Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 16, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-001123
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Anthony Continelli - 1473941 Ontario Ltd. cob (PBG Group)
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request
Description: To facilitate the construction of stacked townhouses totaling 69 residential units
Reference Number: OPA No. 43
Property Address: 392 & 398 Thorold Road
Municipality/UT: City of Welland/ The Regional Municipality of Niagara
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-001123
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-001123
OLT Case Name: PBG Group v. Welland (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Anthony Continelli - 1473941 Ontario Ltd. cob (PBG Group)
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application
Description: To facilitate the construction of stacked townhouses totaling 69 residential units
Reference Number: ZBA 2023-02
Property Address: 392 & 398 Thorold Road
Municipality/UT: City of Welland/ The Regional Municipality of Niagara
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-001124
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-001123
Heard: February 8, 2024 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
1473941 Ontario Ltd. cob as PBG Group & Anthony Continelli
Thomas Richardson Sara Premi, in absentia
City of Welland
Callum Shedden
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HARDY ON FEBRUARY 8, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Final Order
INTRODUCTION
1This Decision relates to an appeal brought pursuant to s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”) from the City of Welland’s (“City”) refusal to approve applications for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) (together referred to as “applications”). The appeal has been filed by 1473941 Ontario Ltd. cob as PBG Group & Anthony Continelli (together referred to as the “Appellant”) regarding lands municipally known as 392 and 398 Thorold Road, within the City (together referred to as the “Subject Property”).
2On February 8, 2024, the Tribunal held its first hearing event in the appeal, which was intended to be a Case Management Conference (“CMC”). In advance of the CMC, the Parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement and filed Minutes of Settlement with the Tribunal. The Parties also advised that it was their intent to present a settlement proposal to the Tribunal at the CMC. In advance of the CMC, the Tribunal advised the Parties that because the CMC was a first hearing event, the presiding Member would address any preliminary matters and determine whether the merits of the proposed settlement would be heard at the CMC.
PROCEDURAL MATTERS
3The Tribunal confirmed with the Parties that there were no issues with service of Notice of the CMC and as such, no further notice is required. The Tribunal was in receipt of the Affidavit of Service of Suzanne Martin dated January 8, 2024, which was marked as Exhibit 1.
REQUESTS FOR STATUS
4Prior to the CMC, the Tribunal did not receive any requests for Party or Participant status. In response to the Tribunal’s inquiry, there were no other persons or entities present at the CMC requesting Party or Participant status.
5Counsel for the Appellant advised the Tribunal that he had been contacted by a member of the public who had questions about the appeal but had not indicated to Counsel whether they were in favour of or opposed to the applications. Similarly, Counsel for the City advised that he had been contacted by a neighbour of the Subject Property who requested further information about the appeal, which Counsel provided. The neighbour was present at the CMC and the Tribunal confirmed with him that he was not seeking status but was attending the proceedings in the capacity of an observer.