Mark Robert Flowers

The Manors of Belfountain Corp. appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to make a decision on a draft plan of subdivision, while the Town and a community organization appealed the Niagara Escarpment Commission's conditional approval of a development permit for the same residential project.

The Tribunal considered extensive expert evidence on hydrogeology, stormwater management, and natural heritage, particularly concerning potential impacts on local groundwater, private wells, and sensitive Brook Trout habitat.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts, finding that the proposed phased development, supported by advanced wastewater treatment and rigorous monitoring conditions, would not cause negative environmental impacts.

The Tribunal confirmed the development permit and approved the draft plan of subdivision in principle, subject to agreed conditions.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the City's passing of a Zoning By-law Amendment that reduced the height, density, and residential gross floor area of a proposed 39-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal directed the parties to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a five-day hearing on the merits to commence by video conference.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing scheduled to commence on November 30, 2026, regarding appeals by Stylux Bowmanville Inc. for a proposed development of 97 three-story townhouse units in the Municipality of Clarington.

The order includes the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, a summary of dates, the list of parties and participants, the issues list, and the order of evidence.

The City of Vaughan brought a motion for directions seeking to adjourn the scheduled merit hearing for the PEM appeals and to schedule a consolidated Phase 1 Transportation Hearing to hear common transportation issues across multiple appeals (PEM, SKY, and Kingsmoor) within the Weston and Highway 7 Secondary Plan area.

The responding parties opposed the motion, arguing it would cause prejudice and delay, and that the City's Transportation Master Plan should not dictate site-specific densities.

The Tribunal granted the motion in part, ordering that the PEM, SKY, and Kingsmoor appeals be heard together for a Phase 1 Transportation Hearing to test the scope and applicability of the City's Transportation Master Plan.

The PEM merit hearing was adjourned and rescheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Friday Harbour Resort Holdings Inc. for a proposed resort development in the Town of Innisfil.

The Tribunal granted party and participant status to several individuals and entities on consent.

A procedural order was issued to govern the upcoming 15-day video hearing scheduled for May 2026.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Stylux Bowmanville Inc. against the Municipality of Clarington's failure to make decisions on applications for a 97-unit townhouse development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority on consent and participant status to Nadine Taylor without objection.

A 15-day hearing was scheduled, and the parties were directed to file a finalized Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant sought a Final Order from the Ontario Land Tribunal to approve a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) and Draft Plan of Subdivision (DPS) for a residential redevelopment, following an earlier Interim Order that approved them in principle.

The respondent municipality and a greenspace coalition opposed the final approval of the ZBA, arguing that unresolved issues regarding City-owned easements and overland flow routes made it premature.

The Tribunal found that it had the jurisdiction to issue a Final Order without the consent of all parties.

It held that the only prerequisites set out in the Interim Order were the receipt of the draft ZBA, DPS, and consolidated conditions, which had been satisfied.

The Tribunal concluded that easements and overland flows were not prerequisites for the Final Order and that it is common practice to approve a ZBA and DPS concurrently.

The Tribunal issued the Final Order approving both instruments.

The proposed intervenors, three regional municipalities, brought a motion for leave to intervene as friends of the court in an appeal regarding compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The underlying appeal involved a private dispute between an expropriating authority and a landowner over the market value of expropriated land.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that the proposed intervenors failed to demonstrate they would make a useful and distinct contribution not already offered by the appellant.

The court noted that the intervention would unnecessarily broaden and complicate the private dispute by introducing issues related to the capital planning of other municipalities.

The Applicant brought a motion for directions to determine the completeness of its Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications for a proposed development of approximately 1,500 dwelling units.

The City had deemed the applications incomplete, citing prematurity and the need for additional studies, including a Master Servicing Study and an Environmental Management Plan.

The Tribunal found that the City's additional requirements were not reasonable, as they were not specified in the Official Plan and the Applicant had already provided extensive information and material.

The Tribunal allowed the motion and deemed the applications complete.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the upcoming hearing regarding appeals by PEM (Weston) Limited Partnership and PEM (Weston) GP Inc. against the City of Vaughan's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and draft plan of subdivision.

The applications seek to permit the development of two mixed-use residential and commercial buildings and one residential building.

The order sets out the schedule for the exchange of evidence, witness statements, and the hearing dates, and includes the finalized issues list.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference to obtain a status update regarding a previous Interim Order that approved a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision in principle.

The appellant sought direction to progress the matter towards a Final Order after the municipality and another party failed to respond to draft conditions.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day hearing event to consider the issuance of a Final Order.

This was the second Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 777 (Sheppard East Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal granted added party status to Lencroft Holdings Inc., allowing it to shelter under an existing appeal.

The Tribunal also granted requests to adjourn two specific appeals while those appellants pursue site-specific applications.

Procedural dates were established for the exchange of materials ahead of Tribunal-led mediation and a third Case Management Conference.

The Appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 56-storey mixed-use tower at 2350-2352 Yonge Street.

The City opposed the development, arguing the site was only suitable for a midrise building and raised concerns about back-to-back towers, blank walls, combined tower floor plate size, and impacts on the public realm.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the Appellant's experts, finding that the proposed tower separation, blank wall treatment, and combined floor plate size were acceptable and had appropriate regard for the Tall Building Design Guidelines.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, subject to the Appellant increasing the ground floor retail depth to 15 metres and satisfying other technical pre-requisites.

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 City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 54-storey mixed-use building at 2346 Yonge Street.

At an uncontested settlement hearing, the Tribunal accepted expert land use planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conforms to the Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, approving the amendment in principle and withholding the final order until several conditions, including finalization of the by-law and servicing reports, are satisfied.

At a Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding a proposed in-water boathouse, a neighbouring party brought a motion seeking an order for discovery to compel the delivery of documents and permit a site inspection of the subject property by their consultants.

The Tribunal reviewed the draft Issues List and provided directions to scope and remove irrelevant issues, noting that matters relating to slope, vegetation, and erosion fall under the jurisdiction of the conservation authority.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion for discovery, finding that the requested site access was not relevant or necessary to the disposition of the planning merits of the boathouse structure and would be highly intrusive.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Friday Harbour Resort Holdings Inc. against the Town of Innisfil's failure to make a decision on applications for official plan and zoning by-law amendments.

The Tribunal granted party status to the County of Simcoe and eleven individuals forming the Friday Harbour Focus Group, and participant status to nine individuals.

A second Case Management Conference and a 15-day Merit Hearing were scheduled.

Following a compensation proceeding under the Expropriations Act, the claimant sought an order for costs of over $1.1 million.

The respondent requested an adjournment of the costs assessment pending its appeal of the underlying merit decision to the Divisional Court.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding that the assessment of costs is not automatically stayed and that proceeding expeditiously was fair and efficient.

The Tribunal reviewed the contested items in the bill of costs, making minor deductions for unrelated utility negotiations and previously settled discovery motions, but largely upheld the claimant's costs as reasonable and reasonably incurred.

The Tribunal awarded $1,067,308 for the interim bill of costs and $64,359 for costs incurred on the application itself, with interest running from the date of the merit decision.

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 of the City of Vaughan's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The applications propose a development of two 45-storey mixed-use buildings and one 43-storey residential building.

The Tribunal scheduled a 12-day hearing commencing March 23, 2026, and directed the parties to submit a finalized Procedural Order.