Chris Barnett

The Tribunal held a fifth Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the District's approval of the new Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan.

The parties disputed the contents of the Issues List.

The Appellants sought to include policies related to aggregates, rural and resource management, transportation, and water, arguing the Provincial Planning Statement must be read in its entirety.

The District and added parties argued the Issues List should be restricted to issues specifically named in the Notices of Appeal, consistent with a prior Tribunal order.

The Tribunal agreed with the District, finding its Issues List best complied with the prior order and provided a fair and just process.

A 13-day hearing on the merits was scheduled for February 2027, and a Procedural Order was issued.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference for four distinct appeals relating to proposed expansions of the Fergus Urban Centre boundary in the Township of Centre Wellington.

The parties agreed to a phased hearing approach, with Phase 1 addressing overarching population forecasts and land needs assessments, and Phase 2 addressing site-specific issues.

The Tribunal ordered the appeals to be heard together for Phase 1 and granted party status to several requesting entities, including the appellants in each other's appeals, adjacent landowners, and the local school board.

A 14-day hearing was scheduled for Phase 1.

The appellants appealed a Superior Court decision granting the municipality's application for an order to demolish above-ground construction on a contaminated property.

The appellants had proceeded with above-grade construction without a full building permit, having failed to obtain the required Record of Site Condition.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the application judge's factual findings and concluding that the demolition order was a proper exercise of discretion to enforce compliance with the Building Code Act.

The Lake Associations brought a motion to dismiss appeals filed by Our Muskoka, Miller Paving, and Elizabeth Lippa against the District's approval of the Township of Muskoka Lakes' new Official Plan.

The moving parties argued the notices of appeal failed to provide the required explanations of how the plan was inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement or failed to conform with the District Official Plan, as required by s. 17(37.1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal granted the motion, dismissing Our Muskoka's appeal entirely for lacking the mandatory explanations and land use planning grounds.

The Tribunal also dismissed the Miller Paving and Lippa appeals in part, scoping them to remove broad claims of non-conformity that lacked specific policy references.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals of the municipality's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 336-unit affordable housing development.

The parties requested an adjournment as the South Simcoe Growth Initiative is currently underway and its outcome could impact the appeals.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment and scheduled a subsequent Case Management Conference for April 9, 2026.

The applicant appealed the failure of the Town of Caledon to adopt an Official Plan Amendment, and the refusal by the Niagara Escarpment Commission of development permits, to allow a new aggregate extraction operation (gravel pit).

Prior to the hearing, the applicant reached a settlement with the Town, the Commission, and a neighbouring property owner, resulting in revised site plans and conditions that addressed concerns regarding water, natural heritage, noise, and air quality.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good land use planning and meets all legislative tests.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, contingent upon the Crown advising that adequate Indigenous consultation has occurred.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and the Niagara Escarpment Commission's refusal of development permits to allow a new gravel pit operation.

The applicant also sought a Class A licence under the Aggregate Resources Act.

Prior to the hearing, the applicant reached a settlement with the Town, the Commission, and a neighbouring property owner, resulting in revised site plans and conditions that addressed concerns regarding traffic, water quality, natural heritage, noise, and air quality.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good land use planning, is consistent with provincial policies, and adequately mitigates potential adverse impacts.

The Tribunal approved the Official Plan Amendment and recommended approval of the development permits and Niagara Escarpment Plan amendment, issuing an interim order contingent upon confirmation of adequate Indigenous consultation.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and the Niagara Escarpment Commission's refusal of development permits to allow a new gravel pit operation.

The Ministry of Natural Resources also referred the applicant's Aggregate Resources Act licence application to the Tribunal.

Prior to the hearing, the applicant reached a settlement with the Town, the Commission, and a neighbouring landowner, resulting in revised site plans and conditions that addressed concerns regarding water, natural heritage, noise, and air quality.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good land use planning, meets all legislative tests, and adequately mitigates potential impacts.

The Tribunal approved the Official Plan Amendment, directed the issuance of the aggregate licence, and recommended approval of the Niagara Escarpment Plan amendment and development permits, subject to an interim order pending confirmation of adequate Indigenous consultation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the Phase 2 hearing on the merits regarding appeals by Lambs Road School Property Ltd. concerning a proposed residential redevelopment and the demolition of a heritage building in the Municipality of Clarington.

