Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 20, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-001031
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: 1463291 Ontario Inc
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Did not make a decision
Description: To permit the development of 57 new dwelling units
Reference Number: OPA 1516.03
Property Address: 1020, 1024, 1028, 1032 and 1042 Sixth line
Municipality/UT: Oakville-Halton
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-001031
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-001031
OLT Case Name: 1463292 Ontario Inc. v. Oakville
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: 1463291 Ontario Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law - Refusal of application
Description: To permit the development of 57 new dwelling units
Reference Number: OPA 1516.03
Property Address: 1020, 1024, 1028, 1032 and 1042 Sixth line
Municipality/UT: Oakville-Halton
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-001031
OLT Case Name: 1463292 Ontario Inc. v. Oakville
Heard: January 17, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| 1463292 Ontario Inc. | M. Nemanic L. Johnston G. Mutlu |
| City of Oakville | A. Biggart |
| Region of Halton | B. Maione |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY MEMBER S. GOPIKRISHNA ON JANUARY 17, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) regarding appeals brought pursuant to s. 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act by 1463292 Ontario Inc. (the “Appellant”), resulting from a refusal by the City of Oakville (the “City”) to pass an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) to permit the development of 57 new dwelling units at 1020, 1024, 1028, 1032 and 1042 Sixth line, in the City of Oakville (the “Subject Lands”).
2On behalf of the Parties, Ms. Mutlu, Counsel for the Appellants provided a brief overview of the Development Application for the Subject Lands. She said that the Appellant had applied to the City for an OPA and ZBA to permit the development of 57 new dwelling units, compromised of 55 townhouse units, and a semi-detached unit (two dwellings), and the retention of the detached dwelling at 1042 Sixth Line. The City staff reviewed the Application, and concluded that the proposal, as submitted, did not represent a development that reflects the appropriate implementation of the Livable Oakville Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and is not considered to be good planning, or in the public interest, and recommended that both the OPA and ZBA Applications be refused. On September 11, 2023, the City’s Municipal Council (“Council”) reviewed the Applications, and refused the same, resulting in the Appellant appealing the Decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) on October 3, 2023. The Tribunal scheduled a CMC on January 17, 2024.
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
3The Member reviewed the Affidavit of Service (“AOS”) sworn by Ms. Mutlu dated January 2, 2024, evidencing that notice of the CMC was provided to all required persons on December 18, 2023, as per the Tribunal’s Direction letter dated November 15, 2023. No concerns were raised by the Parties with respect to the AOS, and it was marked as Exhibit 1.
PARTY STATUS REQUESTS
4Ms. Maione, Counsel for the Region of Halton (“Region”), asked that the Region be given Party status in the Proceeding because the Subject Lands were in the Region of Halton, and had to conform to the Region’s Official Plan. She added that the Region had made submissions to the City before the Council heard the Application in October, 2023, regarding the proposal, and had specific questions with respect to waste management, as well as Site specific issues. She also added that if given Party status, the Region could seek clarifications, and ask for the imposition of conditions, but may not call witnesses at the Proceeding. Given that neither the Appellant, nor the City had questions for the Region, nor did they object to the Region being granted Party status, the Tribunal gave the Region Party status.
PARTICIPANT STATUS
5Havoc Franklin, Jess Gill, David Long, Robert Mordaunt and Barry Moore requested Participant status; each stated that they lived in the vicinity of the Subject Lands and asserted that they would be impacted negatively by the development and wanted Participant status to discuss the consequences of approving the proposal with the Tribunal. Given that none of the Parties objected to the granting of Participant status to the aforementioned individuals, the Tribunal gave Participant status to all five individuals.
6Ewa Cynk addressed the Tribunal verbally to request Participant status, and said that she would fill in, and send the requisite forms to the Tribunal after the completion of the CMC. The Tribunal granted her Participant status on a provisional basis, meaning that her Participant status would be confirmed after the Tribunal received her paperwork.
