ISSUE DATE: July 16, 2025

CASE NO.: OLT-25-000253

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

Applicant and Appellant: Line 2 Developments Inc.

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

Description: To permit the development of 349 residential units, a park block, a watershed treatment facility, a water treatment facility, a stormwater management pond, and a new public road system

Reference Number: ZBA 2023-02

Property Address: 753072 2nd Line

Municipality/UT: Town of Mono/County of Dufferin

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000253

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000253

OLT Case Name: Line 2 Developments Inc. v. Mono (Town)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Line 2 Developments Inc.

Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision

Description: To permit the development of 349 residential units, a park block, a watershed treatment facility, a water treatment facility, a stormwater management pond, and a new public road system

Reference Number: SUB 2023-01

Property Address: 753072 2nd Line

Municipality/UT: Town of Mono/County of Dufferin

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000254

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000253

BEFORE:

STEVE DEBOER MEMBER

Wednesday, the 16th day of July 2025

THESE MATTERS having come before the Ontario Land Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) for a Case Management Conference on June 13, 2025 and the Tribunal having issued a decision on June 18, 2025;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having directed the submission of a draft Procedural Order on consent of the parties;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having received the requested draft Procedural Order, on consent;

NOW THEREFORE

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the seventeen (17) day virtual Merits Hearing is scheduled to commence on September 21, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. on:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077

Access code: 927-921-077

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that it will not be sitting on September 30, 2025, and October 12, 2026;

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Procedural Order attached hereto as Schedule “1” is in full force and effect.

“Matthew D.J. Bryan”

MATTHEW D.J. BRYAN REGISTRAR

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: 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.

SCHEDULE 1

PROCEDURAL ORDER

1. The Tribunal may vary or add to these rules at any time, either on request or as it sees fit. It may alter this Order by an oral ruling, or by another written Order.

2. At the request of the Town, the Tribunal scheduled a motion to dismiss the appeals at 10 a.m. on November 6, 2025, as confirmed in paragraph 7 of the Case Management Disposition issued June 18, 2025. This motion is scheduled pursuant to section 19(1)c of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021. The issuance of this Procedural Order, and the current issue list, is without prejudice to the Town proceeding with this motion.

3. Further refinement of this Procedural Order is anticipated as the positions of the parties are refined.

Organization of the Hearing

4. The hearing will commence on Monday, September 21, 2026, at 10am and will be conducted virtually on:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077

Access code: 927-921-077

5. The length of the hearing will be seventeen (17) days, not sitting September 30, 2026, and October 12, 1015.

6. The parties and participants to the hearing are set out in Attachment 1.

7. The current Issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. The parties shall provide a final Issues List to the parties and the Tribunal no later than Friday, June 27, 2025. Except as contemplated in paragraph 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.

8. 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 consent or by Order of the Tribunal.

9. Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal and the other parties as soon as possible. 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

10. 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 which it intends to rely upon, to all the Parties on or before Friday, April 24, 2026. The Applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties or which do not seek to scope or resolve concerns expressed in the Witness Statement(s) filed by another party, may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

11. 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, their professional qualifications, their areas of expertise, completed Acknowledgements of Expert’s Duty, the precise area and discipline in which they will seek to be qualified to provide expert testimony, and the intended order in which the witnesses will be called during the hearing. This information must be delivered on or before Friday, May 22, 2026. Any challenge by a Party to the qualifications or expertise of a witness must be filed with the Tribunal with supporting reasons within 30 days.

12. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, June 12, 2026, to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Expert meetings and discussions are to be held on a without prejudice and confidential basis, except insofar as it may be necessary for an expert to seek out resources or information (e.g. consult with other experts or counsel) that may be required in order for the expert witness to comply with the duties and obligations outlined in this section. The without prejudice and confidential nature of the discussions includes not being cross-examined or examined, by any party, regarding any statements or positions that may have been made or taken during an expert meeting or discussion. The experts must prepare a list of agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing and provide this list to all of the parties by no later than Friday, June 26, 2026.

