Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: June 01, 2026

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-001209 OLT-25-000864 OLT-26-000291

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: Credit Valley Residents Association & Kaneff Properties Limited

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. OP2006-254

Description: To permit the amendment of the Credit Valley Secondary Plan Area 45

Reference Number: OPA 2006OP-254

Property Address: The intersection of Queen Street West and Creditview Road, extending westerly to Elbern Markel Drive and easterly towards Springbrook Creek.

Municipality: Brampton

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-001209

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-001209

OLT Case Name: Credit Valley Residents Association et al. v. Brampton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 2023-012

Description: To permit 14-16 Storey Residential Towers and Townhouses

Reference Number: City File 2025-383 (By-law 164-2025 – OP 2023-012)

Property Address: Various - Appeal of Secondary Plan

Municipality/UT: City of Brampton

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000864

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000864

OLT Case Name: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited v. Brampton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit the development of two residential apartments and four townhouse blocks

Reference Number: OZS-2024-0067

Property Address: 0 Queen Street West

Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel

OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000291

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000291

OLT Case Name: Kaneff Properties Limited v. Brampton (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

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

Description: To permit the development of two residential apartments and four townhouse blocks

Reference Number: OZS-2024-0067

Property Address: 0 Queen Street West

Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel

OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000294

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000291

Heard: May 20, 2026, by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited ("Applicant"/"Appellant"/"Kaneff Group")

Mark Flowers Lauren Cao

City of Brampton ("City")

Matthew Rea Anthony Cocomile

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY D. CHIPMAN ON MAY 20, 2026, AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This decision arises from a Case Management Conference ("CMC") concerning outstanding appeals by the Kaneff Group, of the City’s adoption of Official Plan Amendments, namely, OP 2023-012 (Tribunal File No. OLT-26-000864) and OP 2006-254 (Tribunal File No. OLT-23-001209) under s. 17(24) of the Planning Act.

2In addition, this CMC heard related applications for an Official Plan Amendment (Tribunal File No. OLT-26-000291) and a Zoning By-law Amendment (Tribunal File No. OLT-26-000294) for 0 Queen Street West that were submitted and appealed.

3This CMC addressed two matters: 1) the draft Procedural Order ("PO") and Issues List ("IL"), submitted on consent, and 2) whether these related appeals should proceed together in a single merit hearing.

4The Tribunal marked the Affidavit of Service of the Notice of this first CMC, sworn by Ali Ahmed, in respect of Tribunal File Nos. OLT-26-000291 and OLT-26-000294, as Exhibit 1. No issues were raised regarding service, and no further notice is required.

PARTY/PARTICIPANT REQUEST

5At the outset of the CMC, the Tribunal heard from a member of the public seeking guidance on how to submit comments for the Tribunal’s consideration. The Tribunal advised that the individual must apply for Party/Participant status and directed him to the Tribunal’s website to submit the appropriate Status Request form.

MEDIATION

6In response to inquiries, the Parties indicated they will continue discussions and may pursue Tribunal-led mediation, if necessary. The Tribunal advised that information regarding mediation is available through the Case Coordinator.

PROCEDURAL ORDER AND HEARING DATES

7A finalized PO and IL, including all hearing dates and issues, has been provided, on consent, and is attached as Schedule 1 to this Decision. The PO is in full force and effect and shall govern the merit hearing. Any amendments to said shall require Tribunal approval.

8The Parties submitted that it would be more efficient to have all four matters heard together at the upcoming merit hearing. The Tribunal agreed that doing so would provide an expeditious and efficient means of resolving the outstanding issues.

9The Tribunal canvassed the anticipated length of the merit hearing with counsel. Based on the number of witnesses expected to provide testimony, a merit hearing will commence on Wednesday, September 9, 2026.

10The Parties indicated that discussions to reduce the number of issues will continue. The Parties are directed to contact the Case Coordinator should some, or all, of the issues be resolved to reduce the time set aside for the merit hearing.

11The merit hearing is scheduled to proceed by video on Wednesday, September 9, 2026, at 10 a.m.

12Parties 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://meet.goto.com/996288525

Access code: 996-288-525

13Parties 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

14Persons 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: +1-647-497-9391 or (toll-free) +1-888-455-1389. The access code is: 996-288-525.

15Individuals 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.

16If the Parties resolve the remaining issues, they are directed to contact the Case Coordinator to set a date for a settlement hearing.

ORDER

17THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS its directions as set out in this Decision.