DRAFT PROCEDURAL ORDER
7Counsel for the City, Mr. Biggart said that the City wanted to deviate from the Draft Procedural Order (“PO”) that had been submitted to the Tribunal on January 16, 2024. He suggested any revised development concept be filed 120 days before the commencement of the Proceeding, as opposed to 90 days, suggested in the PO and explained that the City required at least 60 days between the filing of the revised development concept, and finalizing of its Witness statement. Mr. Biggart reasoned that since Witness Statements have to be submitted 60 days before the commencement of a Proceeding, the City would prefer for revisions to be made 120 days before the commencement, which would enable all concerned departments to thoroughly review all the changes, and make recommendations by way of reports. The Tribunal encouraged the Parties to have a discussion and attempt to arrive at a resolution that was acceptable to all Parties. The Tribunal gave the Parties time until Tuesday, February 20, 2024, to resolve the issue of whether 90 days, or 120 days would be appropriate for the submission of revised development concepts before the commencement of the Proceeding, and update the Tribunal about if, and how the issue was resolved. The Tribunal stated it would make a ruling on the matter if the Parties indicated that they could not reach a resolution on the matter.
ISSUES LIST
8The Parties did not have a finalized Issues List (“IL”) for the Tribunal. Mr. Johnston, Counsel for the Appellants, said that there could be a Hearing before the City regarding the application of s. 33.9 of the Ontario Heritage Act to the Subject Lands, and that the Region’s Conservation Authority could become a Party to the Proceeding, depending on the outcome. The Parties agreed that it would be appropriate to finalize the IL after the completion of the Proceeding related to the Heritage issue.
9The Parties found that it was necessary to address the following issues at the next CMC:
(a) The consolidation of Dunpar’s anticipated appeal of the Town’s refusal to approve Dunpar’s heritage alteration permit under s. 33(9) of the Ontario Heritage Act.
(b) The Tribunal’s approval of the draft IL; and
(c) Other pre-hearing matters which may arise, and the Tribunal may speak to.
HEARING ON THE MERITS
10The consensus among the Parties was to schedule a Hearing on the Merits of the Appeal, and that (15) days would be appropriate for a contested proceeding. After checking for availability, it was decided that the Proceeding would commence on Monday, January 13, 2025 at 10 a.m., and end on Monday, February 3, 2025. There will be no hearing on Monday, January 27, 2025 on account of the Holocaust Memorial Day.
LOG IN INFORMATION FOR THE PROCEEDING
11The Merit Hearing has been set for Monday, January 13, 2025, at 10 a.m. by Video Hearing.
12Parties 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:
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/914098901
Access Code: 914-098-901
13Parties 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
14Persons 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: Toll-Free 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497- 9373. The Access Code is as indicated above.
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 Video Hearing 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.
REQUEST FOR A FURTHER CMC IN SPRING 2024
16The Parties agreed to have a further CMC be held on Friday, June 21, 2024, July 22, 2024, and August 5, 2024. The information for the next CMC to be held on Friday, June 21, 2024, at 10 a.m. is as follows:
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/765631861
Access Code: 765-631-861
17Parties 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:
18Parties 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
19Persons 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: Toll-Free 1-888-455-1389 or +1 (647) 497-9391. The Access Code is as indicated above.
20Individuals 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 Video Hearing 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.
MEDIATION
21The Tribunal highlighted the availability of Tribunal-led mediation and advised the Parties to contact the Case Coordinator should they wish to pursue this option.
REASONS AND ANALYSIS
22The Tribunal notes that that no correspondence has been received from the Parties about the resolution of the question of submitting revisions to the development plans 90 days or 120 days before the commencement of the Hearing has been resolved. It also notes that no documentation has been received from Ewa Cynk in order to be granted Participant status.
ORDER
23THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:
a) The Region of Halton is granted Party status;
b) Havoc Franklin, Jess Gill, David Long, Robert Mordaunt and Barry Moore are granted Participant status;
c) Ewa Cynk is granted Participant status on a provisional basis, subject to her submitting a completed Participant status form to the Tribunal; and
d) A (15)-day Hearing on the Merits will take place via Video Hearing commencing on Monday, January 13, 2025 at 10 a.m., and end on Monday, February 3, 2025.
24No further notice will be provided.
25The next Case Management Conference is scheduled on Friday, June 21, 2024 at 10 a.m..
26The finalized Procedural Order is to be submitted for review and approval by the Tribunal.
27The Panel Member is not seized, but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should the need arise.
“S. Gopikrishna”
S. GOPIKRISHNA
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.