Katarzyna Sliwa

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and draft plan of subdivision for an industrial subdivision.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two individuals on consent.

The parties agreed to seek a Tribunal-led mediation assessment and submitted a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference for November 2026 and a nine-day hearing on the merits for February 2027.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the hearing of appeals by the applicant concerning the failure of the Town of Ajax and the Region of Durham to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, and site plan control.

The applications propose a development of 660 residential units, a school block, park block, stormwater management block, and environmental protection block.

The hearing is scheduled for five days commencing June 8, 2026.

The Town of Ajax brought an uncontested motion to adjourn a scheduled multi-day hearing before the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding various planning appeals for a proposed 660-unit residential development.

The Town's counsel requested the adjournment due to an upcoming medical procedure and a scheduling conflict with another hearing.

Finding the request reasonable and noting the lack of opposition from the other parties, the Tribunal granted the motion, abridged the time for service, vacated the April 2026 hearing dates, and scheduled a new five-day video hearing for June 2026.

The applicant appealed the Town's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement proposing a four-storey mixed-use building on a consolidated parcel following a land swap.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Regional and Town Official Plans.

The Tribunal allowed the zoning appeal in part to implement the settlement and dismissed the subdivision appeal on consent.

The appellants appealed the Municipality of Clarington's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 136 regarding the Bowmanville East Urban Centre Secondary Plan.

One appellant reached a settlement with the municipality to modify specific policies and schedules, including removing their lands from the secondary plan maps and adjusting mixed-use building permissions.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement modifications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the regional official plan.

The Tribunal approved the settlement for that appellant and scheduled a merit hearing for the remaining appeals.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the appellants against the municipality's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment for a Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal granted non-appellant party status to several individuals, deferred a status request from a conservation authority, and scheduled a third Case Management Conference to finalize the Issues List and consider potential settlements.

The Town of Milton brought a motion on consent to bring Official Plan Amendment No. 86 and Zoning By-law Amendment No. 036-2025 into full force and effect, save and except for specific properties that remain under appeal.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted planning evidence that partial approval would provide clarity and promote orderly planning without prejudicing the appellants.

The Tribunal ordered the instruments into full force and effect on a Town-wide basis, with the site-specific appeals adjourned sine die.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a corrective order under Rule 24.4 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure to amend a previous Memorandum of Oral Decision and Order issued on October 17, 2025.

The correction fixed a typographical error in the spelling of counsel's name for Home Depot of Canada Inc. from Noah Jorden to Noah Gordon.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

This was a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Brampton's Official Plan Amendment for Major Transit Station Areas and the new City Official Plan.

The Tribunal granted party status to 201 County Court Brampton Holdings Inc. on consent.

The parties reported progress in mediation and proposed a written settlement motion once a draft order is finalized.

A subsequent Case Management Conference was scheduled for March 2026 to address outstanding matters and potential consolidation of the appeals.

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 appellant appealed the passing of the Town of Aurora Official Plan, seeking to modify the boundary of the Promenade Secondary Plan to reflect a consistent boundary for its lands and to permit a maximum building height of 12 storeys.

The parties reached a settlement wherein the official plan would be modified to provide the requested consistent boundary, and the appellant would drop the building height issue, deferring it to a future site-specific application.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposed modifications were consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed with the regional official plan, and represented good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to implement the settlement.

A second Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-Law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The applications propose a 14-unit freehold townhouse development.

The parties agreed to scope the issues, reducing the required Merit Hearing from seven to five days.

The Tribunal scheduled the Merit Hearing and directed the parties to submit a revised draft Procedural Order and Issues List on consent.

The appellant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development.

The sole remaining issue was whether the development would negatively impact the Garden Hill Earth Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI).

Prior to the re-hearing, the Ministry of Natural Resources adjusted the ANSI boundary, removing the subject property.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the development would have no negative impacts, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the applicable official plans.

The appeals were allowed in part.

The Township of Adjala-Tosorontio brought a motion to adjourn a minor variance merit hearing after its former counsel declared a conflict of interest shortly before the hearing.

The applicant opposed the adjournment, arguing it was a delay tactic.

The Ontario Land Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the Township acted promptly to retain new counsel upon learning of the conflict and that a brief adjournment was necessary to ensure procedural fairness and allow the Township to properly present its case.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the Regional Municipality of Halton's approval of the new City of Burlington Official Plan, as well as appeals against OPA 119 and ZBL 418.

The Tribunal granted non-appellant party status to Canadian National Railway Company, substituted Inaria Burlington Inc. for Burlington Healthcare Centre Inc., and scheduled a motion hearing to consider dismissing certain appeals and addressing potential settlements.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Municipality of Clarington's Official Plan Amendment No. 136, which updates the Bowmanville East Urban Centre Secondary Plan.

The parties agreed on all procedural matters and requested a second CMC to allow time for further discussions to scope and potentially resolve the issues.

The Tribunal scheduled a second CMC for November 24, 2025, and deferred consideration of requests for non-appellant party status until that time.

The appellant appealed the Township's failure to make a decision on applications for Site Plan Approval and a Draft Plan of Subdivision for a 78-unit townhouse development.

The parties reached a settlement resolving outstanding engineering matters through a single set of conditions of approval.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, in conformity with applicable Official Plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the site plan and draft plan of subdivision subject to the agreed conditions.

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.

A status Case Management Conference was held regarding the remaining appeals against the City of Toronto's comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 569-2013.

The City provided updates on settlement discussions concerning various issue-specific and site-specific appeals, including those related to propane storage, school boards, parking, cemeteries, and places of worship.

The Tribunal scheduled a further one-day CMC for December 3, 2025, and directed the City to provide a written status update and an updated tracking chart of remaining appeals by November 26, 2025.

The appellant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and plan of subdivision to permit a residential development.

The subject lands contained a portion of a Provincially Significant Area of Natural or Scientific Interest (ANSI).

The municipality brought a motion arguing the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to determine the features of the ANSI, which was dismissed.

On the merits, the Tribunal found the appellant failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would have no negative impact on the natural features or ecological functions of the ANSI, as the appellant's expert evidence focused exclusively on the subject lands rather than the ANSI as a whole.

The appeals were dismissed.