18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that Tribunal File Nos. OLT-23-001209, OLT-25-000864, OLT-26-000291, and OLT-26-000294 shall be heard together.

19This Member remains available to assist with the case management of this proceeding, subject to the Tribunal’s calendar.

20This Member is not seized.

21No further notice will be given.

"D. Chipman"

D. CHIPMAN

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

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-001209 OLT-25-000864 OLT-26-000291

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: Credit Valley Residents Association & Kaneff Properties Limited

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. OP2006-254

Description: To permit the amendment of the Credit Valley Secondary Plan Area 45

Reference Number: OPA 2006OP-254

Property Address: The intersection of Queen Street West and Creditview Road, extending westerly to Elbern Markel Drive and easterly towards Springbrook Creek.

Municipality: Brampton

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-001209

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-001209

OLT Case Name: Credit Valley Residents Association et al. v. Brampton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No.

Description: To permit 14-16 Storey Residential Towers and Townhouses

Reference Number: City File 2025-383 (By-law 164-2025 - OP2023-012)

Property Address: Various - Appeal of Secondary Plan

Municipality/UT: City of Brampton

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000864

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000864

OLT Case Name: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited v. Brampton (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit the development of two residential apartments and four townhouse blocks

Reference Number: OZS-2024-0067

Property Address: 0 Queen Street West

Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel

OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000291

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000291

OLT Case Name: Kaneff Properties Limited v. Brampton (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

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

Description: To permit the development of two residential apartments and four townhouse blocks

Reference Number: OZS-2024-0067

Property Address: 0 Queen Street West

Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel

OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000294

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000291

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

1. The video hearing of the appeals in City of Brampton File No. OZS-2024-0067 (OLT Case Nos. OLT-26-000291 and OLT-26-000294) and the appeals of City of Brampton Official Plan Amendment OP2006-254 (Case No. OLT-23-001209) and City of Brampton Official Plan Amendment OP2023-012 (Case No. OLT-25-000864) will begin on September 9, 2026 at 10:00 A.M. No further notice shall be required.

2. The length of the hearing will be approximately 12 days, concluding on September 24, 2026. 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.

3. The parties and participants (see Attachment "4" for the meaning of these terms) identified at the Case Management Conference are listed in Attachment "1" to this Order.

4. The issues for the hearing are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment "2" to this Order. 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, except if the Issues List is modified on consent of the parties, through mediation or pursuant to a settlement between the parties.

5. The order of evidence for the hearing is listed 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.

6. 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. 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.

7. 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.

8. A party, participant, or witness who intends to submit document(s) to the Tribunal must include a declaration within each submitted document if generative AI was used to create or generate content. A declaration is not required if AI was used to merely suggest changes, provide recommendations, or critique content already created by a human who then considered and manually implemented the changes.

Requirements Before the Hearing

9. 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 are intended to be called. This list must be delivered on or before June 11, 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(s) of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified.

10. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before June 30, 2026, to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting, a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues shall be filed with the OLT case coordinator on or before July 10, 2026.

11. An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, and any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in paragraph 13. 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.

12. 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 anticipated evidence as in paragraph 13. 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.

13. On or before July 24, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case coordinator in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

14. On or before July 24, 2026, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties and the OLT case coordinator 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.

15. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case coordinator a written response to any written evidence on or before August 19, 2026, in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

16. On or before August 12, 2026, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

17. On or before August 26, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties and the OLT case coordinator 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.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case coordinator on or before August 26, 2026.

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’ written evidence or expert witness statement 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 prior to the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

21. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before September 2, 2026 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, at 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. All filings shall be electronic and, if requested by the Tribunal, also in hard copy. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 30MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by Rule 7.

23. 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.

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE	EVENT
June 11, 2026	Parties to exchange lists of witnesses (names, disciplines, CVs and intended order to be called)
June 30, 2026	Meetings of Expert Witnesses
July 10, 2026	Parties to file Statements of Agreed Facts and Issues
July 24, 2026	Exchange of Witness Statements, summonsed witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
August 12, 2026	Parties to advise OLT if all scheduled hearing days are required
August 19, 2026	Exchange of Reply Witness Statements
August 26, 2026	Exchange of visual evidence
August 26, 2026	Joint Document Book to be filed
September 2, 2026	Parties to file hearing plan
September 9, 2026	Hearing commences

