Emma Ruth Bradley Blanchard

This was a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Town of Carleton Place's Official Plan Amendment No. 8.

The Tribunal noted that Pegasus Development Corporation failed to submit a party status request form and was therefore not a party to the appeals.

The Tribunal also determined that Zoning By-law No. 32-2021 was not before it, as it was never appealed, and excluded it from the Issues List.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day video hearing and approved the final Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a fifth Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the appellant against the City's approval of revised conditions for a draft plan of subdivision.

The parties advised they were in the final stages of executing a settlement and requested a subsequent CMC be scheduled in case the settlement did not proceed.

The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a further CMC, directing the parties to submit a revised Procedural Order if the settlement fails.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal under section 51(34) of the Planning Act for the failure of the County of Renfrew to make a decision on a proposed draft plan of subdivision for 26 waterfront residential lots.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Township of McNabb/Braeside and participant status to two individuals.

The Tribunal also approved the draft Procedural Order and scheduled a four-day merits hearing to commence by video on July 14, 2025.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Ottawa's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 3.

The parties advised that they are engaged in ongoing settlement discussions and requested a further CMC to provide an update.

The Tribunal scheduled a further video CMC for May 27, 2025, and directed the parties to provide a draft Procedural Order and Issues List if a settlement is not reached.

The appellant sought a Zoning By-law Amendment to retroactively legalize unauthorized development on a waterfront property, including additions to a seasonal cottage and various decks within the prescribed 30-metre shoreline setback.

The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the requested exceptions failed to conform with the Township Official Plan's strict shoreline setback policies designed to protect the ecological and heritage features of the Rideau Canal waterway.

The Tribunal rejected the appellant's ecological evidence due to factual misapprehensions and accepted the municipality's evidence that the unauthorized development likely had an unacceptable negative impact on the environment and Species at Risk habitat.

The applicant appealed the County of Renfrew's refusal of an application for provisional consent to sever a vacant residential lot from a rural property.

The County denied the application because the applicant refused to provide a hydrogeological assessment and a noise impact study.

The Tribunal found that the proposed severance without the required studies was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2024, and did not conform to the County's Official Plan, which explicitly mandates these studies for lots under 1 hectare or within 250 metres of a highway.

The appeal was dismissed and provisional consent was denied.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern an upcoming 5-day video hearing regarding an appeal by VIA Rail Canada Inc. The appeal concerns the conditions of approval for a draft plan of subdivision in the City of Ottawa, specifically focusing on noise and vibration mitigation measures for development adjacent to a railway station.

The order establishes the procedural timeline, the list of parties and participants, the issues list, and the order of evidence.

The claimant sought an assessment of legal costs under s. 32 of the Expropriations Act following a settlement with the expropriating authority.

The authority argued that interest was not payable on unpaid legal accounts and that the claimant's costs were excessive due to duplication.

The Tribunal held that reasonable legal fees are payable regardless of whether they have been paid by the claimant, and that interest on those fees is compensable from the date of settlement.

The Tribunal reduced the claimant's legal costs by 10-20% for certain stages due to excessive internal discussions, awarding $356,755.45 in pre-settlement costs plus interest.

The Town of Carleton Place brought a motion to dismiss an appeal by Pegasus Development Corporation regarding Official Plan Amendment No. 8.

The Town argued that Pegasus lacked standing under s. 17(36) of the Planning Act because it did not make oral or written submissions to Council before the amendment was adopted.

Pegasus contended that its communications with senior municipal staff should be considered submissions to Council under the law of agency.

The Tribunal held that ad hoc meetings and emails with planning staff outside the formal public meeting process do not satisfy the strict statutory requirement of making submissions to Council.

The motion was granted and Pegasus's appeal was dismissed, with leave to request party status to shelter under another valid appeal.

The applicant appealed the Town of Hearst's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit a salvage yard.

At the first Case Management Conference, it was determined that proper notice had not been served by the applicant.

A further CMC was scheduled, with the Town agreeing to serve notice.

Subsequently, the applicant withdrew the appeal, and the Tribunal closed the file.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding an appeal by Via Rail Canada Inc. concerning proposed changes to conditions of approval for a draft plan of subdivision in the City of Ottawa.

The Tribunal received no further requests for party or participant status, considered the parties' updated Procedural Order submitted on consent, and scheduled a new five-day hearing commencing April 28, 2025, to allow additional time to review reports.

The applicant appealed the failure of the Town of Perth and the County of Lanark to make decisions on a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Draft Plan of Subdivision within the statutory timelines.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposed 94-unit residential subdivision and associated zoning changes were consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, conformed to the applicable Official Plans, and represented good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals and approved the settlement.

The Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by VIA Rail Canada Inc. against the City of Ottawa's revised conditions for a draft plan of subdivision adjacent to a VIA Rail station.

The parties requested additional time to scope the remaining issues, particularly concerning noise and vibration data.

The Tribunal scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference to finalize the procedural order and issues list, and set a five-day Merit Hearing.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the appellant against the municipality's revised conditions for a draft plan of subdivision.

The parties requested additional time to continue settlement discussions.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference and directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant appealed the Town of Carleton Place's Interim Control By-law No. 99-2023, which affected its conditionally approved development permit for a residential and commercial building.

At a settlement hearing, the parties presented a settlement to remove the subject lands from the by-law's 'Strategic Properties' designation and extend the time to satisfy development conditions.

Relying on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the settlement, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and good land use planning.

The applicant appealed the Township of Horton's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment to permit a Class A gravel pit.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties advised they had reached a settlement.

The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing event to consider the settlement.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding an appeal by Loblaw Companies Limited against the City of Ottawa's adoption of the Orléans Corridor Secondary Plan.

Based on uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the proposed settlement amendments, finding they have regard for provincial interests, are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conform to the City's Official Plan.

The amendments provide clearer, less prescriptive policy direction while maintaining the vision of the secondary plan.

At the first Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding revised conditions of approval for a draft plan of subdivision, the Tribunal granted party status to the applicant, Colonnade Management Inc. The parties indicated a desire to pursue Tribunal-led mediation to resolve compatibility issues between the proposed development and the adjacent VIA Rail Station.

The Tribunal directed the parties to initiate mediation and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.

The applicant appealed the Township's refusal of a site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a retail store on a rural property.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement that included site-specific performance standards, such as increased setbacks and minimum landscaped open space, to ensure compatibility with an abutting residential property.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Township's refusal to amend a zoning by-law to permit a seasonal cottage to be used as a year-round dwelling.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two area residents on consent, noted the parties' openness to mediation, approved the draft Procedural Order, and scheduled a five-day video hearing.