Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
June 28, 2024
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-24-000243
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
OP 16-08-6
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
OP 16-12-6
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000244
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
ZN 6-16-09
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000245
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
ZN 6-16-12
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000246
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
SB 16-04-6
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000247
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
Heard:
June 3, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Sifton Properties Limited
Matthew Helfand Andrea Skinner (in absentia)
Town of Ingersoll
Peter Pickfield Alex Ciccone (in absentia)
County of Oxford
Peter Pickfield Alex Ciccone (in absentia)
Huron Grain Processing Inc.
Paula Lombardi
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY ASTRID J. CLOS ON june 3, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) convened for appeals brought by Sifton Properties Limited (“Applicant/Appellant”) pursuant to s. 22(7) of the Planning Act (“Act”) of the Official Plan Amendments (“OPA”), pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Act of the Zoning By-law Amendments (“ZBA”), and pursuant to s. 51(34) of the Act of the Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”) for the properties legally described as Block 65 and Part of Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 and Part of Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford) in the Town of Ingersoll (“Subject Properties”).
2Sifton Properties Limited owns two properties in the Town. The first property (Block 65 and Part of Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309) has an OPA and ZBA appeal before the Tribunal. The second property (Part of Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford)) has OPA, ZBA, and DPS appeals before the Tribunal. Together, these two parcels are identified as the Subject Properties.
3The purpose of the OPA for the first property is to allow medium-and high-density residential uses. The related ZBA will allow medium and high-density uses, nursing home, rest home uses, and introduce specific standards and special provisions to address setbacks, height, and other standards.
4The purpose of the OPA for the second property is to redesignate a portion of the property from the “Service Commercial” to “Low Density Residential” designation under the County of Oxford Official Plan. The related ZBA would rezone a portion of the land to a Special Residential Type 2 (R2-14) Zone. The DPS proposes approximately 38 low-density single detached lots, the extension of Sutherland Crescent, and a servicing corridor.
5The Appellant subsequently appealed all five applications for both properties since the approval authorities did not make a decision within the statutory timelines.
6The Affidavit of Service sworn on May 16, 2024, was entered as Exhibit 1.
STATUS REQUESTS
7In response to the notice, a request for Party status was filed by Huron Grain Processing Inc. The Tribunal reviewed the request and determined that reasonable grounds and genuine land use planning issues were being raised, and with no opposition from the other Parties granted the requested Party status.
8In response to the notice, no requests for Participant status had been filed with the Tribunal.
HEARING MATTERS TOGETHER WITH CONSENT APPEAL
9Matthew Helfand, Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant, advised that a provisional consent application had been appealed to the Tribunal assigned Case File OLT-22-003944. Mr. Helfand requested that the five appeals in this matter and the related Consent appeal all be heard together. The Tribunal canvassed the other Parties who confirmed that their clients have no objection to all six appeals being heard together. The Tribunal considered the request and directed that all six appeals be heard together in accordance with Rule 16.3 of the OLT Rules of Practice and Procedure.
MERIT HEARING
10The Parties jointly requested that a (15) fifteen-day Merit Hearing be scheduled. The Tribunal canvassed the availability of Counsel and accordingly scheduled a (15) fifteen-day Merit Hearing to commence at 10 a.m. on Monday, May 26, 2025 and ending on Friday, June 13, 2025 by Video Hearing.
11Parties 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.
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/344779885
Access code: 344-779-885
12Parties 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
13Persons 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: (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373. The access code is as indicated above.
14Individuals 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.
DRAFT PROCEDURAL ORDER
15The Tribunal has reviewed and approved the Draft Procedural Order filed with the Case Coordinator on June 20, 2024. The approved PO is included as Schedule 1.
16The Parties were reminded that Tribunal-led mediation is available at their convenience by contacting the Case Coordinator.
ORDER
17The Tribunal orders THAT:
a. Party status is granted to Huron Grain Processing Inc.,
b. OLT-24-000243, OLT-24-000244, OLT-24-000245, OLT-24-000246, OLT-24-000247, and OLT-22-003944 be heard together,
c. The Procedural Order appended as Schedule 1 is approved, and
d. A fifteen-day Merit Hearing commencing at 10 a.m. on Monday, May 26, 2025 and ending on Friday, June 13, 2025 by Video Hearing is scheduled.
18This Member is not seized.
19No further notice will be provided.