13. 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 section 23. 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. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7.4 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the expert witness has prepared any report(s) that he/she intends to rely on at the hearing, and which did not form part of the submissions made to the City, such report(s) shall be provided to the other parties at the same time as the delivery of expert witness statements, as in section 23.

14. On or before Friday, July 24, 2026, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing or the participant may not give oral evidence at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

15. 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 section 23. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in section 15.

16. On or before Friday, July 24, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties.

17. On or before Friday, August 21, 2026, the parties shall provide any reply witness statements responding to any written evidence received to the other parties.

18. On or before Friday, September 11, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to the other parties. 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. A party who provides a witness’ evidence 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 the record.

21. The parties shall prepare and file a hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Monday, September 14, 2026 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.

22. The parties shall cooperate to prepare and file a Joint Document Book with the Tribunal on or before Monday, September 14, 2026. If a party wants a printed copy of the electronic Document Book for its own use it shall print it themselves at their own cost. It is not anticipated that the Tribunal will require a printed copy for itself but if it does, the Tribunal will print its own copy.

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. Documents may be delivered by personal delivery, registered or certified mail or email, or otherwise as the Tribunal may direct. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Tribunal’s Rules (Rule 7) on this subject. Material delivered by mail shall be deemed to have been received five business days after the date of registration or certification.

24. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness, and except as contemplated in paragraph 10 of this Order. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.

25. The purpose of the Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in the Procedural Order are set out in Attachment 4.

26. A summary of the various procedural dates is set out in Attachment 5.

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

ATTACHMENT 1

LIST OF PARTIES and participants

Parties

Line 2 Developments Inc. KAGAN SHASTRI DeMELO WINER PARK LLP 188 Avenue Road Toronto, ON., M5R 2J1 Ira T. Kagan / Sarah R. Kagan Tel: 416-368-2100 x. 226 / 243 ikagan@ksllp.ca / skagan@ksllp.ca

Town of Mono Thomson Rogers 390 Bay Street, Suite 3100 Toronto, ON., M5H 1W2 Jeffrey J. Wilker / Stan Floras Tel: 416-868-3118 /416-868-3150 jwilker@trlaw.com / sfloras@trlaw.com

Participants

1. John Voight T: 519-941-6120 ext. 25/ 416-779-6488 E: jvoight@technicor.ca

ATTACHMENT 2

ISSUES LIST

Note 1: 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.

Prematurity/Dismissal

1. Should this appeal be dismissed on the basis that the development proposal is premature?

2. Should this appeal be dismissed on the basis that no application for a plan of condominium has been filed or appealed to accompany the development proposal?

3. Is water and wastewater servicing a threshold issue?

4. Can the issue of site density in the development proposal be decided before an acceptable water and wastewater servicing system is determined that is financially and technically feasible and which protects human health and the natural environment?

5. Can or should the issue of site density in the development proposal be decided when the Town has resolved that it will not consent to the construction, operation and maintenance of a new drinking water or sewage utility under section 93 of the Municipal Act?

6. Should the appeals be dismissed without a hearing under Section 19 1 c) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act 2021, on the basis that this proceeding has no reasonable prospect of success because: a) the development approvals sought in these appeals are reliant upon a non-municipal (stand alone) communal drinking water system and a private (stand-alone) communal wastewater treatment system that cannot be established, constructed or operated? b) the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks will not approve the construction and/or operation of a private communal wastewater treatment system or private non-municipal communal drinking water system without the Town executing a responsibility agreement with the appellant, or the Town otherwise agreeing to consent to act as the guarantor of each system? c) the applicant has not submitted a financial analysis to the Town, nor has the Town approved such analysis to demonstrate the affordability of the operational, maintenance and ownership costs of the proposed private communal wastewater treatment system or non-municipal communal drinking water system, in the event of the failure of either or both systems? d) the Town has not confirmed, consented or agreed that it is prepared to execute a responsibility agreement with the appellant or act as the guarantor of each communal system? or e) the applicant has not satisfied any other issues included and set out in this section Prematurity/Dismissal issues.

