Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: November 28, 2024

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000005

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

Applicant and Appellant: Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd.

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

Description: To permit development of two midrise mixed-use buildings with 10 and 12 storeys in height, 263 residential units and 2,256 square metres of commercial space

Reference Number: 22 123884 WET 05 OZ

Property Address: 65 – 81 McCormack Street

Municipality: City of Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000005

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000005

OLT Case Name: Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

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

Appellant: Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd.

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

Reference Number: 22 123884 WET 05 OZ

Property Address: 65 – 81 McCormack Street

Municipality: City of Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000006

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000005

BEFORE:

S. BRAUN VICE-CHAIR

Thursday, the 28th, day of November, 2024

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Procedural Order issued on May 16, 2024, is hereby replaced with the Procedural Order set out as Attachment "A" to this Order, and the revised dates shall be in full force and effect for the purposes of governing the required procedure leading up to and including the hearing now scheduled to commence on June 16, 2025.

"Euken Lui"

EUKEN LUI REGISTRAR (A)

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.

Attachment A

Ontario Land Tribunal Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: November 28, 2024

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000005

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

Appellant: Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd.

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

Description: To permit development of two midrise mixed-use buildings with 10 and 12 storeys in height, 263 residential units and 2,256 square metres of commercial space

Reference Number: 22 123884 WET 05 OZ

Property Address: 65 – 81 McCormack Street

Municipality: City of Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000005

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000005

OLT Case Name: Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

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

Appellant: Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd.

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

Reference Number: 22 123884 WET 05 OZ

Property Address: 65 – 81 McCormack Street

Municipality: City of Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000006

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000005

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, June 16, 2025 at 10 a.m. through the following video link:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/638422541

Access code: 638-422-541

Parties 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 https://global.gotomeeting.com/install or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

Persons 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 638-422-541

3. The parties' initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 10 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 procedural order deadlines are found in Attachment 1.

4. The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 2.

5. The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3. 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 4 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. If the Applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, or if either the Applicant or its expert witnesses seek to rely on any new or revised reports, the Applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal or any such new or revised reports, as the case may be, to the other parties on or before Tuesday, January 7, 2025. The Applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the plans or the introduction of any new or revised reports, except those that are very minor or filed in accordance with paragraph 17 and amount to "true" or "proper" reply that could not reasonably have been anticipated or foreseen prior to receipt of the other parties' witness statements, after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

10. 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 Tuesday, February 4. 2025 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 proposed to be qualified.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Tuesday, February 25, 2025 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 the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing with the Tribunal's Case Coordinator on or before Tuesday, March 11, 2025.

12. 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.

13. 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. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

14. On or before Tuesday, April 1, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the Tribunal's Case Coordinator in accordance with paragraph 23 below.

15. On or before Tuesday, April 1, 2025, 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 permitted by the Tribunal.

16. On or before Tuesday, April 22, 2025, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

17. On or before Tuesday, April 22, 2025, parties may provide to all other parties and the Tribunal's Case Coordinator a written response to any written evidence in accordance with paragraph 23 below.

18. On or before Friday, June 6, 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.

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. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a Joint Document Book which shall be shared with the Tribunal's Case Coordinator in accordance with paragraph 23 below on or before Friday, June 6, 2025.

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. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Friday, June 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 preliminary hearing plan. Any and all witnesses shall be available on the identified date(s), unless otherwise directed by the Tribunal or on consent of parties. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the preliminary hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.

23. All filings shall be submitted electronically. 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. All documents to be filed with the Tribunal shall be organized, tabbed and digitally searchable.

24. 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.

