Marc Kemerer

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the procedures leading up to a 9-day hearing scheduled to commence on October 5, 2026.

The hearing concerns appeals by UrbanLink Developments regarding the Town of Lincoln's failure to adopt a requested official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment to permit two mixed-use residential buildings with commercial space.

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 defendant corporation was charged under the Planning Act with using its property for an unpermitted use, specifically the excessive outdoor storage of motor vehicles in a Service Station Commercial Exception Zone.

While operating a permitted motor vehicle body shop, the defendant stored up to 95 vehicles outside, far exceeding the 20-vehicle limit established by a registered site plan agreement.

The court found the extent of the storage constituted a distinct, non-permitted use rather than a subordinate accessory use.

The defendant's due diligence defence was rejected, as its failure to ascertain the zoning limits constituted a mistake of law, not fact, and it took no reasonable steps to reduce the storage after receiving notice of the violation.

The defendant was found guilty on both counts.

The Beamsville Bench Winery Association (BBWA) brought a motion seeking Party status in appeals concerning the Town of Lincoln's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a proposed mixed-use development.

The developers opposed the motion, arguing BBWA lacked a direct interest and its participation would cause unnecessary duplication and delay.

The Tribunal granted Party status, finding that BBWA had a direct interest due to potential impacts on nearby wineries and specialty crops, had participated in the prior municipal process, and would provide necessary and distinct evidence regarding agritourism and agricultural impacts.

The Tribunal declined to strike BBWA's proposed issues, leaving their merits to be determined at the hearing.

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.

The City of Brampton brought a motion for directions seeking approval of modifications to its new Official Plan to resolve multiple appeals.

The Tribunal found that the proposed modifications and unmodified policies had regard for matters of provincial interest, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Greenbelt Plan and the Region of Peel Official Plan.

The Tribunal granted the motion, approving the modifications and unmodified policies without prejudice to the remaining outstanding appeals.

Galibier Materials Inc. appealed the Township of Springwater's failure to make a decision on applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit the expansion of an existing aggregate pit.

The Minister of Natural Resources also referred the associated Licence Application to the Tribunal.

Objectors raised concerns regarding air quality impacts from dust and the preservation of a wildlife corridor.

The Tribunal found that the proposed Dust Management Plan and revised phasing and rehabilitation plans adequately addressed the concerns.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, approved the planning instruments, and directed the Minister to issue the licence subject to conditions, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest.

The applicant sought an order compelling the Long Point Region Conservation Authority (LPRCA) to enforce a permit issued to his neighbours, who had constructed a retaining wall contrary to the approved grading plan.

The LPRCA had investigated the applicant's complaint but exercised its discretion to take no enforcement action, concluding the completed work conformed with the applicable legislation.

The Superior Court found that while the LPRCA has the discretionary authority to enforce its permits through stop orders or charges, it is not mandatory.

Applying the reasonableness standard of review, the Court held that the LPRCA's decision not to take enforcement steps was justified, transparent, and intelligible.

The application was dismissed.

The moving party, Friends of Ball’s Bridge & Little Lakes, brought a motion to admit new evidence in an ongoing hearing regarding a proposed gravel pit.

The new evidence included an MNR inspection report, a corrected property survey, wood turtle sighting documents, and videos of dust emissions.

The Tribunal applied the Palmer test for fresh evidence.

The Tribunal admitted the MNR report, the survey, and the wood turtle documents, finding them relevant and not obtainable before the filing deadlines.

However, the Tribunal refused to admit the dust videos, finding they could have been produced earlier and their late admission would prejudice the responding party, who had already closed its case.

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.

The applicant appealed the conditions imposed by the Parry Sound Area Planning Board on a consent application to sever a waterfront property into three lots.

The Township of Carling also appealed after the Board removed certain conditions regarding private road upgrades.

Prior to the hearing, the applicant and the Township agreed on revised conditions for road upgrades to ensure emergency vehicle access.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposed consent, subject to the agreed-upon conditions, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the applicable official plans, has regard for the criteria in section 51(24) of the Planning Act, and represents good planning.

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 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 Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Camping in Ontario against the Township of Selwyn's Development Charges By-laws.

The Tribunal ordered the consolidation of the appeals and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the four-day merit hearing scheduled for November 2025.

This was the third Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's Zoning By-law No. 63-2024 for the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan area.

Several appeals were withdrawn, and the remaining appellants agreed to scope their appeals to be site-specific and adjourn them sine die.

The Tribunal acknowledged the withdrawals, adjourned the remaining site-specific appeals sine die, released the scheduled 10-day hearing dates, and directed the parties to provide a status update within one year.

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 appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit the construction of an oversized detached garage on a waterfront property.

The parties reached a settlement to rezone the property to permit the garage with a larger footprint than the principal dwelling.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to the applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law was amended.

This was a status hearing regarding multiple appeals against the Region of Halton's approval of the new City of Burlington Official Plan, as well as appeals against Official Plan Amendment No. 119 and Zoning By-law Amendment No. 2020-418.

The Tribunal deferred a party status request from Canadian National Railway Company to the next Case Management Conference to allow parties time to obtain instructions.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference for July 16, 2025.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on a proposed draft plan of subdivision within the statutory timeframe.

At the Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to four individuals and interested person status to one individual.

The Tribunal also approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 10-day video hearing.

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.