Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
September 25, 2025
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-23-000388
OLT-23-000679
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 10(3) of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. N.2
Applicant:
Columbia Northcliffe Campus Inc.
Subject:
Proposed Amendment to the Niagara Escarpment Plan
Description:
Application to amend the Niagara Escarpment Plan to permit the use of the former convent of the Sisters of St. Joseph as a private secondary school with a maximum of 1,000 students and 85 staff with an accessory gymnasium addition attached to the existing building known as the Motherhouse
Reference Number.:
PW 218 20
Property Address:
574 Northcliffe Avenue
Municipality/UT:
(Former) Town of Dundas, City of Hamilton
OLT Case No.:
OLT-23-000388
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-23-000388
OLT Case Name:
Plan Amendment PW 218 20 (Re)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 25(5.1) of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. N.2
Applicant/Appellant:
Columbia Northcliffe Campus Inc.
Respondent:
Niagara Escarpment Commission
Subject:
Refusal of a Development Permit Application
Description:
To construct an addition for an accessory use (gymnasium) to an existing building (former convent) and expand a private septic system to support a secondary school use proposed under Niagara Escarpment Plan Amendment PW 218 20
Reference Number.:
W/P/2021-2022/487
Property Address:
574 Northcliffe Avenue
Municipality/UT:
(Former) Town of Dundas, City of Hamilton
OLT Case No.:
OLT-23-000679
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-23-000679
OLT Case Name:
Columbia Northcliffe Campus Inc. v. Ontario (Niagara Escarpment Commission)
Heard:
August 26, 2025 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative*
Columbia Northcliffe Campus Inc.
Scott Snider and Anna Toumanians
Pleasant View Protection Corporation
Nancy McKeil*
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY HUGH S. WILKINS ON AUGUST 26, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1On August 26, 2025, a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) was convened regarding two proceedings. The first is a proceeding under s. 10(3) of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act (“NEPDA”) relating to proposed Amendment No. PW 218 20 (“proposed amendment”) to the Niagara Escarpment Plan (“Plan”) to permit the use of a former convent as a private secondary school with an accessory gymnasium addition attached. There were multiple objections received by the Niagara Escarpment Commission (“Commission”) regarding the proposed amendment. The Plan amendment proceeding is labelled as OLT Case No. OLT-23-000388.
2The second proceeding arises from an appeal brought by Columbia Northcliffe Campus Inc. (“Columbia”) under s. 25(5.1) of the NEPDA regarding the Commission’s refusal of Columbia’s application for a development permit to construct the proposed accessory gymnasium referred to above and expand an existing private septic system. It is labelled as OLT Case No. OLT-23-000679.
3The Tribunal acts in its role as the Hearing Office in these proceedings.
4The Commission attended the CMC as an observer and does not intend to participate as a Party in either proceeding.
5At the CMC, the Hearing Officer addressed requests for Party and Participant status, heard submissions on whether the proceedings should be heard together, discussed the preparation of a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, discussed opportunities for settlement discussions, and scheduled a further CMC.
Requests for Party and Participant Status
6The Pleasant View Protection Corporation (“PVPC”) requested Party status in each proceeding. It is a community group with concerns regarding the protection of the environment. Columbia did not object to PVPC’s request for status. The Hearing Officer found that PVPC has a direct and genuine interest in the proceedings and granted Party status to PVPC in each proceeding as requested.
7The City of Hamilton (“City”) stated that it intends to request Party status in each proceeding, but is awaiting instructions from City Council to proceed. The Hearing Officer noted this and directs that the City may formally make its request at the next CMC in these proceedings.
8Janet Linton, Alison Forde, and Trevor McKee requested Participant status in each proceeding. None of the Parties objected to their requests. The Hearing Officer granted each of them Participant status in the proceedings.
Structure of the Hearing
9PVPC submitted that the Plan amendment proceeding should precede the development permit appeal proceeding as it alleges that the proposed development permit relies on the Plan amendment to proceed. Columbia argued that the development permit appeal is not reliant on the proposed Plan amendment and that, given the subject matter and the witnesses to be called, it would be more efficient and cost-effective to have the matters heard at the same time.
10The Parties agreed to consider this further issue and revisit it at the next CMC after all of the issues to be adjudicated are identified.
Preparation of a Draft Procedural Order
11The Parties discussed the identification of the issues to be adjudicated and agreed that separate issues lists should be prepared for each proceeding. They also discussed the number and types of witnesses that they each intend to call at the hearing. The Parties agreed to work together to finalise issue and witness lists and to prepare a draft Procedural Order. They agreed to file a draft Procedural Order with the Tribunal’s case coordinator by no later than Friday, October 24, 2025.
Opportunities for Settlement Discussions
12The Parties expressed an openness to engaging in settlement discussions in order to at least narrow some of the issues, which the Hearing Officer encouraged.
Scheduling of a Further Case Management Conference
13The Hearing Officer scheduled a further CMC commencing on Friday, October 31, 2025, at 10 a.m. by video hearing to further address requests for status, address whether the proceedings should be heard together, finalize a Procedural Order, and schedule hearing dates.
14The Parties and/or Participants and/or Observers are asked to log in to the CMC by video at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/692665589
Access Code 692-665-589
15Parties 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.
16Persons 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: +1 (647) 497-9373 or Toll Free: 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 692-665-589.
17Individuals 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.
ORDER
18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Pleasant View Protection Corporation is a Party in each of the proceedings and that Janet Linton, Alison Forde, and Trevor McKee are Participants in each proceeding.
19THE TRIBUNAL FURTHER ORDERS THAT a further Case Management Conference will be held as set out in the Decision above.
20There will be no further notice.
21This Hearing Officer is not seized.
“Hugh S. Wilkins”
HUGH S. WILKINS
HEARING OFFICER
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.