ATTACHMENT 1

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE	EVENT
January 7, 2025	Last date to provide copies of revised proposal and all revised plans, reports, and studies (if any)
February 4, 2025	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
February 25, 2025	Experts meeting prior to this date
March 11, 2025	Statement of agreed facts filed with the Tribunal
April 1, 2025	Exchange of witness statements, summoned witness outlines, expert reports and participant statements
April 22, 2025	Parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required
April 22, 2025	Exchange of reply witness statements (if any)
June 6, 2025	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
June 6, 2025	Hearing plan filed with the Tribunal
June 6, 2025	Joint document book filed with the Tribunal
June 16, 2025	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

A. PARTIES

1. Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. Michael Foderick and Jamie Cole McCarthy Tétrault LLP Suite 5300, TD Bank Tower Box 48, 66 Wellington Street West Toronto, ON M5K 1E6 Email: mfoderick@mccarthy.ca Email: jpcole@mccarthy.ca Tel: (416) 601-8300

2. City of Toronto Cameron McKeich and Adrienne deBacker City of Toronto Legal Services Metro Hall 55 John Street, 26th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 Email: cameron.mckeich@toronto.ca Email: adrienne.debacker@toronto.ca Tel: (416) 392-8047

3. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Tim Duncan and Matthew Rutledge Fogler Rubinoff LLP Suite 3000, TD Centre North Tower P.O. Box 95, 77 King Street West Toronto, ON M5K 1G8 Email: tduncan@foglers.com Email: mrutledge@foglers.com Tel: (416) 941-8817

B. PATICIPANTS

1. Joanna Maio maiojo@yahoo.com

ATTACHMENT 3

ISSUES LIST

Note: The identification of an issue on this Issues List is intended to provide notice to all parties that a party will lead evidence and/or argument on the matter. This identification does not serve as an acknowledgement of relevancy to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

A party may revise their Issues List in response to any revised proposal within 20 days of receipt of such revised proposal.

CITY OF TORONTO

Planning Act

1. Do the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment, and Zoning By-law Amendments have appropriate regard for the matters of provincial interest as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular Section 2(a), 2(h), 2(j), 2(o), 2(p) and 2(r)?

Provincial Planning Statement (2024)

2. Are the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendments consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) pursuant to Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, including Sections: 2.1.6, 2.2.1, 2.8.1.1, 2.8.1.3, 3.5, 4.1, 5.1.1, and 5.2?

City of Toronto Official Plan

3. Do the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendments conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan with respect to: a. Employment Areas (2.2.4) b. Healthy Neighbourhoods (2.3.1) c. Toronto Green Space System and Waterfront (2.3.2) d. The Public Realm (3.1.1) e. Built Form (3.1.3) f. Built Form – Building Types (3.1.4) g. Housing (3.2.1) h. Parks and Open Spaces (3.2.3) i. The Natural Environment (3.4) j. Parks and Open Space Areas (4.3) k. Mixed Use Areas (4.5) l. Implementation (5.1.2)

Site and Area Specific Policy No. 437

4. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of Site and Area Specific Policy 437, including but not limited to, minimum affordable housing and non-residential GFA requirements?

City of Toronto Guidelines

5. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for, and meet the intent and purpose, the applicable City of Toronto Guidelines: a. Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities; b. City of Toronto Mid-rise Building Performance Standards and Addendum; c. Toronto Accessibility Design Guidelines; and d. Pet Friendly Design Guidelines for High Density Communities

Toronto Green Standard

6. Does the proposed development meet the requirements of the Toronto Green Standard?

Site Specific Issues

7. Natural Hazard a. Has the erosion hazard limit and related development setback associated with the valley corridor been established through the submission of a geotechnical study, to the satisfaction of the City and TRCA? b. Is the proposed development encroaching within the erosion hazard limit and required buffer lands associated with the erosion hazard limit?

