Corlon Properties Inc. v. London (City), 2026 CanLII 12532

Issued: February 10, 2026 CASE NO.: OLT-25-000560

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(43) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

Applicant/Appellant: Corlon Properties Inc. Owner: Sunningdale Gold Country Club Ltd Subject: Conditions of approval of draft plan of subdivision Description: To facilitate the development of a subdivision Reference Number: 39T-23503 Property Address: 465 Sunningdale West Municipality/UT: London/Middlesex OLT Case No: OLT-25-000560 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-25-000560 OLT Case Name: Corlon Properties Inc. v. London (City)

BEFORE:

Tuesday, the 10th

day of February, 2026

THIS TRIBUNAL having received and considered a draft Procedural Order delivered by the parties on consent;

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Procedural Order, as agreed to between the Parties and attached hereto as Schedule A, shall be in force and effect for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing, which is scheduled to commence on March 9, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. The Tribunal has set aside 4 day(s) for the hearing.

GoTo Meetings: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/765631861

Access code: 765-631-861

“Matthew D.J. Bryan”

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: 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.

Schedule A

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(43) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.

Organization of the Hearing

The video hearing will begin on March 9th 10:00 AM

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/765631861

Access Code: 765-631-861

The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 4 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible.
Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.
Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.

Requirements Before the Hearing

An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in paragraph 7 below. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony.
On or before February 13, 2026 the parties shall provide copies of their expert witness statements and visual evidence to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 14 below.
Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any evidence by February 27, 2026.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before February 27, 2026.
On or before March 2, 2026 the parties shall file a hearing plan and confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On or before March 2,2026 the parties shall file a compendium of evidence consisting of:

a. All witness statements

b. Responses to any evidence

c. Agreed Statements of Fact

A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.
A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.
All filings shall be submitted electronically unless otherwise directed. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7.
No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

BEFORE:

Name of Member: Jean-Pierre Blais

Date: February 9, 2026

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

ATTACHMENT 1 – ORDER OF EVIDENCE

Appellant – Corlon Properties Inc.
City of London
Appellant in Reply

ATTACHMENT 2 – ISSUES LIST

Is the requirement in Condition 36 and Appendix A for dedicated bicycle lanes on Street A, Street B (Wonderland Road to Streets C & G), and Street C (Streets A to B) supported by the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, the Planning Act, applicable municipal policy, technical transportation guidance, and the functional design of the draft plan?
Are the traffic calming requirements in Conditions 36, 47 and 48, and the associated “parking lane/lay‑by” and “speed cushion” elements in Appendix A, supported by the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, the Planning Act, applicable municipal policy, technical transportation guidance, and any study or analysis demonstrating the need for such measures in this subdivision?
Are Conditions 47 and 48, which require the installation of traffic calming measures, reasonable having regard to the nature of the proposed development.
Should Appendix A be amended to remove the requirement for traffic calming features—specifically parking lane/lay‑bys—on Street A, Street B, Street C, and Street D.
Should Appendix A be amended to remove the requirement for dedicated bicycle lanes on Street A, Street B (Wonderland Road to Streets C & G), and Street C (Streets A to B).
Are the appealed Conditions reasonable having regard to the nature of the proposed development