Hugh S. Wilkins

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant concerning a proposed residential redevelopment and the demolition of a heritage building.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal issued an order revising several procedural timelines leading up to the Phase 2 hearing scheduled for December 2025.

During a Case Management Conference for an appeal of a Director's Order regarding odour emissions from a poultry farm, the Director brought a motion to dismiss the appeal.

The Director argued the appellant failed to respond to a Tribunal request for information.

The Tribunal denied the motion, finding the appellant's failure was due to a misunderstanding and did not warrant summary dismissal.

The Tribunal also granted participant status to a nearby resident and directed the parties to engage in settlement discussions and expert meetings.

At a Case Management Conference regarding a proposed amendment to the Niagara Escarpment Plan and an appeal of a development permit refusal, the Tribunal granted Party status to a community protection corporation and Participant status to three individuals.

The Tribunal directed the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and scheduled a further Case Management Conference to finalize the issues list and hearing dates.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission brought a motion to dismiss an appeal by the appellants regarding the refusal of a development permit for agricultural uses, including a vineyard and storage structures.

The Commission argued the appeal lacked planning justification and merit because the Hearing Officer lacked jurisdiction to declare whether the uses were exempt existing uses.

The Hearing Officer denied the motion, finding that determining whether the Commission's decision was correct inherently involves considering whether the proposed uses are exempt, which falls within the statutory mandate and is in the public interest.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a development permit approval for a lot severance, the Hearing Officer directed the appellants to prepare an Issues List and a draft Procedural Order.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to further organize the hearing.

The Appellant brought a motion for discovery seeking disclosure of documents from the Director relating to a 2015 application for regulatory relief from water sampling requirements.

The Director had refused a similar application in 2024, which is the subject of the current appeal.

The Director opposed the motion, arguing the 2015 documents were not relevant.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the 2015 application related to the same property and similar relief, making the documents relevant to the current appeal.

The Director was ordered to disclose the documents, subject to any claims of privilege.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Niagara Escarpment Commission's refusal of a development permit application to sever an existing lot into three additional lots.

The parties agreed to a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, which the Tribunal approved.

A one-day video hearing was scheduled for November 24, 2025.

The applicants appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make decisions regarding a proposed official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and plan of subdivision to permit two industrial buildings.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered amendments to the dates in the Procedural Order for the exchange of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Issues, participant statements, and witness statements.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the hearing of appeals by Lewis 286 Development Inc. concerning the City of Hamilton's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and draft plan of subdivision.

The applications seek to facilitate the development of 309 residential units at 286 Lewis Road.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day video hearing to commence on September 26, 2025, and established a timeline for the exchange of witness lists, expert reports, and visual evidence.

The appellants appealed the refusal of a development permit application by the Niagara Escarpment Commission.

At the commencement of the hearing, the appellants requested that the hearing be held in two phases.

The Hearing Officer denied the request, finding that a single hearing would be the most cost-effective and efficient manner to adjudicate the appeal.

On the request of the parties, the hearing was adjourned to allow sufficient time to prepare for a single hearing.

The Tribunal issued an amended procedural order and scheduled dates for the hearing and a motion to dismiss.

The Applicant sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval for air and noise to a meat processing facility.

The Applicant argued that the facility's noise emissions exceeded guidelines and that the eight-year timeline for implementing noise mitigation measures was unreasonable.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant had standing to seek leave to appeal based on his past involvement with an adjacent residential subdivision.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the application for leave to appeal, finding that the Applicant failed to satisfy the two-part test under section 41 of the Environmental Bill of Rights.

The Director's decision was reasonable, and the Applicant provided no compelling evidence that the decision could result in significant harm to the environment.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's refusal of applications for official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a 26-storey mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement on all issues except the required number of ground-floor retail units, which was later resolved through revised amendments requiring four at-grade retail units and a holding provision to ensure the design reinforces the local main street character.

An adjacent property owner opposed the settlement, raising concerns about shadow, privacy, and transition.

The Tribunal found that the revised amendments provide appropriate transition in scale, mitigate impacts on adjacent neighbourhoods, conform with the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan, and represent good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the revised amendments in principle.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a refused development permit application, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted participant status to local residents on consent.

The Tribunal also approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a 5-day video hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a zoning by-law amendment appeal for a property in Whitby.

The parties had previously adjourned the hearing to engage in settlement discussions but were unable to reach a settlement.

The Tribunal scheduled a new eight-day video hearing to commence on October 29, 2025, and amended the Procedural Order to set a new deadline for filing the Hearing Plan.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 33-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement to allow a 36-storey building with specific height, setback, and amenity space requirements.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, withholding its final order pending the satisfaction of several conditions.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission proposed an amendment to the Niagara Escarpment Plan to allow for the development of on-farm diversified uses and agricultural-related uses outside of prime agricultural areas, among other changes.

Hearing Officers were appointed to receive representations on the proposed amendment.

The Hearing Officers recommended the adoption of the proposed amendments, finding that they meet the purpose and objectives of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act and the Plan, are consistent with Provincial policies, and are justified.

The amendments include allowing agricultural uses in Earth Science ANSIs, permitting expansions to existing agricultural buildings in key natural heritage features, allowing maple sugar harvesting in the Escarpment Natural Area, and permitting agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses outside of prime agricultural areas in the Escarpment Protection Area.

The appellants appealed the Town of Carleton Place's extension of an interim control by-law.

The parties reached a settlement to remove the appellants' property from the application of the extended by-law.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence that the amendment was consistent with provincial policy and conformed to the official plan, the Tribunal approved the settlement and allowed the appeal in part.

The appellants appealed the extension of Interim Control By-law No. 83-2024 by the Town of Carleton Place.

During a status update telephone conference call, the parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a proposed settlement and requested a written settlement hearing.

After confirming that proper notice had been served and an updated Affidavit of Service was filed, the Tribunal scheduled a written hearing to consider the proposed settlement.

The Tribunal received a request, on consent of the parties, to amend procedural timelines contained in a Procedural Order issued on November 21, 2024.

The appeals relate to applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a plan of subdivision to permit three new residential apartment towers in the City of Toronto.

The Tribunal granted the request and amended the dates for the exchange of witness lists, expert meetings, witness statements, and other pre-hearing steps leading up to the hearing scheduled for October 20, 2025.

The parties requested, on consent, to amend certain procedural timelines contained in a previously issued Procedural Order governing appeals under the Planning Act regarding a proposed mixed residential neighbourhood.

The Tribunal granted the request and ordered the amendment of dates for the filing of the Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues, witness statements, and written responses.