8. Natural Heritage a. Is the Natural Heritage Impact Study to the satisfaction of the City? b. Does the proposed development negatively impact the Natural Heritage System on or adjacent to the subject site and, if so, have measures been identified to appropriately mitigate those impacts and/or enhance the system and its functions, to the satisfaction of the City? c. Is development appropriately setback from the limit of vegetation contiguous with the Natural Heritage System, and associated natural heritage features? d. Does the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment identify acceptable buffers to the natural hazard feature and/ or dripline feature, and are appropriate Official Plan Land Use and Zoning By-law categories assigned to the buffer lands? e. Does the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment demonstrate that all future building maintenance and functionality will be accommodated outside of the erosion hazard and buffer lands, within the proposed property limits? f. Are the erosion hazard and buffer lands appropriately naturalized and identified for conveyance to public ownership for long-term preservation?

9. Is the site organization and built form of the proposed development appropriate, including: a. Are the proposed building setbacks and streetwall heights appropriate? b. Does the proposal provide an appropriate fit and transition to surrounding land uses and built form? c. Are the shadow impacts from the proposed development acceptable? d. Are the wind impacts from the proposed development acceptable, given requested information in the form of a Pedestrian Level Wind Study has not been provided to date? e. Does the proposed development provide safe and barrier-free access and paths of travel throughout the site for all users?

10. Does the proposed development represent principles of good planning and urban design?

11. Is the proposed development compatible with the surrounding land uses, and if not, have appropriate mitigation strategies been provided?

12. Is the Land Use Compatibility and Mitigation Study in accordance with the City's Terms of Reference?

13. Is the proposed development compatible with the adjacent hydro corridor, and protect matters of public health and safety?

14. Does the proposed development adequately protect existing trees on the site and within the City Right of Way, and if not, have appropriate replacement plantings been provided, in accordance with the City's Tree Protection Policies and City of Toronto's Tree By-laws?

15. Is the proposed development providing adequate soil volume to provide tree plantings in accordance with the Toronto Green Standard?

16. Does the proposed development satisfy Urban Forestry issues, given requested information in the form of a Public Utility Plan and Grading Plan have not been provided to date?

17. Parkland a. Has a parkland dedication of an appropriate size, location and configuration been proposed under Section 42 of the Planning Act? b. Do the proposed development and proposed parkland dedication conform to Policy 3.2.3 of the City of Toronto Official Plan? c. Do the proposed development and proposed parkland dedication conform to Policy 3.4 of the City of Toronto Official Plan? d. Has a parkland dedication been provided which conforms to Chapter 415 Article III of the Toronto Municipal Code?

18. Servicing a. Has the proposed development demonstrated adequate municipal servicing in place to support it?

19. Transportation Services a. Has the proposed development provided adequate loading spaces to support the development? b. Is the proposed parking supply, including accessible parking supply, appropriate? c. Is the proposed bicycle parking supply adequate to support the development? d. Does the Transportation Impact Study demonstrate appropriate site circulation, access, parking, loading and related concerns in accordance with the City of Toronto guidelines?

20. Are the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment good planning and in the public interest?

Implementation

21. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied and the Tribunal receives confirmation from the City Solicitor that: a. The form and content of the Official Plan Amendment is satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor; b. The form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment is satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor; c. The owner has addressed all outstanding issues identified within the Engineering and Construction Services correspondence dated October 30, 2023, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services; d. The owner has submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study including all requested revisions identified within the Engineering and Construction Services correspondence, dated October 30, 2023, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services; e. The owner has submitted a revised Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services, and such report shall determine the stormwater run-off, sanitary flow and water supply demand resulting from the development and whether there is adequate capacity in the existing municipal infrastructure to accommodate the proposed development and/or any upgrades that may be required. The Applicant must also provide the Servicing Report Groundwater Summary, Foundation Drainage Summary Form, Foundation Summary Form Technical Brief, and the Hydrological Review Summary to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services f. The owner has addressed all outstanding issues identified by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the City Divisions, associated with sufficient setbacks to natural hazard lands at the rear of the property including the need for updated materials, including a Landscape Plan, Planting Plan, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management report, Geotechnical Study and Hydrological Assessment, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Parks, Forestry and Recreation and Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; g. The owner has provided a Pedestrian Level Wind Study, in accordance with the City's Terms of Reference, with such report to be reviewed and recommendations implemented as part of the Zoning By-law and/or secured in a development agreement, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; h. The owner has submitted a Natural Heritage Impact Study, to be peer reviewed by a third-party consultant on behalf of the City, with recommendations to be implemented as part of the amending Official Plan policies and Zoning By-laws and/or secured in a development agreement, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; i. The owner has submitted an Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Management Plan to be peer reviewed at the owner's expense, with recommendations to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; j. The owner has satisfactorily addressed matters from the Urban Forestry, Tree Protection and Plan Review, in response to future submissions filed by the owner, and provided required materials, including a Public Utilities Plan and a Site Grading Plan, all to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation; k. The owner has submitted a phasing plan to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director of City Planning, how the required non-residential gross floor area will be achieved; and l. The owner has made revisions to meet the Toronto Green Standard requirements to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

22. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the Tribunal receives confirmation from the City Solicitor that a Holding provision (H) has been included in the final form of the site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment, not to be lifted until such time as the following conditions are satisfied: a. Should it be determined that upgrades are required to the infrastructure to support the development according to the accepted Functional Servicing Report and/or the Transportation Impact Study, the owner has made satisfactory arrangements, including entering into appropriate agreement(s) with the City for the design and construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure and the provision of financial securities, at no cost to the City, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services and General Manager, Transportation Services; b. The owner has entered into a Municipal Housing Project Facility Agreement or such other agreement(s) as may be satisfactory to the City Solicitor to secure the provision of affordable housing; c. The submission and acceptance of a Housing Issues Report, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, that identifies the unit mix, unit sizes, and how affordable housing requirements will be met; and d. Submission of a Compatibility and Mitigation Study (including air quality and noise and vibration) to be peer reviewed at the owner's expense, with recommendations to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY:

1. Have the hazardous lands, as defined in the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, been adequately identified through site evaluation and an adequate geotechnical slope stability study?

2. Do the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest, as set out under Section 2 of the Planning Act, including subsections 2(o) and (p)?

3. Are the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, including sections 5.1 and 5.2?

4. Are the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the natural environment policies in Chapter 3 of the City of Toronto Official Plan, specifically 3.4.1(e), and 3.4.8 through 3.4.10?

5. Do the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment have appropriate regard for the policies contained in Chapter 7 of the 2014 Living City Policies for Planning and Development in the Watersheds of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority?

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

IN CHIEF:

1. Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd.
2. City of Toronto
3. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

REPLY:

1. Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd.

Attachment to Procedural Order

Meaning of terms used in the Procedural Order

A party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. An unincorporated group cannot be a party and it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorisation from the party.

NOTE that a person who wishes to become a party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the case management conference (CMC), must ask the Tribunal to permit this.

A participant is an individual or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a party may do so). Section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A participant may also be asked questions by the parties should the Tribunal direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.

A participant must be identified and be accorded participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a participant does not have the rights of a party to make such requests of the Tribunal.

Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.

Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing.

A witness statement is a short written outline of the person's background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss; and a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing.

An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness' opinions on those issues and the complete reasons supporting their opinions and conclusions and (5) a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of expert's duty.

A participant statement is a short written outline of the person's or group's background, experience and interest in the matter; a statement of the participant's position on the appeal; a list of the issues which the participant wishes to address and the submissions of the participant on those issues; and a list of reports or materials, if any, which the participant wishes to refer to in their statement.

Additional Information

A summons may compel the appearance of a person before the Tribunal who has not agreed to appear as a witness. A party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons through a request. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) The request should indicate how the witness' evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the information provided in the request that the evidence is relevant, necessary or admissible, the party requesting the summons may provide a further request with more detail or bring a motion in accordance with the Rules.

The order of examination of witnesses is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:

• direct examination by the party presenting the witness;
• direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;
• cross-examination by parties of opposite interest;
• re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or
• another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Tribunal.