OLT 2026

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the objector status of two individuals who failed to appear at two case management conferences and did not respond to communications.

The Ontario Land Tribunal granted the motion, finding the objection to be frivolous and not in good faith due to the continued absence.

As they were the last remaining objectors, the Tribunal referred the aggregate license application back to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and vacated the scheduled hearing dates.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated May 4, 2026.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Tribunal corrected the definition of the acronym 'LTSSC' from 'Lake Toe of Slope Stability Crest' to 'Long Term Stable Slope Crest'.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal against the Town of Milton's passing of a Zoning By-law to permit a transportation terminal.

The parties disagreed on whether certain issues, specifically those involving a temporary use by-law, were properly before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal scheduled a Motion for Determination to resolve the dispute over the Issues List.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals by PowerBank Corporation against the Township of Armour's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a battery energy storage facility.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a citizens' group and the property owner.

Noting that the parties were in productive discussions to narrow the issues, the Tribunal scheduled a one-day merit hearing and waived the requirement for a formal procedural order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the Township of Tiny's Zoning By-law No. 25-039 and Official Plan Amendment No. 5, which introduce a 'Shoreline Development Area'.

The Tribunal ordered that the appeals be heard together, granted party status to several entities, confirmed the withdrawal of certain appeals, and approved the Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.

A 19-day merit hearing was scheduled for April 2027, and a further Case Management Conference was scheduled for July 2026.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a non-decision by the Township of Muskoka Lakes on a zoning by-law amendment application.

The applicant seeks to permit 55 residential units on the subject property.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit a final draft Procedural Order and scheduled a three-day video hearing on the merits for September 2026.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and draft Plan of Subdivision.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for November 17, 2026, and a 14-day hearing on the merits for January 2027.

The parties were directed to submit a finalized Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's by-laws designating two adjacent properties under the Ontario Heritage Act.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal ordered the two appeals to be heard together, as they involve the same appellants, adjacent properties, and similar issues.

A one-day merit hearing was scheduled, and a Procedural Order was adopted.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an order amending the procedural timelines in a previously issued Procedural Order, on consent of the parties.

The amendments adjusted the deadlines for the preparation of an Agreed Statement of Facts, the exchange of expert witness statements, and the provision of written responses, leading up to a hearing scheduled for June 8, 2026.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application to permit a 34-storey mixed-use building, an increase from a previously approved 28-storey building.

The applicant also appealed the related site plan application.

The Tribunal adjourned the site plan appeal to allow the parties to finalize conditions.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the requested variances met the four tests under the Planning Act, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and represented good planning.

The minor variance appeal was allowed in part, and the variances were authorized subject to conditions requiring a pedestrian access easement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of an appeal by the applicant regarding the respondent municipality's failure to adopt a requested official plan amendment.

The proposed amendment seeks to redesignate the subject lands to expand the urban boundary.

The procedural order establishes the hearing dates, the issues list, the order of evidence, and the deadlines for the exchange of witness lists, expert reports, and visual evidence.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of appeals regarding a proposed zoning by-law amendment and site plan for a livestock trailer washing facility.

The order sets out the issues list, order of evidence, and procedural dates leading up to a 15-day hearing scheduled to commence in April 2027.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to adopt a requested official plan amendment and its refusal or neglect to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building.

Following a case management conference, the Tribunal issued a procedural order.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered an amendment to the procedural order to extend the applicant's deadline to submit a revised proposal.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan amendment and refusal to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a residential development.

The Ontario Land Tribunal previously allowed the appeals in part and withheld its final Order pending the fulfillment of certain conditions.

Having been advised that the conditions were satisfied, the Tribunal issued its final Order amending the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement for a 13-storey building with enhanced setbacks, environmental protection for the adjacent ravine, and public realm improvements.

Relying on uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal represents good planning, is consistent with provincial policy, and is in the public interest.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of various conditions.

The appellant appealed a municipal by-law designating its property as having cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

At the scheduled settlement hearing, the parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement but required more time to execute signed minutes of settlement.

The parties jointly requested an adjournment.

The Tribunal granted the request and adjourned the matter to a written settlement hearing.

The Appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring them to take preventive measures regarding the off-site discharge of contaminated stormwater from a brownfield property.

The Appellants argued that the Director lacked jurisdiction because there was no evidence of an actual adverse effect or actual impairment of water quality.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Environmental Protection Act and the Ontario Water Resources Act permit preventive measures orders where there is a potential for adverse effects or impairment.

The Tribunal found the site to be highly contaminated, with stormwater exceeding aquatic life guideline values for contaminants like hexavalent chromium by several orders of magnitude, and confirmed the Director's Order in its entirety.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application for a mixed-use development at 3019 Dufferin Street.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal featuring a 33-storey building with 345 residential units.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the City's Official Plan.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including the finalization of the by-law and engineering reports.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's refusal of Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment applications.

The municipality did not attend.

A neighbour requested party status on behalf of himself and others.

The Tribunal adjourned the party status request to a second CMC to allow the neighbour to consider retaining counsel or a professional planner.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a residential development.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to an adjacent developer on consent.

The Tribunal scheduled a 14-day hearing and issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.