Eric Davis

The Municipality of Middlesex Centre and the County of Middlesex brought a motion for directions to settle several appeals regarding site-specific modifications to Official Plan Amendment 59.

The settlements proposed expanding settlement area boundaries and converting employment lands to residential and commercial uses.

Sifton Properties Limited contested the settlements, arguing that a quantitative land needs assessment was required under the Provincial Policy Statement 2024 prior to approval.

The Tribunal found that the PPS 2024 removed the requirement for a municipal comprehensive review for boundary expansions, allowing for incremental expansions.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the settlements, finding them consistent with the PPS 2024, in conformity with the County Official Plan, and supportive of providing local housing options.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of appeals regarding a proposed zoning by-law amendment and site plan for a livestock trailer washing facility.

The order sets out the issues list, order of evidence, and procedural dates leading up to a 15-day hearing scheduled to commence in April 2027.

The applicant applied for an order waiving the requirement to obtain a farming business registration number and make a payment to an accredited farm organization based on his religious convictions.

He argued that his beliefs in 'Sphere Sovereignty' and 'Impartiality' prevented him from supporting organizations that advocate for supply management and risk management programs.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's convictions were genuinely held, religious in nature, and the actual cause of his objection.

The application for a religious exemption was granted.

The Township of Adelaide Metcalfe applied for leave to appeal the MECP Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval for stormwater management works at a proposed fertilizer storage facility.

The Township raised concerns about the risk of spontaneous combustion of fertilizer pellets and the potential for fire-fighting water run-off to overflow the stormwater ponds and contaminate the local watershed.

The Tribunal found that the Township had standing to appeal but failed to satisfy the two-part test for leave under section 41 of the Environmental Bill of Rights.

The Tribunal accepted expert evidence that the stormwater ponds were appropriately sized to contain worst-case storm events and fire-fighting run-off, and that the decision was reasonable and would not result in significant environmental harm.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the Town of Kingsville's refusal and the County of Essex's failure to make a decision regarding applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to facilitate a land swap.

The proposal sought to exchange the land use designations of two 4.4-hectare parcels, moving future residential development away from natural features and into an agricultural area.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the proposed land swap constitutes a 'development' and creates a 'new settlement area' under the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024.

The applicant failed to provide the required environmental, servicing, and agricultural impact assessments to demonstrate consistency with provincial policies.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Guelph's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and related Official Plan Amendment No. 88.

The Tribunal received status updates indicating that several site-specific appeals had been resolved, while constructive discussions continued on the remaining city-wide and site-specific appeals.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal scheduled a second multi-day Case Management Conference for March 2026 to further organize the proceedings and establish a Procedural Order for any unresolved issues.

The applicant appealed the City of Woodstock's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment, and the City appealed the County of Oxford's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision, all relating to a proposed residential development.

The parties reached a settlement that reduced the total unit count, lowered building heights near existing homes, and relocated higher-density buildings to improve compatibility.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the County Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the revised planning instruments.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the appellant against the municipality's passing of a zoning by-law.

As the parties had not yet filed a procedural order and were open to mediation, the Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference and directed the parties to file the Procedural Order with the Issues List beforehand.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a zoning by-law amendment, official plan amendment, and draft plan of subdivision for a proposed residential development in Woodstock.

The statutory parties advised that a settlement had been reached.

The Tribunal considered requests for Party and Participant status.

John Bell's request for Party status was denied as there were no remaining issues to shelter under given the settlement, and his participation as a Party would cause prejudice through increased hearing length and cost; he was granted Participant status instead.

The Tribunal granted Participant status to 85 other requestors, ordered the matters to be heard together, and scheduled a settlement hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the procedures leading up to a three-day hearing scheduled to commence on November 12, 2025.

The hearing concerns an appeal by the applicants regarding the respondent municipality's refusal or neglect to make a decision on an application to amend the zoning by-law to permit a contractor's business.

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 applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal upholding the respondent Commission's Cost of Production Formula for chicken pricing.

The Divisional Court found that the Tribunal failed to adequately explain its preference for certain expert evidence over others, rendering its reasons conclusory and inadequate.

The application was allowed, the Tribunal's decision was quashed, and the matter was remitted for a fresh hearing.

The applicant appealed the non-decision of its Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications to permit a residential development of 269 dwelling units.

Prior to the merit hearing, the parties reached a full settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised applications consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The appeals were allowed in part, the Zoning By-law was amended, and the draft plan was approved subject to conditions.

The appellant requested a hearing date for its appeal of the City of Guelph's Comprehensive Zoning By-law regarding parking requirements.

The City opposed, arguing that one of the issues was already litigated in a recent minor variance appeal and scheduling it would constitute issue estoppel.

The Tribunal directed that the overlapping issue be held in abeyance pending the minor variance decision, and scheduled a written settlement hearing for the remaining agreed-upon issues.

The Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula passed a zoning by-law amendment to add a definition of a 'Commercial Tour Boat Operation' and include it as a permitted use in all C1 zones.

The Big Tub Harbour Citizens Committee appealed, arguing the use was incompatible with the existing residential community along Big Tub Road.

Bruce Anchor also appealed regarding parking provisions, which were settled prior to the hearing.

The Tribunal dismissed the Citizens Committee's appeal, finding that the amendment conforms to the Official Plan, represents good land use planning, and is in the public interest, as commercial tour boat operations have historically operated from the subject properties and provide important tourism and employment opportunities.

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.

This was the first Case Management Conference for an appeal concerning the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit a 19-unit townhome development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two individuals.

The Tribunal also ordered that this appeal be heard together with a related official plan amendment appeal at a settlement hearing scheduled for March 12, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for a proposed residential development in the Township of Centre Wellington.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Upper Grand District School Board, which operates an adjacent elementary school.

The Tribunal also approved a draft Procedural Order and Issues List on consent, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference and a 10-day merit hearing.

The applicant appealed the Town of Kingsville's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan amendment and its refusal or neglect to make a decision on a Zoning By-law amendment.

The applications sought to permit the adjustment of a Settlement Area Boundary through a land swap.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent of the parties, establishing the procedural requirements and scheduling a three-day video hearing to commence on May 7, 2025.

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.