Attachment 1

LIST OF PARTIES / PARTICIPANTS

Parties

1. Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

Davies Howe LLP The Tenth Floor 425 Adelaide Street West Toronto, ON M5V 3C1

Mark Flowers Tel: 416-263-4513 Email: markf@davieshowe.com

Lauren Yan Lin Cao Tel: 416-263-4524 Email: laurenc@davieshowe.com

2. City of Brampton

2 Wellington Street West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2

Matthew Rea Tel: 905-874-2626 Email: Matthew.Rea@brampton.ca

Anthony Cocomile Tel: 905-874-2682 Email: Anthony.Cocomile@brampton.ca

Attachment 2

ISSUES LIST

The identification of an issue on this list does not mean that all parties agree that the issue, or the manner in which it is expressed, is appropriate for or relevant to the proper determination of the appeals. The extent of the appropriateness and/or relevance of the issue may be a matter of evidence and/or argument at the hearing.

Issues List of the City of Brampton – 0 Queen Street W.

1. Do the Official Plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment ("Applications") have regard for section 2 of the Planning Act including subsections (h), (n), (p), (q) and (r)?

2. Are the Applications consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) including policies 2.1.6, 2.3.1, 2.3.1.3, 2.3.1.4, 2.3.1.5, 2.4.1.1, 2.4.1.2, 2.4.1.3, 6.1.5, and 6.1.11?

3. Do the Application conform to the Region of Peel Official Plan including policies 5.4.18.17, 5.6.3, 5.6.15, 5.6.17.5, 5.6.17.8, 5.6.17.9, 6.5.2, and 7.10.2, 7.10.4, 7.10.5, 7.10.13, 7.10.15?

4. Do the Applications conform to the 2023 City of Brampton Official Plan including policies 2.1.2.2, 2.1.2.12, 2.1.2.20.b, 2.2.1.2.b, 2.2.2, 2.2.4.3.d, 2.2.4.6, 2.2.4.8, 2.2.4.9.f, 2.2.7.3.f, 2.2.7.7, 2.2.7.13, 2.2.7.38, 2.2.7.39, 3.1.1.7, 3.1.1.9, 3.1.1.11, 3.1.1.40, 3.1.1.45, 3.1.1.47, 3.1.1.48, 3.1.1.49, 3.1.1.53, 3.1.1.54, 3.1.1.55, and 3.4.1.12?

5. Do the Applications conform to the 2006 City of Brampton Official Plan (2020 consolidation) including policies 3.2.1.2, 3.2.8.1, 3.2.8.3, 3.2.8.5, 3.2.8.6, 4.2.1.2, 4.2.2.2.ix, 4.2.2.2.xi, 4.11.3.1, and 4.11.3.2?

6. Do the Applications conform to the Credit Valley Secondary Plan (2024 consolidation) including policies 4.2.4, 4.3.vii, 5.2.1.3, 5.2.7(b) and 7.1.6?

7. What, if any, weight should be given to the Credit Valley Secondary Plan Amendment OPA-12, including policies 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 10, 12.a, 12.b, 12.d and 12.h?

8. What, if any, weight should be given to the Credit Valley Secondary Plan Amendment OPA-254, including policies 4.2.4.i, 4.2.4.vii, 4.3.vii, 5.2.1.3, 5.2.2.1.ii, 5.2.4.2, and 5.2.7, 5.2.7.a, 5.2.7.b, 5.2.7.d, 5.2.7.h.iv, 5.2.7.h.v, 5.2.7.h.vi?

9. What, if any, weight should be given to the City’s Urban Design Guidelines (Council endorsed December 2025) including C3.2.1.10, C3.2.1.11, C3.2.2.A, C3.2.2.2, C.4.1.1, C4.2.1.A, C4.2.2.A, C5.1.1, C5.1.2, C5.2.1.2, C5.2.2, C5.2.2.A, C5.4.1.A, C5.4.2.A.6, C5.4.2.B.2, and C5.4.2.B.6?

10. Has the Applicant demonstrated the orderly and co-ordinated development of the site and surrounding lands including through a tertiary plan?

11. Are the Applications compatible with the area character?

12. Is there an appropriate transition within the site and to surrounding properties?

13. Does the proposal appropriately consider potential impacts to adjacent properties including the proposed grading differential between the development lands and surrounding properties?

14. Does the zoning by-law amendment sufficiently regulate built form including with respect to massing, height, density, scale, setbacks, stepbacks, landscaping, road widenings and lot coverage?

