Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: April 23, 2026

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-001155, OLT-26-000163

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

Appellant: 1732216 Ontario Inc. and 2602151 Ontario Inc. Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment Description: To appeal the OPA 57 regarding the adaptation of Stewarttown Secondary Plan Reference Number: OPA 57 Property Address: 24 Mill Pond Drive and 12399 15th Sideroad Municipality/UT: Halton Hills/Halton OLT Case No.: OLT-24-001155 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-001155 OLT Case Name: 1732216 Ontario Inc. and 2602151 Ontario Inc. v. Halton Hills (Town)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 1732216 Ontario Inc. and 2602151 Ontario Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To facilitate a residential development consisting of 199 new dwelling units Reference Number: D14ZBA25.008 Property Address: 24 Mill Pond Drive and 12399 15th Sideroad Municipality/UT: Halton Hills/Halton OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000163 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000163 OLT Case Name: 1732216 Ontario Inc. and 2602151 Ontario Inc. v. Halton Hills (Town)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 1732216 Ontario Inc. and 2602151 Ontario Inc. Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision Description: To facilitate a residential development consisting of 199 new dwelling units Reference Number: D12SUB25.002 Property Address: 24 Mill Pond Drive and 12399 15th Sideroad Municipality/UT: Halton Hills/Halton OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000164 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000163

Heard: April 21, 2026 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel / Representative*
1732216 Ontario Ltd. and 2602151 Ontario Inc.	D. Angelucci, I. Kagan (in absentia), S. Kagan (in absentia)
Town of Halton Hills	S. Floras, J. Wilker (in absentia)
Stewarttown Community Association	S. Mercurio*
Canadian National Railway Company	J. Jakubowski, M. Reedijk (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY N. EISAZADEH ON APRIL 21, 2026, AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This Decision arises from the second Case Management Conference ("CMC") convened in the matter bearing Tribunal Case No. OLT-24-001155, and the first CMC convened in the matters bearing Tribunal Case No. OLT-26-000163 and OLT-26-000164. The appellants in all matters are 1732216 Ontario Ltd. and 2602151 Ontario Inc. ("Appellants").

2The appeal in Tribunal Case No. OLT-24-001155 is brought pursuant to s. 17(24) of the Planning Act ("Act"), against the Town of Halton Hills' ("Town") adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 57 ("OPA 57") which implements the Stewarttown Secondary Plan ("OPA 57 Appeal"). The OPA 57 Appeal had been adjourned sine die, at its first CMC pending the outcome of a mediation in which the Parties were engaged. That mediation has since failed.

3The appeal in Tribunal Case No. OLT-26-000163 is brought pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Act, and the appeal in Tribunal Case No. OLT-26-000164 is brought pursuant to s. 51(34) of the Act. Both appeals relate to applications against the Town's non-decision on a request for a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Draft Plan of Subdivision (collectively, the "Amendment Appeals"), in order to facilitate the Appellants' plans for a residential development consisting of 199 new dwelling units ("Proposed Development") at the lands municipally known as 24 Mill Pond Drive and 12399 15th Sideroad, in the Town ("Subject Lands").

NOTICE

4The Tribunal received the Affidavit of Service affirmed by Christopher J. Drew, on April 8, 2026, confirming that the Notice of these CMCs was properly given in respect of both the OPA 57 Appeal and the Amendment Appeals. The affirmed Affidavit of Service of Christopher J. Drew was marked as Exhibit 1.

PARTY AND PARTICIPANT STATUS REQUESTS

5At the first CMC held on the OPA 57 Appeal, and under a Tribunal Panel differently constituted, Party status was granted to Stewarttown Community Association ("SCA"), and Participant status was granted to Don Beatty, in respect of the OPA 57 Appeal.

6Further requests for Party and Participant status are now before the Tribunal. There was no objection raised from the Appellants nor the Town with respect to either of the Party status requests. The Appellants did raise an objection to the singular request for Participant status.