The Phase 2 hearing was scheduled for five days commencing June 22, 2026, and the procedural order set out the key dates for the exchange of witness statements, expert meetings, and other pre-hearing requirements.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Brantford's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment 11.

The Tribunal scheduled future hearing dates and approved a procedural order.

Additionally, the Tribunal heard and approved a settlement between BSC Landco Inc. and the City regarding the property at 555 Greenwich Street.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to rezone a portion of the property from 'Core Natural' to a 'Holding - General Employment' zone, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Brantford's Comprehensive Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment 11.

The Tribunal granted requests from several parties to withdraw their appeals.

Additionally, the Tribunal granted a request by Losani Homes to consolidate its site-specific appeals of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law with its appeals of privately-initiated applications for the same properties, finding it would be an effective and efficient use of resources.

Further Case Management Conference dates were scheduled.

The moving parties brought a motion to dismiss appeals of the Township of Muskoka Lakes' new Official Plan filed by the responding parties.

The moving parties argued the notices of appeal failed to provide the required explanations of how the Official Plan was inconsistent with provincial policy or failed to conform to the District Official Plan, and failed to disclose apparent land use planning grounds.

The Tribunal agreed, finding that the alleged lack of conformity and inconsistency were not clearly identified or explained in the original notices of appeal as required by the Planning Act.

The Tribunal granted the motion and dismissed the appeals without a hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the upcoming hearing regarding appeals by 2723773 Ontario Limited.

The appeals relate to the Town of Innisfil's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and draft plan of subdivision to facilitate the development of six townhouse blocks.

The hearing is scheduled for two days commencing December 17, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference for appeals brought by the applicant due to the Town's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The applications seek to facilitate the development of six townhouse blocks.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a two-day merit hearing.

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 in the Municipality of Clarington.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order and scheduled a two-phase merit hearing to commence in June and December 2025.

The Tribunal convened a fourth Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the District Municipality of Muskoka's approval of the new Township of Muskoka Lakes' Official Plan.

The parties were unable to agree on an Issues List, with the Township alleging that certain issues raised by the appellants did not comply with the Planning Act regarding consistency with the Provincial Planning Statement and conformity with the District Official Plan.

The appellants argued that a motion on the validity of the Issues List would be an abuse of process.

The Tribunal scheduled a motion hearing to address these disputes and directed the provision of updated policy changes.

The City of Brantford brought a motion to scope appeals of its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law (CZBL) and to bring the unappealed portions of the CZBL into full force and effect on a city-wide basis.

The appellant parties consented to scoping their appeals to their specific sites or areas.

Relying on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found that granting the motion represented good planning as it would streamline the development process.

The Tribunal granted the motion pursuant to s. 34(31) of the Planning Act, bringing the CZBL into force save and except for the specific properties under appeal.

The appellant appealed the Town of Caledon's Interim Control By-law (ICBL) and its subsequent extension, which temporarily prohibited new gravel pits and quarries on certain lands to allow the Town to review and update its aggregate resource policies.

The appellant, who sought to develop an aggregate operation on affected lands, argued the ICBL was unnecessary, improperly motivated to thwart its application, and failed to conform with provincial and municipal policies.

The Tribunal applied the four-part test for ICBLs and found that the Town strictly complied with section 38 of the Planning Act, substantiated a valid planning rationale for the policy review, ensured conformity with the Official Plan, and conducted the review fairly and expeditiously within the statutory timeframe.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated February 4, 2025.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the decision was amended to correct the spelling of counsel Diana Doracin's name in the appearances list.

In all other respects, the original decision and order remain unchanged.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Brantford's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 124-2024 and Official Plan Amendment 11.

The Tribunal granted party status to several entities on consent.

The parties agreed to schedule a Motion Hearing to further scope the issues, which may lead to the resolution or withdrawal of some appeals.

The Tribunal scheduled the Motion Hearing for March 4, 2025, and a second Case Management Conference for April 30, 2025.