“Astrid J. Clos”
ASTRID J. CLOS
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
ISSUE DATE: June 28, 2024 CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000243
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Failure to announce a decision respecting Proposed New Official Plan
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
OP 16-08-6
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Failure to announce a decision respecting Proposed New Official Plan
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
OP 16-12-6
Property Address:
Part of Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford) in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000244
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
ZN 6-16-09
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000245
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
ZN 6-16-12
Property Address:
Part of Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford) in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000246
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description:
To permit development for residential use
Reference Number:
SB 16-04-6
Property Address:
Part of Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford) in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-24-000247
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Sifton Properties Limited
Subject:
Consent Application
Description:
To permit a lot addition to Block 65
Reference Number:
B21-106-6
Property Address:
West side of Hollingshead Rd., north of Clarke Rd. East, legally described as Block 65 and Part Block 66, Registered Plan 41M-309 in the Town of Ingersoll
Municipality:
Oxford
OLT Case No.:
OLT-22-003944
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-24-000243
OLT Case Name:
Sifton Properties Limited v. Oxford (County)
- 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 hearing will commence on May 26, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. and will end on June 13, 2025 by video hearing.
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 15 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.
Parties 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.
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/344779885
Access code: 344-779-885
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 GoToMeeting or a web application is available at: 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 into an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll-Free) 1-(888) 299-1889. Access code is 344-779-885
Individuals 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.
The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1.
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. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Issues List may be amended on the consent of the parties to remove Issues that are resolved or no longer relevant.
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.
The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in it are set out in Attachment 4.
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.
Requirements Before the Hearing
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 January 31, 2025. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the Parties may be grounds for the Tribunal to adjourn 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 February 25, 2025 (at least 90 days prior to the start of the hearing) and in accordance with paragraph 27 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.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before March 12, 2025 (at least 75 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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 27, 2025 (at least 60 days prior to the start of the hearing).
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 27 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 27 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 27 below.
On or before April 11, 2025 (at least 45 days prior to the start of the hearing), 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 27 below.
On or before April 11, 2025 (at least 45 days prior to the start of the hearing), a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 27 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 April 21, 2025 (at least 35 days prior to the start of the hearing) the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On or before May 6, 2025 (date – at least 20 days prior to the start of the hearing), the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 27 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, April 21, 2025, after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 27 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before May 16, 2025 (at least 10 days prior to the start of the hearing).
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 May 16, 2025 (at least 10 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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.
A summary of the various procedural dates is contained in Attachment 5.
This Member is [not] seized.
So orders the Tribunal.
BEFORE:
Name of Member:
Date:
TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR
ATTACHMENT 1
LIST OF PARTIES / PARTICIPANTS
Parties
Sifton Properties Limited
Aird & Berlis LLP
Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800
Toronto ON M5J 2T9
Andrea Skinner
Tel: 416.865.3423
Email: askinner@airdberlis.com
Matthew Helfand
Tel: 416.865.4624
Email: mhelfand@airdberlis.com
County of Oxford
Garrod Pickfield LLP
9 Norwich Street W.,
Guelph, ON N1H 2G8
Peter Pickfield Alex Ciccone
Tel: 519.837.0500
Email: pickfield@garrodpickfield.ca aciccone@garrodpickfield.ca
Town of Ingersoll
Garrod Pickfield LLP
9 Norwich Street W.,
Guelph, ON N1H 2G8
Peter Pickfield Alex Ciccone
Tel: 519.837.0500
Email: pickfield@garrodpickfield.ca
Huron Grain Processing Inc.
Siskinds LLP
275 Dundas Street, Unit 1
London, ON N6B 3L1
Paula Lombardi
Tel: 519.660.7878
Email: paula.lombardi@siskinds.com
ATTACHMENT 2
ISSUES LIST
NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the Tribunal or any Party that the issue is relevant or appropriate, or that the Tribunal has jurisdiction over it. The identification of an issue by a Party indicates that Party’s intent to tender evidence and/or make submissions on it, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other Parties the case they need to meet. No Party shall make submissions or tender evidence on an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the Tribunal.
Issues List 1 (Block 65 and 66)
County of Oxford and the Town of Ingersoll
OLT Case Nos.: OLT-24-000243 – OLT-24-000247
Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000243
Municipal File Nos.: OP16-08-6 & ZN6-16-09
Property: Block 65 and Part Block 66, Plan 41M-309
Provincial Law, Policy and Guidance
- Would approval of the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest, as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular the following sub-sections:
(f) – the adequate provision and efficient use of transportation systems;
(h) – the orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
(n) – the resolution of planning conflicts involving public and private interests;
(o) – the protection of public health and safety.
- Would the approval of the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, in particular the following policies:
s. 1.1.1 c) – avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns;
s. 1.1.1 f) – ensuring that necessary infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to meet current and projected needs;
s. 1.2.6 – Land Use Compatibility; and
s. 1.6.7 – Transportation Systems.