15. Should the proposal be required to comply with the City’s minimum parking requirements?

16. Are the form of the Official Plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment acceptable? Are the proposed instruments aligned with the density and setbacks advanced in the applicant’s site plan and statistics?

17. Should the zoning by-law amendment include a holding provision to be lifted upon: (a) the applicant providing proof of good standing from the Trustee pursuant to the Credit Valley Master Cost Sharing Agreement; and (b) servicing capacity is available?

18. Do the Applications constitute good land use planning and are they in the public interest?

Issues List of Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

Appeals of Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications for 0 Queen Street West

19. Are the Applications required to conform to official plan policies and/or meet the intent of urban design guidelines that were not in effect on the date that the Applications were complete or that are not currently in effect?

Appeal of OP2006-254

20. Should Schedule SP(45)(b) be modified for the lands municipally known as 0 Queen Street West (the "Queen Street Lands") to:

(a) establish land use designations that would permit the proposed development contemplated under Application No. OZS-2024-0067;

(b) identify a Conceptual Access to Queen Street West;

(c) shift the Conceptual Access to the extension of Classic Drive to the eastern portion of the Queen Street Lands;

(d) remove the Conceptual Road; and

(e) remove the Conceptual Trail Access and Conceptual Trail Opportunity;

and would such modifications have regard to matters of provincial interest under section 2 of the Planning Act and be consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (the "PPS")?

21. Should Item 10, clause d.i. be modified for the Subject Lands to permit buildings with heights up to 16 storeys, and would such modification have regard to matters of provincial interest under section 2 of the Planning Act and be consistent with the PPS?

Appeal of OP2023-12

22. Should Schedule SP12(b) be modified for the Queen Street Lands to:

(a) establish land use designations that would permit the proposed development contemplated under Application No. OZS-2024-0067;

(b) identify a Conceptual Access to Queen Street West;

(c) shift the Conceptual Access to the extension of Classic Drive to the eastern portion of the Queen Street Lands;

(d) remove the Conceptual Road; and

(e) remove the Conceptual Trail Access and Conceptual Trail Opportunity;

and would such modifications have regard to matters of provincial interest under section 2 of the Planning Act and be consistent with the PPS?

23. Should any of the policies of the proposed Credit Valley Secondary Plan ("CVSP") be modified on a site-specific basis for the Queen Street Lands to permit the proposed development contemplated under Application No. OZS-2024-0067?

24. Should Schedule SP12(a) be modified for the lands municipally known as 8940 Creditview Road to include the local road network approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal in its Decision and Order issued on February 26, 2024, as subsequently amended on April 9, 2025, in Case No. OLT-23-000261, approving a settlement of the appeals of applications submitted by Branthaven Creditview Inc.?

25. Should the CVSP, including Schedule SP12(a), be modified for the portion of the lands municipally known as 8525 Mississauga Road (the "Lionhead Lands") that is located within the CVSP and proposed to be designated as ‘Upscale Executive Housing’ to permit a broader range of housing options and a more intensive form of residential development, and would such modification(s) have regard for matters of provincial interest under section 2 of the Planning Act and be consistent with the PPS?

26. Is the delineation of the ‘Natural System’ designation on the Lionhead Lands, as shown on Schedule SP12(a), appropriate?

27. If any portion of the proposed ‘Natural System’ designation on the Lionhead Lands should be modified, what is the appropriate designation and policies for those lands?

28. Are the proposed policies in the CVSP appropriate for the portion of the Lionhead Lands that is to be designated as ‘Natural System’ and, if not, what are the appropriate policy modifications?

29. Does the City of Brampton have the authority and, if so, is it appropriate to include policies in Section 13.2 of the CVSP that purport to: (a) require the developer of the Lionhead Golf Course to agree to gratuitously dedicate to the City the designated "valleyland" (as defined through the development approval process) upon the cessation of the golf course use; and (b) provide the City with the right of first refusal to acquire the valleyland Lionhead Golf Course and any associated tablelands necessary to operate the golf course if it is to be sold? If not, should Section 13.2 of the CVSP be deleted?

30. If Section 13.2 of the CVSP is to be deleted, should the identification of Area 12-4 on Appendices B and E of the CVSP be removed?

31. Should Chapter 45-4: Block Plan for Sub Area 45-4 of the Credit Valley Secondary Plan be deleted as part of the approval of OP2023-012?

Attachment 3

Order of Evidence

1. Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited

2. City of Brampton

3. Reply of Kaneff Properties Limited and Havenwood Properties (Central) Limited (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.