UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. et. al. v. Lincoln (Town), 2026 CanLII 58380

ISSUE DATE: June 8, 2026

CASE NO.: OLT-25-000754

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. and UrbanLink Developments (5205 King) Ltd.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit the development of two mixed-use residential buildings with commercial space

Reference Number: PLOPA-2025-0001

Property Address: 5205 King Street

Municipality/UT: Town of Lincoln

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000754

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000754

OLT Case Name: UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. et. al. v. Lincoln (Town)

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

Applicant and Appellant: UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. and UrbanLink Developments (5205 King) Ltd.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision

Description: To permit the development of two mixed-use residential buildings with commercial space

Reference Number: PLZBA-2025-0001

Property Address: 5205 King Street

Municipality/UT: Town of Lincoln

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000753

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000754

BEFORE:

Monday, the 8th

day of June, 2026

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that, further to the Decision issued on May 19, 2026, 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 Monday, October 5, 2026. The Tribunal has set aside 9 days for the hearing.

“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.

PROCEDURAL ORDER

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 run from October 5, 2026 to October 16, 2026, but will not sit on October 12, 2026.
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 9 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. The procedural order deadlines are summarized in Attachment 1.
The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 2.
The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.
The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 4 to this Order. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.
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

A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before Tuesday, June 9, 2026, and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday June 26, 2026 and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Monday July 7, 2026.
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 13 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.
Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in paragraph 13 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in paragraph 13 below.
On or before Friday August 7, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
On or before Friday August 7, 2026, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.
On or before Monday August 31, 2026, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On or before Friday September 18, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.
On or before Friday September 4, 2026, the parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT’s Case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Friday September 25, 2026.
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.
The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Monday September 28, 2026 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.
All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy to the Tribunal, if requested. 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: BITA RAJAEE

Name of Member:

Date:

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

ATTACHMENT 1

SUMMARY OF KEY DATES

Date	Hearing event
Tuesday June 9, 2026	Exchange of List of Witnesses
Friday June 26, 2026	Expert Witness Meeting
Monday July 7, 2026	Filing of Statement (s) of Agreed Facts and Issues
Friday August 7, 2026	Exchange of Witness Statements
Friday August 7, 2026	Delivery of Participant Statements
Monday August 31, 2026	Confirmation to Tribunal if all reserved hearing dates are still required
Friday September 18, 2026	Exchange of Visual Evidence
Friday September 4, 2026	Exchange of Reply Witness Statements
Friday September 25, 2026	Filing of Joint Document Book
Monday September 28, 2026	Filing of Hearing Plan
October 5, 2026	Hearing Commences

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS

Parties:

UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. and UrbanLink Developments (5205 King) Ltd.

WeirFoulds LLP 4100-66 Wellington Street West Toronto, ON M5K 1B7 Denise Baker Email: dbaker@weirfoulds.com Tel: 416-947-5090

Town of Lincoln

Aird & Berlis LLP Brookfield Place 1800-181 Bay Street Toronto, ON M5J 2T9 Tom Halinski Email: thalinski@airdberlis.com Tel: 416-865-7767

Beamsville Bench Winery Association

McMillan LLP 4400-181 Bay Street Toronto, ON M5J 2T3 Marc Kemerer Email: marc.kemerer@mcmillan.ca 416-865-7222

Participants:

Ryan Conlin Email: rconlin@stringerllp.com Tel: 416-931-9179
Scott Hatch Email: sm.hatch@hotmail.com Tel: 905-988-3451
Matthew Barkovich Email: matt-bark@hotmail.com Tel: 905-541-0893

ATTACHMENT 3

ISSUES LIST

The inclusion of any issue on the Issues List is without prejudice to the position of UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. and UrbanLink Developments (5205 King) Ltd. that an issue or issues are not relevant to determine the issue before the Tribunal, and the parties may make submissions to the Tribunal on the relevance of an issue during the course of the hearing.

