John Ewart

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the District Municipality of Muskoka's approval of the Township of Muskoka Lakes' Official Plan.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two individuals/groups.

The Tribunal scheduled a motion hearing to determine the validity of one of the appeals in light of Bill 185.

The Tribunal also deferred a request to bifurcate the hearing until the issues list is finalized, and directed the parties to submit a finalized issues list and draft procedural order prior to the next Case Management Conference.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Consent applications to permit the severance of a rural property into three residential lots.

The central issue was whether the proposed lots could be adequately serviced by private water cisterns, given the lack of municipal water and inadequate groundwater for wells.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the appellant's experts, finding that cisterns are a viable and common water source in the area and that the proposed intensification is compatible with the surrounding rural character.

The appeals were allowed and the applications approved subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit the construction of rental cabins and an accessory dwelling on a property formerly used as a fishing resort.

The central issue was whether the proposal constituted a 'new development' or a 'redevelopment' under the County Official Plan, which prohibits new development on private roads.

The Tribunal found that the proposal was a new development, as the previous use ceased in the 1980s and all structures would be new.

Consequently, the proposed development on a private road did not conform to the County Official Plan, and the appeal was dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by JRB Williams Enterprises Inc. against the Municipality of Brighton's refusal of applications for a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision.

The applications seek to permit a 32-unit residential development.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the upcoming three-day video hearing scheduled for September 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and Plan of Subdivision.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a yacht club and four individuals on consent.

The parties agreed to submit a final draft Procedural Order and Issues List by June 14, 2024, and a three-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence on September 25, 2024.

At a Case Management Conference for appeals against the District Municipality of Muskoka's approval of the Township of Muskoka Lakes' new Official Plan, several community groups and individuals requested party or participant status.

Applying the Oakville Factors and the requirements of the Planning Act, the Tribunal granted party status to four cottage and stakeholder associations, finding their involvement would assist in the effective adjudication of the issues without causing undue prejudice.

The Tribunal denied party status to two individuals, finding their concerns were either site-specific or better suited for participant status, and granted participant status to one of them.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the appellant against the municipality's approval of a Zoning By-law Amendment and Official Plan Amendment.

The parties disputed the validity of the OPA appeal and requested a motion date to determine if prior submissions fulfilled the statutory requirements under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day motion and approved the draft Procedural Order to govern the exchange of documents.

Trent Lakes Concerned Citizens (TLCC) brought a motion under s. 34(25) of the Planning Act to dismiss an appeal by Dewdney Mountain Farms Limited (DMF) regarding a zoning by-law amendment for a proposed quarry.

TLCC argued that the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success because the proposed haul route included a 'forced road' that could not be widened to accommodate necessary noise mitigation measures.

The Tribunal found that the notice of appeal disclosed genuine and legitimate planning reasons.

The Tribunal concluded that the evidence regarding the road's status, width, and potential for modification required full consideration at a hearing on the merits, and therefore dismissed the motion.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding an appeal by the appellant against the Township's Community Planning Permit By-law.

The parties reached an agreement resolving 19 of the 27 issues, with the remaining 8 addressed through modifications to the By-law.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the amended By-law consistent with provincial policy, in conformity with applicable official plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the agreed-upon amendments.

The appellant appealed the refusal of an application for consent to sever a property to create a new rural lot containing an existing sleeping cabin.

The subject property is located on Mountain Lake, which is designated as an at-capacity lake trout lake.

The Tribunal found that the proposed severance would create a backlot in contravention of the Township's Official Plan policies.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the severance did not conform to the Township and County Official Plans and was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement regarding the protection of sensitive water features.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit the construction of rental cabins, a boathouse, and an accessory dwelling.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to a neighbouring property owner on consent.

The Tribunal directed the parties to finalize a draft Procedural Order and scheduled a three-day merit hearing.

The applicant appealed the Township's refusal of a site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a short-term rental within an existing accessory dwelling unit on a commercial property.

The Tribunal found that while the proposal had regard for provincial interests, it was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and did not conform to the District of Muskoka or Township of Lake of Bays Official Plans.

The Tribunal preferred the Township's planning evidence that converting the unit to a short-term rental would remove a long-term housing option, contrary to policies aimed at providing a diverse mix of attainable housing to support complete communities and the local tourism economy.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by BayCity Custom Homes against the Township of Ramara's refusal of Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Consent applications.

The applications seek to permit two new residential lots via severances and a reduction in minimum lot frontage.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a four-day merit hearing to commence by video on July 9, 2024.

The appellant brought a motion for discovery seeking hydrogeological records, site plans, and a site visit related to a proposed quarry expansion.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on the motion.

The Tribunal granted the motion in part, issuing a consent order requiring the applicant to provide specific documents and records by a set date, with each party bearing its own costs.

The appellant appealed a municipal by-law that approved the closing and sale of a shoreline road allowance to an abutting property owner.

The Tribunal initiated a motion to dismiss the appeal without a hearing on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction.

The appellant argued that the Tribunal had jurisdiction under various provisions of the Municipal Act, 2001 to review and deny the by-law.

The Tribunal found that it does not have free-standing jurisdiction to determine the validity or legality of a municipal by-law, nor does it have supervisory jurisdiction over a municipality's legislative competence or procedural fairness.

The Tribunal concluded that the proper forum to challenge the validity of the by-law is the Superior Court of Justice under section 273 of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a telephone conference call to clarify its previous decision regarding a zoning by-law amendment for a waterfront property in the Township of Muskoka Lakes.

The Tribunal amended a paragraph in its prior decision to clarify that a parking area may be positioned 'to within 50 feet of the lake'.

The Tribunal also directed the appellants to provide an existing plan of survey and set a deadline for the parties to provide an update and propose timelines for further deliverables.

The appellants appealed the Township's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit an existing small-scale shed within the shoreline setback on their seasonal recreational property.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised amendment that defined the structure as a 'marine storage shed' and established specific regulations for its size and setbacks.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendment was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and County Official Plan, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement.

A second Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by the applicant following the municipality's non-decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a quarry operation.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties and scheduled a five-day merit hearing to commence on May 6, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the appellants against the Township's Community Planning Permit By-law No. 2021-111.

The parties presented a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal scheduled a seven-day merit hearing to commence on March 25, 2024, and approved the Procedural Order on consent.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of an amendment to the County of Hastings Official Plan, which would permit the establishment of a quarry.

The parties were unable to reach a resolution.

The applicant and municipality requested a hearing in mid-April 2024, while the appellant requested a delay until late 2024 to complete necessary studies.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day video hearing for April 2024, noting that the appellant had sufficient time since filing the appeal to prepare their case.