Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: April 13, 2026
CASE NO(S).: OLT-26-000077
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 14 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 27.
Appellant: 11034936 Canada Inc.
Appellant: C.H. Clement Construction Inc.
Appellant: Spacebuilders Ottawa Ltd.
Subject: Development Charges
Description: Appeal of Development Charges
Reference Number: By-law 2025-93
Property Address: N/A
Municipality/UT: Clarence-Rockland/Prescott and Russell
OLT Case No: OLT-26-000077
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-26-000077
OLT Case Name: 11034936 Canada Inc. v. Clarence-Rockland (City)
Heard: April 9, 2026 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| 11034936 Canada Inc. | M. Polowin, J. Polowin |
| C.H. Clement Construction Inc. | M. Polowin, J. Polowin |
| Spacebuilders Ottawa Ltd. | M. Polowin, J. Polowin |
| City of Clarence-Rockland | G. Meeds |
| Clarence Crossing Regional Inc. | P. Osterhout |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HARDY ON APRIL 9, 2026 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This Decision of the Tribunal arises from the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) relating to appeals filed by 11034936 Canada Inc., C.H. Clement Construction Inc. and Spacebuilders Ottawa Ltd. (together, “Appellants”) against the passage of Development Charge By-law No. 2025-93 (“DC By-law”) by the City of Clarence-Rockland (“City”). The Appellants have appealed City Council’s passage of the DC By-law pursuant to s. 14 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, C.27 (“DC Act”).
2Following a 2024 Development Charge Study, City Council passed the City-wide DC By-law on November 12, 2025, with the new calculated rates being fully implemented on January 1, 2026.
3The Appellants are developers and builders operating within the City. They have appealed against the enactment of the DC By-law by City Council on the basis that, among other things, the new rates are unreasonable.
CONFIRMATION OF NOTICE
4The Tribunal served notice of the CMC on March 6, 2026, and confirmed with Counsel that there were no known issues with service of the Notice. No further notice is required.
STATUS REQUESTS
5In advance of the CMC, the Tribunal received one written request for Party status from Clarence Crossing Regional Inc. (“CCRI”). The Tribunal reviewed the sheltering requirements pursuant to Rule 8.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure with the Parties to ensure they were aware of the limitation on non-Appellant parties.
6In its written request form, CCRI explained that it owns approximately 146 hectares of land in the City and made multiple submissions to the City during the municipal process leading up to the passing of the DC By-law. CCRI supports the inclusion of a number of projects in the Development Charge Background Study, which informs the rates imposed by the DC By-law.
7The City consented to CCRI’s request. The Appellants took no position, however, requested that the Tribunal limit CCRI’s participation in the appeal to ensure there will be no duplication of the position of the City. In response, CCRI submitted that it would bring a unique perspective to that of the City and would coordinate with the Parties to ensure no duplication would result from its participation in the proceedings.
8The Tribunal granted Party status to CCRI and did not place any limitation on CCRI’s participation in the proceedings. Although CCRI and the City are distinct entities and may be aligned in certain respects, their interests will necessarily diverge in others. The Tribunal accepted CCRI’s submission that the evidence it intends to lead will not be duplicative of the City’s evidence. The Tribunal further determined that CCRI could assist by providing a more fulsome understanding of the appeal, thereby enabling the Tribunal to adjudicate the matter completely.
9Following the Tribunal’s future review and approval of the Procedural Order, CCRI was directed to identify the issues under which it will shelter.
10The Tribunal confirmed that there were no other persons or entities present at the CMC requesting Party or Participant status in the proceedings.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT / MEDIATION
11The Parties advised the Tribunal that discussions around settlement and mediation were premature at this point in the proceedings, however, all Parties were open to exploring the possibility of mediation.
NEXT STEPS
12The Appellants explained that efforts to finalize an Issues List in advance of the CMC were hindered by religious observances of some of its expert witnesses. The Tribunal set the following timeline for the parties:
the Appellants will circulate a draft Issues List to all parties on or before Friday April 17, 2026;
the parties will file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List with the Tribunal for review and approval on or before Friday, May 1, 2026.
13In the event the parties encounter difficulty finalizing the Issues List, the Tribunal directed the Parties to provide a status update to the Tribunal by Friday, May 1, 2026, in lieu of filing a final draft Procedural Order and Issues List. The Tribunal’s Vice Chair will remain available, schedule permitting, to assist if any issues arise in finalizing the draft Procedural Order and Issues List.
14Following some discussion, the Parties agreed to provide the Tribunal Case Coordinator with blocks of available dates for a merit hearing, which will be scheduled through the Case Coordinator. The availability of the parties and their witnesses will be communicated to the Case Coordinator by Friday, May 1, 2026.
15The Parties were advised by the Tribunal that as of March 30, 2026, all hearing events are governed by the Tribunal’s Artificial Intelligence Practice Direction. This Practice Direction requires a party, participant, or witness to include a declaration within each submitted document if generative AI was used to create or generate content.
ORDER
16THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT Clarence Crossing Regional Inc. is granted Party status in the proceedings.
17The case management directives above are so ordered.
18There will be no further notice and this Member is not seized, however, the Member will remain available for case management subject to the Tribunal’s calendar.
“C. Hardy”
C. Hardy VICE CHAIR
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.