Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: December 3, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000723
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Bovaird West Holdings Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit the development of the Subject Lands from the existing vacant land to high-density mixed-use development
Reference Number: OZS-2023-0039
Property Address: Part of Block 2 on Plan 43M-1927, being Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 11 on Plan 43R-40331
Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000723
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000723
OLT Case Name: Bovaird West Holdings Inc. v. Brampton (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Bovaird West Holdings Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description: To permit the development of the Subject Lands from the existing vacant land to high-density mixed-use development
Reference Number: OZS-2023-0039
Property Address: Part of Block 2 on Plan 43M-1927, being Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 11 on Plan 43R-40331
Municipality/UT: Brampton/Peel
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000724
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000723
OLT Case Name: Bovaird West Holdings Inc. v. Brampton (City)
Heard: November 21, 2025, by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Bovaird West Holdings Inc.
Patrick Duffy Jonathan Cheng (in absentia)
City of Brampton
Bruce Engell
Menkes Creditview Inc.
Justine Reyes Michael Cara (in absentia)
Canadian National Railway Company
Jessica Jakubowski Isaiah Banach (in absentia)
DECISION DELIVERED BY Kurtis Smith AND Interim ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The matter before the Tribunal was an uncontested settlement hearing pertaining to the lands municipally known as Part of Block 2 on Plan 43M-1927, being Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 11 on Plan 43R-40331 (“Subject Lands”) in the Cit of Brampton (“City”), owned by Bovaird West Holdings Inc. (“BWH”).
2Leading up to the previously scheduled merit hearing the Parties worked diligently to resolve all the issues by entering into an agreement, registered on title with the Canadian National Railway Company (“CN”), altering their proposed development (“Revised Proposal”) to address the remaining issues, and executed Minutes of Settlement with the City.
3To support the revised zoning by-law amendment (“ZBA”) and draft plan of subdivision (“DPOS”) (together “Revised Amendments”), BWH introduced Mr. Ozan Kemal, a land use planner. The Tribunal, based on Mr. Kemal’s Curriculum Vitae and Acknowledgment of Experts Duty, qualified Mr. Kemal to provide opinion evidence in the area of land use planning.
4The Revised Development will permit the construction of four development blocks, three of which are mixed-use (Blocks A-C), and one residential block (Block D). A new public road will dissect the Subject Lands north and south, with a private street dividing the Subject Lands east and west, thus creating the four blocks, as shown below:
EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS
5Mr. Kemal provided the Tribunal with oral, written (Exhibit 2) and visual evidence to support his findings that the Revised Amendments have regard for s. 2 of the Planning Act (“Act”), is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024 (“PPS”), conforms to the Region of Peel’s Official Plan (“Region OP”), the City’s in-force Official Plan (“City OP”), and the Brampton Fletcher’s Meadow Secondary Plan (“BFMSP”), has appropriate regard to the City’s Future Official Plan, satisfies the vision for the Subject Lands expressed in the applicable City Guidelines, and represents good planning that is in the public interest and should be approved.
6The chart below and found on page 11 of Exhibit 2, presents the differences between the original and the revised:
7As indicated above, BWH increased some of the tower heights of the (northern) towers that are closer to the Mount Pleasant Go Station and decreased the heights of the towers to the south that are in close proximity to the existing low density residential. As well as increasing the open space, residential units, and vehicle parking.
8The above noted planning documents have several common themes that are implemented by the Revised Amendments, including:
Represents a form of orderly development on fully serviced and underutilized vacant lands within close proximity to the Mount Pleasant Go Station.
Contributes to the creation of safe and healthy communities.
Delivers a full range of housing choice, in a transit supportive Major Transit Station Area.
Provides a mixed-use compact design with active ground floor commercial uses and is within a strategic growth area,
Creates a valuable public realm through publicly accessible private spaces, landscaping, sidewalks, street connections, and public transit.
9At the time of the hearing, BWH and the City had not provided the Tribunal with a draft of the ZBA or the conditions of approval of the DPOS. Mr. Kemal recommendation to the Tribunal is as follows:
- that the Tribunal allow the ZBA and DPOS appeals in part, granting “in principle” approval of the Settlement Proposal, and that the Tribunal withhold its Final Order on the appeals until the following pre-conditions have been satisfied:
i. that the Tribunal has received confirmation that the final form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment are satisfactory to the Owner and the City; and
ii. that the Tribunal has received confirmation that the conditions to the approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval are satisfactory to the Owner and the City.
10Furthermore, Counsel for BWH requested that the pre-conditions for the interim order be satisfied by February 2, 2026.
11On the uncontested evidence of Mr. Kemal, the Tribunal finds that the Revised Amendments: have due regard for matters of Provincial Interest in s. 2 of the Act, are consistent with the PPS, conforms to the Region OP, City OP and BFMSP, and has regard for the City’s Future OP and applicable guidelines; therefore, represents good planning in the public interest.
ORDER
12THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeals of the applications for Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval are allowed, in part, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph 15 below, and that the proposed development as contemplated by the Architectural Plans, prepared by Giannone Petricone Associated, dated May 5, 2025, is hereby approved in principle.
13The Tribunal will withhold the issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation of the City Solicitor, of the following pre-requisite matters:
A. that the Tribunal has received confirmation that the final form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment are satisfactory to the Applicant and the City; and
B. that the Tribunal has received confirmation that the conditions to the approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval are satisfactory to the Applicant and the City.
14The Panel Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final draft of the Zoning By-Law Amendment, the conditions to the approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval and the issuance of the Final Order.
15If the Parties do not submit the final draft of the Zoning By-law Amendment, and provide confirmation that all other contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order set out in paragraph 15 above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order, by Monday, February 2, 2025, the Applicant and the City shall provide a written status report to the Tribunal by that date, as to the timing of the expected confirmation and submission of the final form of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment and issuance of the Final Order by the Tribunal.
16The Tribunal may, as necessary, arrange the further attendance of the Parties by Telephone Conference Call to determine the additional time lines and deadline for the submission of the final form of the instrument, the satisfaction of the contingent pre-requisites and the issuance of the Final Order.
“Kurtis Smith”
Kurtis Smith
Member
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: www.olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248
The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.