the Tribunal received the final DPO with the IL attached and with the Merit Hearing and filing dates included based on the hearing event dates set out below. The Tribunal is satisfied with the final DPO and IL as submitted.
NEXT STEPS
8The Tribunal engaged the Parties in a discussion about the next steps in the process, including expectations for a second CMC and the requirements for a merit hearing.
9Ms. Chandra indicated that she had Town Council instructions to seek to resolve the issues, which were related to zoning standards, rather than proceed to a merit hearing. Mr. Cheeseman noted that, since the appeal was related to the refusal of the applications, he would like to secure merit hearing dates in the event a resolution of the appeals was not attainable.
10The Parties did not anticipate a second CMC would be required and considered a three-day merit hearing sufficient based on the need for three witnesses, including a land use planner, an urban designer and an architect.
HEARING EVENTS
11At the request of the Appellant and not opposed by the Town, the Tribunal scheduled a three-day merit hearing commencing on Monday, January 13, 2025, at 10 a.m., by video hearing through to Wednesday, January 15, 2025.
12Parties and/or Participants and/or Observers are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/656004293
Access code: 656-004-293
13Parties and/or 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 GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
14Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (toll-free) 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 656-004-293.
15Individuals 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 event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
MEDIATION
16The Tribunal advised the Parties of the option of Tribunal-led mediation and to contact the Case Coordinator to determine next steps if the need for mediation arises.
ORDER
17THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that a three-day merit hearing will be held by video hearing as scheduled above.
18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Procedural Order and Issues List set out as Schedule A is deemed in force and effect and shall govern the merit hearing.
19No further notice is required.
20The Member is not seized of this matter.
“C. I. Molinari”
C. I. MOLINARI
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 A
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000381
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: MacDonald Rose Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit development of 11 freehold townhouse dwelling units
Reference Number: Z-1613.65
Property Address: 358 Reynolds Street
Municipality/UT: Oakville/Halton
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000381
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000381
OLT Case Name: MacDonald Rose Inc. v. Oakville (Town)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(39) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: MacDonald Rose Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Refusal
Description: To permit development of 11 freehold townhouse dwelling units
Reference Number: 24T-23003/1613
Property Address: 358 Reynolds Street
Municipality/UT: Oakville/Halton
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000382
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000381
PROCEDURAL ORDER
- 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
The video hearing will begin on Monday, January 13, 2025 at 10: 00 a.m.
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 3 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible.
The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1 (see the sample procedural order for the meaning of these terms).
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.
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.
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.
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
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 Friday, October 4, 2024 and in accordance with paragraph 23 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.
If the applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal, including all revised plans, drawings, proposed instruments, updated supporting documents and reports, to the other Parties on or before Tuesday, October 15, 2024. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the Parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, October 18, 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 Friday, November 22, 2024.
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 14 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.
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 14 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 14 below.
On or before Friday, November 29, 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 23 below.
On or before Friday, November 29, 2024, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 23 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.
On or before Monday, December 9, 2024 the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On or before Friday, January 3, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 23 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.
Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within ten (10) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 23 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Friday, January 3, 2025.
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.
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.
The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Monday, January 6, 2025 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.
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.
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.
Summary of Procedural Dates
Date Event
Friday, October 4, 2024 Witness List
Friday, October 18, 2024 Final day for expert witness meeting
Friday, November 22, 2024 Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues filed
Friday, November 29, 2024 Expert witness and witness statements due
Friday, November 29, 2024 Written participant statement due
Friday, December 13, 2024 Response to written evidence due
Monday, December 9, 2024 Hearing date confirmation
Friday, January 3, 2025 Visual evidence due
Friday, January 3, 2025 Joint Document Book due
Monday, January 6, 2025 Preliminary hearing plan due
Monday, January 13, 2025 Hearing
Attachment 1
List of Parties and Participants
Russell D. Cheeseman & Stephanie Fleming Municipal Law Chambers rdcheese@aol.com sfleming@mlawc.com
Town of Oakville Nadia Chandra nadia.chandra@oakville.ca
Participants
- Dan Prosser
Attachment 2
Issues List
Town of Oakville Issues List MacDonald Rose Inc. 24T-23003/1613 and Z.1613.65
Does the proposed Zoning By-law amendment adequately demonstrate conformity with the Livable Oakville Official Plan as it relates to providing building elements and setbacks and/or stepbacks, and promotes transition to adjacent building forms through modifications in the mass and scale of the townhouse dwelling, as set out by Section 11 (Residential) policies 11.1.4 and 11.1.9, Section 6 (Urban Design) policies 6.1.2, 6.9.2, 6.9.3, 6.9.8, and 6.9.9, and Section 5 (Heritage) more specifically which meets the guidelines of the Trafalgar Road Heritage Conservation District (TRHCD) Plan?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law amendment conform to the Livable Oakville Official Plan by providing a design of the proposed right-of-way urbanization works that includes stormwater infrastructure, more specifically set out by Section 10 (Sustainability)?
Does the proposed Zoning By-law amendment conform to the Livable Oakville Official Plan by implementing stormwater management strategies for the proposed site work including water quality, water quantity, and water balance, and the hydraulic analysis of the major drainage system; more specifically set out by Section 10.10 (Stormwater Management)?
If a draft plan of subdivision for the development is to be approved, what conditions are required to mitigate both impacts on adjacent properties (such as the completion of a Functional Servicing Report), and risk to future landowners (such as the completion of a Record of Site Condition), and achieve good planning and compliance with town standards?
Attachment 3
Order of Evidence
- MacDonald Rose Inc.
- Town of Oakville
- MacDonald Rose Inc., in reply.