Town of Lincoln Issues

Are the applications consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) including policies 2.1.6, 2.2.1, 2.3, 2.3.1.1, 2.3.1.2, 2.3.1.3, 2.3.1.4, 2.3.1.5, 2.4.1 and 2.8.1.1?
Do the applications conform to or have appropriate regard for the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area policies of the Greenbelt Plan?
Do the applications conform with the Niagara Region Official Plan including policies 2.2.1.1 and 2.2.2?
Do the applications appropriately protect and avoid impact on the Beamsville Bench as well as Escarpment Rural Lands of the Niagara Escarpment Plan?
Do the applications conform with the Town of Lincoln Official Plan including policies 1.3.2.2, 3.1.2, 3.1.4, 3.1.5, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.4.4, 8.6.2 and 8.6.3.5?
Do the proposed building heights and densities conform with the Town’s Official Plan (2016) with respect to compatibility with surrounding neighbourhoods (1.3.2.2.b, 1.3.2.2f)?
Is the proposed density of the two mixed-use buildings appropriate for lands that are outside of the Town’s strategic growth areas and high density policy areas as identified in the Town’s Official Plan (2016) (1.3.2.2.g, 3.1.2.b, 3.1.2.d, 3.1.4.a, 3.1.4.b)?
Do the applications provide an appropriate amount of commercial space on lands that are zoned for commercial uses?
Are the proposed scale and massing appropriate from an urban design perspective?
Do the applications have appropriate regard for the established heritage character of King Street?
Do the applications represent appropriate compatibility with, transition to, and integration with the adjacent low-density residential neighbourhoods and agricultural lands?
Would the proposal result in unacceptable shadow impacts?
Is the proposed landscape strip between the proposed mixed-use buildings and the residential uses to the north wide enough to permit a sufficient buffer to appropriately mitigate impacts including vehicle headlight and noise?
Will the proposed increase in permitted rooftop mechanical penthouse areas contribute to the building height concerns with respect to compatibility with adjacent land uses?
Are the revisions to the GC zone in the Town’s Zoning By-law, as proposed by the applications, appropriate?
Is there sufficient capacity within the sanitary sewer network to accommodate the applications?

Beamsville Bench Winery Association Issues

Are the applications consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, including policies:.2.1.6 a), 2.2.1c), 2.4.1, 2.5.1a) f) and h), and 4.3.1?
Do the Applications conform to or have appropriate regard for policies 1.2.2 and 3.1.2.5 and 3.1.2.6. of the Greenbelt Plan?
Do the applications have appropriate regard for the provincial interest set out in subsections 29b), (h), (l) and (p) of the Planning Act?
Should the applications have been subject to a visual and an agricultural Impact assessment?
Do the Applications conform to the Niagara Regional Official Plan, including policies 2.2.2 and 4.1?
Do the applications conform to the Town of Lincoln Official Plan, including policies 1.3.2.2, 1.3.4.2, 1.3.5.2, 1.3.7.2 i) 1.4.3, , 1.6.5, 1.6.7, Part 2, - 3.1.1, 3.1.2 b) c) d) e), 3.1.4 b) c ) d) and iii) g) i) m) iv) and v),3.1.5.2,3.1.5.3,3.1.13,3.1.15,4.8, 4.12,and 5.1.4?
Will the proposed mass, height and location of the subject development have negative impacts on the adjacent speciality crop areas of the Niagara Escarpment and the Greenbelt lands by blocking air flow?
Will the proposed mass, height and location negatively impact the Wine Route and agritourism in the area both of which are part of an economically significant Agricultural System and key components of the Town of Lincoln Strategic Plan?
Do the applications represent good planning and should they be approved?
If the applications are approved, in whole or in part, what conditions should be placed on any such approval?

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. and UrbanLink Developments (5205 King) Ltd.
The Town of Lincoln
Beamsville Bench Winery Association
UrbanLink Developments (Beamsville) Ltd. and UrbanLink Developments (5205 King) Ltd. in Reply (if any)