7. Should the development proposal be dismissed given it is premised on a new stand alone private communal wastewater servicing when: a. the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks will not approve the construction and/or operation of a private communal wastewater treatment system without the Town executing a responsibility agreement with the appellant, or the Town otherwise agreeing to consent to act as the guarantor of the system? b. the Town has not confirmed, consented or agreed that it is prepared to execute a responsibility agreement with the appellant or consent to act as the guarantor of the system? c. The applicant has not demonstrated the financial affordability of the private communal wastewater treatment system, nor the cost to its proposed users. d. the Town’s own experience with two existing communal wastewater systems has been negative, based on repeated failures of these systems to meet MECP effluent requirements? or, e. technical matters and regulatory requirements, that include but are not limited to requirements for the dilution area, effluent concentration targets, leaching bed size and buffer areas, financial information and long-term performance have not been satisfactorily resolved?

8. Should the development proposal be dismissed as it is premised on communal drinking water services that involves the approval and construction of a new independent (stand-alone) non-municipal drinking water system when: a. a Schedule Class C Environmental Assessment (Class EA) is required to consider all alternatives has not been undertaken or completed? b. the Town has not approved any such expansion or Class EA study of same? c. water capacity is not currently available from existing Town water systems to service the development proposal?; d. the quality of groundwater is not shown to be drinkable, usable or treatable, because of the presence of arsenic that naturally occurs in the aquifer?; e. the source water protection requirements have not been addressed? f. the disposal of the arsenic to be removed or treated to have drinking water meet regulated standards, has not been addressed? g. technical matters and regulatory requirements have not been satisfactorily resolved that include, but are not limited to, compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act and duties of owners and operators of non-municipal drinking water systems that service residential development, studies to demonstrate no adverse effect on the Island Lake Drinking Water System Municipal Wells (5), Cardinal Woods Drinking Water System Municipal Wells (3), studies to support an independent water supply system, test wells to demonstrate the direction of groundwater flow, sufficient water supply for fire protection; or sufficient reliable quantity and quality; and protection of drinking and groundwater sources which have not been satisfactorily resolved? or, h. the Town has not confirmed, consented or agreed that it is prepared to execute a responsibility agreement with the appellant or consent to act as the guarantor of the stand-alone communal system and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks will not approve construction and/or operation of a non-municipal communal drinking water system without the Town executing a responsibility agreement with the appellant, or the Town otherwise agreeing to act as the guarantor of this system?

9. Should the development proposal be dismissed without a hearing under Section 19 1 c) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021 on the basis that this appeal proceeding has no reasonable prospect of success given the applicant has failed to advance the technical submissions to address the Town’s Engineering comments, provided to the appellant in March 2024?

10. Is it appropriate and good planning to consider approval of the development proposal of this magnitude without a plan of condominium?

11. Is it appropriate and good planning to consider approval of the development proposal of this magnitude absent certainty of water and wastewater servicing?

12. Should this development proposal be considered and evaluated without an associated financial and servicing study to establish the costs and affordability for assumption of the proposed water and wastewater treatment systems?

Planning Hierarchy

13. Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision (“the development proposal”) have regard for matters of provincial interest identified in section 2 of the Planning Act, including but not limited to sections (e), (f), (h), (k), (l), (n), (o), (p) and (r)?

14. Does the proposed plan of subdivision have regard to the matters listed in section 51(24) of the Planning Act?

15. Is the development proposal consistent with the PPS 2024, including but not limited to policies 2.8.1, 2.8.2, 3.1, 3.5, 3.6, 4.1, 4.2?

16. Does the development proposal conform with the Greenbelt Plan, including but not limited to policy 3.4.4?

17. Is the development proposal in conformity with the County of Dufferin Official Plan, including but not limited to policies 3.3.1, 3.2.2, 3.3.3, (Schedule B), 3.6, 3.6.1, 3.7.1, 3.7.4, 3.8, 3.9.1, 5.1, 5.4.2, 7.1 d), e) and k), 6.3.5 b), d) 7.2, 7.2.2 and 7.2..2.1 and 7.3.1 and 7.3.2, 7.7?