7The first request is from the Canadian National Railway Company ("CN Rail") who requests Party status to both the OPA 57 Appeal, and the Amendment Appeals. CN Rail is the owner and operator of significant railway infrastructure in the Town, including the CN Halton Subdivision, a principal railway line which supports the frequent bulk transfer of cargo including dangerous goods throughout the Town and province. The Proposed Development on the Subject Lands is immediately adjacent to the CN Halton Subdivision. The development of sensitive uses immediately adjacent to rail lines can lead to land use compatibility conflicts, and accordingly, CN Rail seeks Party status to assist the Tribunal in resolving those conflicts between the Proposed Development and the adjacent railway operations.

8On the submissions of Counsel for CN Rail, and the Statutory Parties being unopposed, the Tribunal was satisfied that CN Rail's interest in these matters properly relate to land use compatibility conflicts including, inter alia, railway operations, noise, vibration and safety. The Tribunal was therefore satisfied that the granting of Party status to CN Rail to both the OPA 57 Appeal and Amendment Appeals would be of assistance to the Tribunal in resolving the ultimate issues in dispute and so granted Party status.

9The second request is from the SCA who seeks Party status to the Amendment Appeals. SCA was incorporated as a not-for-profit organization in March of 2024, with an aim to voice the concerns of its constituents including over land development, traffic and safety, and in particular, regarding expansion within the Stewarttown Secondary Plan area. Given SCA was granted Party status to the OPA 57 Appeal, SCA seeks the same to the related Amendment Appeals. SCA submits that the granting of status will assist the Tribunal through enabling the concerns of the residents and community members of the Stewarttown neighbourhood to be voiced in relation to the Proposed Development.

10On the submissions of the Representative for SCA, and the Statutory Parties being unopposed, the Tribunal was satisfied that SCA has a direct interest in these matters as those most directly affected by land development and intensification within the community, and as an existing Non-Appellant Party to the OPA 57 Appeal. The Tribunal was therefore satisfied that the granting of Party status to the SCA with respect to the Amendment Appeals would be of assistance to the Tribunal in resolving the ultimate issues in dispute and so granted Party status.

11The final request is for Participant Status from Peter McKenna, who seeks status to both the OPA 57 Appeal, and the Amendment Appeals. Counsel for the Appellants, Daniel Angelucci, opposed Mr. McKenna's request on the basis that Mr. McKenna is also a member of the SCA. Mr. Angelucci submitted it would be inappropriate for a member of a Non-Appellant Party to be provided additional status unless they were advancing a different position from that of the association, which did not appear to be the case with Mr. McKenna's request. From a procedural perspective, Mr. Angelucci argued that the purpose of an organized community association is to voice the concerns of the local community in a streamlined fashion, which purpose would be defeated if each of its members was then permitted to also file separate and individual statements. Mr. Angelucci contended this would only result in a duplication of issues and inefficiency in the management of the concerns raised.

12At the request of the Tribunal. Mr. McKenna provided clarity on his individual Participant status request. Mr. McKenna advised that while a resident in the community and a member of the SCA, he is also the immediate neighbour directly adjacent to the Subject Lands. He stated he has had dealings with the Appellants in respect of the Proposed Development, and in particular, requests for access to his property for the purpose of building a sound and retention wall. Accordingly, apart from the concerns raised by the community through the SCA, Mr. McKenna wished to raise his specific concerns with respect to the property boundary lines, noise pollution issues, and a potential retention wall.

13While the Tribunal appreciated the concerns raised by Mr. Angelucci, including that of private property matters, it noted that the present case constituted a single request from an immediately adjacent landowner with nuanced issues separate from those raised by the SCA. Accordingly, the Tribunal was not concerned with a duplication of issues. The Tribunal found that Mr. McKenna had an immediate interest in the OPA 57 Appeal and Amendment Appeals that was nuanced and distinct from the concerns raised by the SCA. The Tribunal was therefore satisfied that the granting of Participant status would be of assistance to the Tribunal in resolving the ultimate issues in dispute and so granted Participant status.

ORDER FOR HEARING TOGETHER

14On the consent of both the Statutory Parties and the Non-Appellant Parties, an Order was sought that the OPA 57 Appeal and the Amendment Appeals be heard together. The Tribunal is satisfied that there is sufficient commonality and overlapping of issues between the two matters involving the same Parties and so granted an Order that the three appeals be heard together.