- Would development permitted by the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law meet the Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Noise Guideline – Stationery and Transportation Sources NPC-300.
County of Oxford Official Plan
- Would approval of the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the policies of the County of Oxford Official Plan, in particular the following policies
s. 2.1.1 – Growth Management (Land Use Compatibility);
s. 3.3 – Human-made Constraints;
s. 9.3.4.2 – Industrial Areas – Established Industrial Uses;
s. 9.3.4.5.6 – South Ingersoll Secondary Plan Area – Noise Sensitive Land Uses.
- Would approval of the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the transportation policies of the Oxford County Official Plan in particular:
s. 2.1.6 – Transportation Systems and Corridors;
s. 5.1 – County Transportation Policy;
s. 9.2.6 – High Density Residential Areas (Site Specific Evaluation Criteria – the location of vehicular access points and the likely effects of traffic generated by the proposal on public streets has been assess and is acceptable);
s. 9.6.2 – Roads.
- Would approval of the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the following policies of the Oxford County Official Plan with respect to high density residential development:
s.9.2.6 – High Density Residential Areas (Site Specific Evaluation Criteria – adequate off-street parking and outdoor amenity areas can be provided);
s. 9.2.7 – Site Design Policies for Multiple Unit Residential Development.
Transportation Planning
Would the development that would be permitted under the proposed amendments to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law meet the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the County of Oxford 2024 Transportation Master Plan.
Can some or all of the issues identified above be adequately addressed through holding provisions in the implementing zoning by-law and, if so, what holding provisions are appropriate?
Issues List 1 (Phase 5 Lands)
County of Oxford and the Town of Ingersoll
OLT Case Nos.: OLT-24-000243 – OLT-24-000247
Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000243
Municipal File Nos: OP16-12-6, SB16-04-6 & ZN6-16-12
Property: Part Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford), Parts 1-3 Plan 41R-10498
Provincial Law, Policy and Guidance
- Would approval of the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest, as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular the following sub-sections:
(f) – the adequate provision and efficient use of transportation systems;
(h) – the orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
(o) – the protection of public health and safety.
- Would the approval of the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, in particular the following policies:
s. 1.1.1 f) – ensuring that necessary infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to meet current and projected needs;
s. 1.6.7 – Transportation Systems.
- Would development permitted by the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan, the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law and proposed draft plan of subdivision meet the Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Noise Guideline – Stationery and Transportation Sources NPC-300 Guidelines?
County of Oxford Official Plan
- Would approval of the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the transportation policies of the Oxford County Official Plan in particular the following policies:
s. 2.1.6 – Transportation Systems and Corridors;
s. 5.1 – County Transportation Policy;
s. 9.2.4 – Low Density Residential Areas (Infill Subdivision and All Infill Proposals – vehicular access points and the likely impact of traffic generated by the proposal on public streets and potential traffic impacts on pedestrian and vehicular safety and surrounding properties are acceptable)
s. 9.6.2 – Roads.
Other Issues
Would the development that would be permitted under the proposed draft plan of subdivision and proposed amendments to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law meet the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the 2024 County of Oxford Transportation Master Plan.
Can some or all of the issues identified above be adequately addressed through draft plan conditions or holding provisions in the implementing zoning by-law and, if so, what draft plan conditions and/or holding provisions are appropriate?
Issues List - Block 65 and 66
Huron Grains Processing Inc.
OLT Case Nos.: OLT-24-000243 – OLT-24-000247
Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000247
Municipal File Nos.: OP16-08-6 & ZN6-16-09
Property: Block 65 and Part Block 66, Plan 41M-309
- Does the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest, as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular the following sub-sections:
(h) the orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
(o) the protection of public health and safety;
(q) the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;
(r) the promotion of built form that,
(i) is well-designed,
(ii) encourages a sense of place, and
(iii) provides for public spaces that are of a high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant.
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
- Is the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, in particular the following policies:
1.0 Building strong Healthy Communities;
1.1.1 a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;
1.1.1 c) avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns;
1.2.6 Land Use Compatibility
1.3 Employment Areas
County of Oxford Official Plan
Does the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the following policies of the Oxford County Official Plan: s. 9.2.1 (Strategic Approach); s. 9.2.3.1 (Objectives for All Residential Areas); s. 9.2.6 (High Density Residential Areas); s. 9.2.6.1 (Redevelopment and Conversion of Non-Residential Buildings); s. 9.3.4.4 (Industrial Areas – Zoning and Site Plan Control);; s. 9.4.2 (Community Facilities); and s.9.4.2.1 (Expansions and New Community Facility Designations)?