18. Does the development proposal conform with the Town’s OP, including sections 2, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 7, 14A, 22(4), 22(5),24.1 b), 24.2), 24.3) and 24.4), 24.8) 25.5?

19. Is there a need for the proposed residential development on private communal water and communal sewer services when population growth in the County is focused on three settlement areas that have municipal water and sewer services?

20. Should the proposed residential development be considered when the financial costs of the proposed private water and wastewater services have not been established, studied or evaluated?

Identification of Subject lands as Employment Lands

21. What weight should be given by the OLT to OPA 3 which designates the Subject Lands as Employment after the approval of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on October 10, 2024?

22. Are the subject lands more appropriate for commercial employment use?

23. Is the development proposal appropriately buffered from the Coles Subdivision Industrial Park?

24. Is the proposed development suitable for residential uses given its proximity to Coles Subdivision Industrial Park?

25. Are there adequate separation distances in the proposed development to ensure air quality and noise compatibility?

26. Will the development of the Subject Lands affect the viability of the Coles Subdivision Industrial Park?

Site Constraints

27. Are there appropriate protections and measures to separate to the natural heritage features on the Subject lands from the development proposal, including the provincially significant wetland and the two surrounding woodlands?

28. Is the proposal too dense for the site, given the servicing constraints and the community character and surrounding uses?

29. Are sufficient recreational, parks or amenity facilities proposed in the subdivision and rezoning and are their sufficient rights of access to the recreational, parks or amenity facilities proposed?

30. Does the proposed density, housing type, bult form and lot layout/fabric reflect the community character of the Town of Mono?

31. Does the lot fabric proposed minimize encroachment upon natural features?

Site Access

32. Is the proposed local access road suitable having regard to the commercial uses on Coles Court and potential uses permitted by the Town’s zoning by-law?

33. Should alternative access to the proposed development be required?

Stormwater

34. Is the stormwater management proposal acceptable including but not limited to: a. Have adequate provisions been made to convey surface drainage under a major storm event? b. Has the stormwater management facility been appropriately sized? c. Does the stormwater management facility protect natural heritage features (including wetland features) and address all requirements of the Credit Valley Conservation d. Will the drainage adversely impact municipal roads and/or abutting properties (Coles Subdivision)?

ATTACHMENT 3

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

(1) Line 2 Developments Inc. (2) Town of Mono (3) Line 2 Developments Inc. Reply (if any)

ATTACHMENT 4

Purpose of the Procedural Order and Meaning of Terms

The Tribunal recommends that the parties meet to discuss this sample Order before the Case Management Conference to try to identify the issues and the process that they want the Tribunal to order following the conference. The Tribunal will hear the parties’ comments about the contents of the Order at the conference.

Case Management Conferences usually take place only where the hearing is expected to be long and complicated. If you are not represented by a lawyer, you should prepare by obtaining the Guide to the Ontario Land Tribunal, and the Tribunal’s Rules, from the Tribunal Information Office, 15th Floor, 655 Bay Street, Toronto, M5G 1E5, 416-212-6349, or from the Tribunal’s website at https://olt.gov.on.ca/about-olt/.

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 authorization 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 Filing Dates

EVENT	DATE
1st Case Management Conference	Friday, June 13, 2025
Final Issues List due	Friday, June 27, 2025
Town’s Motion to Dismiss	Thursday, November 6, 2025
Deadline to file revised plans	Friday, April 24, 2026
Parties to exchange their List of Witnesses	Friday, May 22, 2026
Deadline for Meeting of Like Experts	Friday, June 12, 2026
Deadline to file Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues	Friday, June 26, 2026
Parties to exchange their Witness and Expert Witness Statements Participants to provide their Participant Statements	Friday, July 24, 2026
Parties to exchange their Reply Witness Statements	Friday, August 21, 2026
Parties to exchange their Visual Evidence	Friday, September 11, 2026
Parties to File Joint Document Book Parties to File Preliminary Hearing Plan	Monday, September 14, 2026 Monday, September 14, 2026
Hearing commences	Monday, September 21, 2026