PROCEDURAL ORDER AND ISSUES LIST

15The Appellants filed a draft Procedural Order ("PO") with draft Issues List ("IL"). The draft IL included a list of issues organized by each of the Statutory and Non-Appellant Parties to all three appeals.

16Counsel for the Town and CN Rail each advised that their issues were comprehensive, though preliminary and subject to change. CN Rail advised that it anticipated to be in a position to finalize its issues list by April 28, 2026. Counsel for the Town advised it required approximately 60-days to finalize its issues since the Amendment Appeals were still undergoing their circulation through the various commenting agencies and that process required some further time for completion. Pending the comments received back, the Town would update and finalize its issues list.

17Notwithstanding that finalization of issues remained pending, all Parties agreed that they had a good grasp of the core issues requiring adjudication which include policy planning, development review planning, urban design, parks planning, transportation including traffic and access, site servicing, environmental concerns, and rail safety. To address these various concerns, the Parties anticipated requiring a total of approximately 17-20 witnesses as follows: up to 6 witnesses for the Appellants, between 8 and 9 witnesses for the Town, between 2 and 3 witnesses for CN Rail, and up to 2 witnesses for SCA. Accordingly, the Parties agreed that a length of between three and four weeks was an accurate estimate of the time required for the Merit Hearing.

18The Tribunal was satisfied that the PO could be finalized and filed in due course without the assistance of the Tribunal and without jeopardizing the accuracy of the number of Hearing dates anticipated to be required. Accordingly, the Tribunal so directed that the finalized PO, inclusive of finalized IL, be filed by no later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday, June 30, 2026.

19The Tribunal further reminded the Parties that pursuant to Rule 8.3 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure, the issues of the Non-Appellant Parties granted status to the OPA 57 Appeals, being CN Rail and the SCA, are restricted in their participation by way of sheltering under only those issues raised by an appellant party, and may only participate fully in that proceeding to the extent that those issues(s) remain in dispute.

20Accordingly, the Tribunal directs that the finalized IL clarify those issues under which CN Rail and the SCA will be sheltering in respect of the OPA 57 Appeals.

MERIT HEARING DETAILS

21Having reviewed the possible number of witnesses and scope of issues, the Tribunal ordered and set a 19-day Merit Hearing for the OPA 57 Appeal and Amendment Appeals together, by video, commencing at 10 a.m. on Monday, May 10, 2027.

22The Tribunal will not be sitting on Monday, May 24, 2027, on account of the statutory holiday.

23Parties and/or Participants and/or Observers are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077

Access code: 927-921-077

24Parties and/or Participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

25Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9391 or (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 927-921-077.

26Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal's Case Coordinator.

27As of March 30, 2026, all hearing events are governed by the Tribunal's Artificial Intelligence Practice Direction. This Practice Direction requires a party, participant, or witness to include a declaration within each submitted document if generative AI was used to create or generate content.

ORDER

28THIS TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT Party status is granted to the Canadian National Railway Company in the appeals bearing Tribunal Case Nos: OLT-24-001155, OLT-26-000163 and OLT-26-000164.

29AND THIS TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT Party status is granted to Stewarttown Community Association in the appeals bearing Tribunal Case Nos: OLT-26-000163 and OLT-26-000164.

30AND THIS TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT Participant status is granted to Peter McKenna in the appeals bearing Tribunal Case Nos: OLT-24-001155, OLT-26-000163 and OLT-26-000164.

31AND THIS TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Parties shall file the finalized Procedural Order, inclusive of Issues List, by no later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday, June 30, 2026, in accordance with paragraphs [18] to [20] of this Decision.

32AND THIS TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Merit Hearing for the matters bearing Tribunal Case Nos: OLT-24-001155, OLT-26-000163 and OLT-26-000164, shall be heard together.

33AND THIS TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Merit Hearing for the matters bearing Tribunal Case Nos: OLT-24-001155, OLT-26-000163 and OLT-26-000164, are scheduled to proceed together commencing Monday, May 10, 2027, in accordance with paragraphs [21] to [27] of this Decision. There will be no further notice and this Member is not seized, but may be available for case management, should the Tribunal's calendar permit.

"N. Eisazadeh"

N. Eisazadeh 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.