28.11.2021 Views

Colhoun vs RM Lumsden, COURT_Statement_of_Claim_re__R_M_.pdf February 2021

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

- 3 -<br />

12. The property <strong>re</strong>fe<strong>re</strong>nced in Resolution No. 2019-578, being NW 32-19-21<br />

W3, Surface Parcel No. 111090192 (“NW 32”), is not the subject matter <strong>of</strong> the Subdivision,<br />

the Subdivision Application, nor owned by Norman or Laura. For further clarity, Emshay<br />

Enterprises Ltd. is the <strong>re</strong>giste<strong>re</strong>d owner <strong>of</strong> NW 32.<br />

13. On or around January 28, 2020, Je<strong>re</strong>my Dela Cruz (“Mr. Dela Cruz”),<br />

Planning Consultant for the Government <strong>of</strong> Saskatchewan, commented on the<br />

inappropriateness <strong>of</strong> Resolution No. 2019-578, stating:<br />

…Under 184 <strong>of</strong> The Planning and Development Act, 2007 the approving authority may<br />

<strong>re</strong>qui<strong>re</strong> the owner <strong>of</strong> land that is subject <strong>of</strong> the proposed subdivision to provide without<br />

compensation part <strong>of</strong> that land in any location that the approving authority considers<br />

necessary to the Crown. The important clause is that the <strong>re</strong>quest <strong>of</strong> the dedication must be<br />

applicable to the subject land <strong>of</strong> the proposed subdivision and cannot be extended outside<br />

<strong>of</strong> the proposed subdivision application….<br />

14. In <strong>re</strong>sponse to the comments <strong>of</strong> Mr. Dela Cruz, the R.M. passed Resolution<br />

No. 2020-119 at the Regular Council Meeting held on March 19, 2020 (“Resolution No.<br />

2020-119”), which <strong>re</strong>ads, in part, that “we deny Development Application #2019-038 to<br />

<strong>re</strong>zone and subdivide land…The <strong>RM</strong> is unwilling to initiate highway commercial <strong>re</strong>zoning<br />

proceedings unless it is ensu<strong>re</strong>d that the developer has secu<strong>re</strong>d land to upgrade the<br />

undeveloped access road to a standard suitable for highway commercial development.”<br />

15. As a <strong>re</strong>sult, Norman and Laura we<strong>re</strong> forced to appeal the decision to the<br />

Planning Appeals Committee (the “Appeal”), a committee <strong>of</strong> the Saskatchewan Municipal<br />

Board (the “SMB”). The Appeal was set down for a hearing date <strong>of</strong> September 22, 2020 (the<br />

“Hearing Date”).<br />

16. Prior to the Hearing Date, the R.M. had failed and/or <strong>re</strong>fused to p<strong>re</strong>sent<br />

Norman and Laura with a serving ag<strong>re</strong>ement in <strong>re</strong>lation to the Subdivision Application.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!