Does the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the policies of the South Ingersoll Secondary Plan Area, particularly s. 9.3.4.5.6?
Noise and Compatibility
Does the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan, the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law and proposed mitigation adequately and appropriately address noise and vibration taking into account the existing land uses in the area and does it meet the standards of the Environmental Protection Act, the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks guidelines (including the NPC 300)?
Would development permitted by the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan, the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law and proposed draft plan of subdivision meet the Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Noise Guideline – Stationery and Transportation Sources NPC-300 Guidelines?
Are there noise mitigation measures that should be implemented for the proposed residential use?
Issues List - (Block 66 Consent)
Huron Grains Processing Inc.
OLT Case Nos.: OLT-22-003944
Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003944
Municipal File Nos.: B21-10606
Property: Block 66, Plan 41M-309
- Does the proposed consent have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest, as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular the following sub-sections:
(h) the orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
(k) the adequate provision of employment opportunities;
(o) the protection of public health and safety;
(p) the appropriate location of growth and development;
(q) the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;
(r) the promotion of built form that,
(i) is well-designed,
(ii) encourages a sense of place, and
(iii) provides for public spaces that are of a high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant.
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
- Is the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, in particular the following policies:
- 1.0 Building Strong Communities
- 1.2.6 Land Use Compatibility
- 1.3 Employment
- 1.7 Long Term Economic Prosperity
County of Oxford Official Plan
Does the proposed consent conform to the following policies of the Oxford County Official Plan: s. 8.3 (Economic Development and Employment Lands); s. 9.2.3.1 (Objectives for All Residential Designations); and s. 10.3.4 (Consents (Severances))?
Does the proposed consent conform to the policies of the South Ingersoll Secondary Plan Area, particularly s. 9.3.4.5.6?
Issues List - Phase 5 Lands
Huron Grains Processing Inc.
OLT Case Nos.: OLT-24-000243 – OLT-24-000247
Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000243
Municipal File Nos: OP16-12-6, SB16-04-6 & ZN6-16-12
Property: Part Lot 19, Concession 1 (West Oxford), Parts 1-3 Plan 41R-10498
- Does the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest, as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular the following sub-sections:
(h) the orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
(o) the protection of public health and safety;
(q) the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;
(r) the promotion of built form that,
(i) is well-designed,
(ii) encourages a sense of place, and
(iii) provides for public spaces that are of a high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant.
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
- Is the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, in particular the following policies:
s. 1.1.1 a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;
s. 1.1.1 c) avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns;
s. 1.2.6 Land Use Compatibility
County of Oxford Official Plan
Does the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the following policies of the Oxford County Official Plan: s. 9.2.3.1 (Central Area Vision); s. 9.3.4 (Industrial Areas); s. 9.3.4.2 (Industrial Areas – Established Industrial Uses).?
Does the proposed draft plan of subdivision and amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan and the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law conform to the South Ingersoll Secondary Plan Area policies, particularly s. 9.3.4.5.6?
Noise and Compatibility
Does the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan, the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law and proposed mitigation adequately and appropriately address noise and vibration taking into account the existing land uses in the area and does it meet the standards of the Environmental Protection Act, the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks guidelines (including the NPC 300)?
Would development permitted by the proposed amendment to the Oxford County Official Plan, the Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law and proposed draft plan of subdivision meet the Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Noise Guideline – Stationery and Transportation Sources NPC-300 Guidelines?
Are there noise mitigation measures that should be implemented for the proposed residential use?
ATTACHMENT 3
ORDER OF EVIDENCE
Sifton Properties Limited
County of Oxford
Town of Ingersoll
Huron Grain Processing Inc.
Sifton Properties Limited in reply (if any)
ATTACHMENT 4
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.
ATTACHMENT 5
SUMMARY OF DATES
DATE
EVENT
February 25, 2025
(90 days prior to hearing)
Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
March 12, 2025
(75 days prior to hearing)
Experts meeting prior to this date, if such meeting occurs
April 11, 2025
(60 days prior to hearing)
Agreed Statement of Facts, if meeting occurs and matters agreed to
April 11, 2025
(45 days prior to hearing)
Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
April 21, 2025
(ten (10) days after the evidence is received)
Exchange of written response to written evidence (if any)
April 21, 2025
(35 days prior to hearing)
Parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required
May 6, 2025
(20 days prior to hearing)
Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
May 16, 2025
(10 days prior to hearing)
Final Hearing Plan filed with the Tribunal
May 16, 2025
(10 days prior to hearing)
Finalize Joint Document Book
May 26, 2025 to June 13, 2025
Hearing commences (15 days)
60016936.2