Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: August 01, 2025
CASE NO.: OLT-24-000494
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1000439324 Ontario Inc.
Appellant: Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh
Appellant: Darryl and Teresa Davis
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 18.6 (Village Local Centre)
Municipality: City of Richmond Hill
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000494
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000494
OLT Case Name: Davis v. York (Regional Municipality)
BEFORE:
JENNIFER GOLD
MEMBER
Tuesday, the 10th day of June, 2025
UPON APPEAL having been brought before the Tribunal as a fourth Case Management Conference (“CMC”), pursuant to s. 17(36) of the Planning Act (“Act”) as the result of the Regional Municipality of York (“Region”) decision in support of the City of Richmond Hill’s (“City”) approval of a City-initiated Official Plan Amendment No. 18.6 (“OPA 18.6”);
AND THE TRIBUNAL having considered the Appeal by Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh that was scheduled for a Motion but was converted to this fourth CMC;
AND THE TRIBUNAL, at the fourth CMC, having scheduled a seven-day Merit Hearing (including time for a potential motion at the outset of the Hearing) to commence on Monday, April 13, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. by video;
Parties and/or Participants and/or Observers are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/442599157
Access code: 442-599-157
Parties and/or 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 GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: (Toll-free) 1-888-455-1389 or +1 (647) 497-9391. The Access Code is: 442-599-157.
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 event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT:
The Procedural Order appended as Appendix 2 shall govern the conduct of this proceeding.
There shall be no further notice.
This Member is not seized.
“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 (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.
APPENDIX 1
CMC Attendance List
Party Name
Counsel/Representative*
Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh
Jason Cherniak
City of Richmond Hill
Raj Kehar and Carlton Thorne
APPENDIX 2
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000494
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1000439324 Ontario Inc.
Appellant: Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh
Appellant: Darryl and Teresa Davis
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 18.6 (Village Local Centre)
Municipality: City of Richmond Hill
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000494
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000494
OLT Case Name: Davis v. York (Regional Municipality)
PROCEDURAL ORDER
- 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 video hearing will begin on April 13, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 7 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 generally found in Attachment 1.
The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in 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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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 January 19, 2026 and in accordance with paragraph 22 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 February 6, 2026 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 February 16, 2026.
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 13 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 13 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 13 below.
On March 6, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
On or before March 6, 2026 a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.
On March 9, 2026 the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On March 20, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.
On March 23, 2026, the parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT’s Case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on April 8, 2026.
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 motion returnable at the video hearing event scheduled to commence on April 13, 2026 shall be heard with notice in accordance with Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules.
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 April 6, 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.
All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy, if requested by the Tribunal. 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.
This Member is not seized.
So orders the Tribunal.
ATTACHMENT 1
SUMMARY OF KEY DATES
Date
Hearing event
January 19, 2026
Exchange of List of Witnesses
February 6, 2026
Expert Witness Meeting
February 16, 2026
Filing of Statement (s) of Agreed Facts and Issues
March 6, 2026
Exchange of Witness Statements
March 6, 2026
Delivery of Participant Statements
March 9, 2026
Confirmation to Tribunal if all reserved hearing dates are still required
March 20, 2026
Exchange of Reply Witness Statements
March 23, 2026
Exchange of Visual Evidence
April 8, 2026
Filing of Joint Document Book
April 6, 2026
Filing of Hearing Plan
April 13. 2026
Hearing Commences
ATTACHMENT 2
LIST OF PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS
City of Richmond Hill WeirFoulds LLP 4100-66 Wellington Street West Toronto, ON M5K 1B7
Raj Kehar
Email: rkehar@weirfoulds.com/
Tel: 416-947-5051
City of Richmond Hill
225 East Beaver Creek Road
Richmond Hill, ON L4B 3P4
Carlton Thorne
Email: Carlton.thorne@richmondhill.ca
Tel: 905-771-8800
APPELLANT PARTIES
- Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh
CHERNIAK LAW PC
Suite 209, 10909 Yonge Street
Richmond Hill, ON L4C 3E3
Jason Cherniak
Email: jason@cherniaklaw.com
Tel: (905) 883-6706
PARTICIPANTS
- Brian Chapnik (vrca2021@gmail.com)
ATTACHMENT 3
Issues List of Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh1
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 either relevant, within the jurisdiction of, or otherwise appropriate, to adjudicate. The identification of an issues on this list by a party indicates that party’s intent to lead evidence or argue that the issues is relevant to the proceeding, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other parties the case they need to meet. Accordingly, no party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the Tribunal.
Is the proposed Elizabeth Street extension (the “Proposed Extension”), or any connection from Elizabeth Street to Major Mackenzie Drive West required for transportation?
Is the Proposed Extension, or any connection from Elizabeth Street to Major Mackenzie Drive West, required for land use planning?
If a connection from Elizabeth Street to Major Mackenzie Drive West is required, should it be for pedestrian and cycling access only?
If a connection from Elizabeth Street to Major Mackenzie Drive West is required, should the alignment of the Proposed Extension be altered?
In light of OPA policy 2.2.4.2, Is the Proposed Extension an expropriation without compensation?
What would be the appropriate form and/or location for access to 66 Major Mackenzie Drive West (the “Subject Property”)?
If the Proposed Extension and the proposed FSI of the Subject Property are implemented, would it appropriately allow for the delivery of housing within a PMTSA?
Would implementation of the Proposed Extension and the proposed FSI of the Subject Property conform with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024?
Should the OPA include a policy that requires the calculation of FSI for the Subject Property to include the area of the Proposed Extension or any alternative that is within the Subject Property?
Should the Subject Property be granted an exception from the existing 45-degree angular plane?
Should the Subject Property be granted an exception from the policies relating to transitioning development to the adjacent neighbourhood?
If the Proposed Extension is approved, should the Subject Property be excluded from the new policy proposed by OPA 2.2.2.4 and numbered as 4.3.1.1(3)(a)?
Should the enclave south of the Subject Property (58 – 76 Major Mackenzie Drive West) (the “Enclave”) be planned for comprehensively?
Does the OPA fail to acknowledge the importance of the Subject Property’s location within the PMTSA and the Enclave, as well as its address on Major Mackenzie Drive West, a Regional Corridor as defined under the Provincial Planning Statement 2024?
Does the OPA fail to appropriately respond to and contribute towards achieving the strategies outlined in the 2041 Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area as it relates to the Proposed Extension?
Is OPA 18.6 good planning and within the public interest as it relates to the Subject Property?
Schedule A to Attachment 3
The addresses scoped in Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh’s appeal are limited to the highlighted geographic area above, including the following addresses:
- 32, 42, 52, 58, 60, 66, 74, and 76 Major Mackenzie Drive West;
- 56, 58, and 60 Elizabeth Street South; and
- 10030, 10058, and 10066 Yonge Street, in the City of Richmond Hill.
ATTACHMENT 4
ORDER OF EVIDENCE
City of Richmond Hill
Pamela Harakh and Harry Harakh
The City of Richmond Hill in Reply (if any)