Peter Pickfield

The City of Guelph brought a motion for directions seeking partial approval of its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law, save and except for certain sections under appeal.

The City also sought to scope the appeals of Industrial Equities Guelph Corporation and Paisley & Whitelaw Inc. to site-specific or area-specific appeals.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the notices of appeal for both respondents only provided reasons related to specific properties and did not justify city-wide appeals.

The Tribunal deemed the unappealed portions of the By-law to be in full force and effect and ordered the respondents to scope their appeals accordingly.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make a decision on Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan applications for a 29-storey apartment building.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled an eight-day video hearing on the merits for October 2024.

This was the fourth Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Guelph's Official Plan Amendment No. 79 (Clair-Maltby Secondary Plan).

The parties reported substantial progress in settlement discussions and requested a partial Settlement Hearing.

The Tribunal approved a revised Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a partial Settlement Hearing for January 25, 2024.

The Township of Puslinch brought a motion seeking an indefinite adjournment of the hearing of appeals regarding an official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment to permit a gravel pit expansion.

The Township requested the adjournment until the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry decided whether to refer a related Aggregate Resources Act (ARA) licence application to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that an indefinite adjournment would cause substantial prejudice to the appellants and was not reasonable for the determination of the land use planning issues, which could be adjudicated independently of the ARA licence application.

The Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) brought a motion for party status in an appeal under the Drainage Act regarding a petition for drainage works.

The Township of Zorra had previously declined to proceed with the drainage works because the potential outlet was subject to a court order requiring the petitioner to rehabilitate lands under the Conservation Authorities Act.

The Tribunal dismissed the UTRCA's motion, finding that while its interests might be affected if an engineer's report is eventually produced, its intervention as a party at this preliminary stage of the appeal was premature.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference for an appeal by OBD Developments Inc. against the Township of Georgian Bay's failure to decide on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The applicant sought a temporary use by-law to permit rock crushing on residential lands.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several neighboring property owners on consent.

The Tribunal also scheduled a five-day merit hearing and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Guelph's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and related Official Plan Amendment No. 88.

The Tribunal granted party status to 2793031 Ontario Inc. on consent.

The parties advised that discussions were ongoing to scope the issues and potentially bring parts of the by-law into force.

The Tribunal scheduled a scoping motion and a second Case Management Conference, and directed the submission of a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by St. Mary's Cement Inc. and Rosedale Securities Limited from the failure of the County of Wellington and Township of Puslinch to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a gravel pit expansion.

The County requested that the hearing on the merits be delayed until a related Aggregate Resources Act license application is referred to the Tribunal by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry.

The Tribunal maintained the previously scheduled hearing dates but agreed that the Procedural Order and Issues List cannot be finalized until the license referral occurs, scheduling a further Case Management Conference for October 2023.

Following the dismissal of the applicant's judicial review application, the court issued a supplementary endorsement fixing the respondent's partial indemnity costs.

On consent of the parties, costs were fixed at $30,000, payable by the applicant.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference to facilitate continued case management of outstanding appeals relating to approximately eight hectares of lands identified as 'Deferral Areas'.

The parties proposed scheduling a further CMC in the early fall and setting hearing dates to ensure the appeals move forward without delay.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order and scheduled a further CMC for September 27, 2023, and a nine-day video hearing commencing March 18, 2024.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicants against the Township of Puslinch and the County of Wellington for failing to make decisions on zoning by-law and official plan amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit the expansion of an existing gravel pit.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two parties, reviewed the draft issues list, and scheduled a nine-day merit hearing for March 2024, along with a further Case Management Conference for July 2023 to consider the potential consolidation of a related Aggregate Resources Act license application.

The applicant sought judicial review of a municipal council decision upholding a repair order issued against her for dumping sand on her shoreline property in contravention of a site alteration by-law.

The applicant argued that the alterations were historical, fell under provincial jurisdiction, and that the council breached procedural fairness by not providing written reasons.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Township had concurrent jurisdiction, the decision was reasonable based on the evidence of by-law contravention, and the council's process met the requirements of procedural fairness for an administrative municipal decision.

Mattamy brought a motion to consolidate two competing Official Plan Amendment (OPA) appeals regarding the Southwest Georgetown secondary plan, and to have its site-specific zoning and draft plan appeals heard together with the OPA appeals.

The Town brought a preliminary motion to strike the reply affidavit of Mattamy's planning expert, arguing it contained legal advocacy.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion to strike, finding the affidavit relevant but noting it would separate the planning opinion from the advocacy.

The Tribunal dismissed Mattamy's motion in its entirety, finding that hearing the site-specific appeals together with the OPA appeals would be premature, potentially prejudicial to the approval authorities, and could inappropriately invert the planning hierarchy.

The Tribunal also found no appreciable benefit to formally consolidating the two OPA appeals.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Victoria Park Village Inc. against the City of Guelph's refusal to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment for a proposed high-density residential development.

The Tribunal consolidated the two appeals, approved the agreed-upon Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a 10-day video hearing for August 2023.

The applicant sought approval of revised draft plan of subdivision and draft plan conditions, and the issuance of the Phase 2 Order for a residential development in the Town of Milton.

The Tribunal had previously withheld the Phase 2 Order pending the satisfaction of certain conditions, including the registration of private agreements and a restriction on pre-sales until servicing allocation was secured.

Based on uncontested affidavit evidence from a land use planner confirming that these conditions had been met and that all parties consented to the revisions, the Tribunal approved the revised draft plan and conditions, issued the Phase 2 Order, and extended the lapsing date by three years.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Guelph's Official Plan Amendment No. 79, which introduced the Clair-Maltby Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal granted party status to Timberworx Custom Homes Inc. and provisional party status to Foundation for the Support of International Medical Training Inc. A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues Lists, and an eight-week merit hearing was scheduled to commence in January 2024.

This was the fourth Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Town of Halton Hills' failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment and appeals against the adopted Official Plan Amendment 32.

The Tribunal received a status update on mediation efforts concerning natural heritage issues.

The Tribunal directed revisions to the Issues List proposed by a party, finding some issues were not relevant planning matters.

The Tribunal approved the revised Issues List and issued the Procedural Order to govern the upcoming three-phase merit hearing.

The County of Wellington submitted a Zoning By-law Amendment application, approved by the City of Guelph, to permit the adaptive reuse of an existing building for transitional housing with supports.

The appellant appealed the approval, raising concerns about compatibility with the existing community, access to open space, and the suitability of the building without detailed floorplans.

The Tribunal found that the proposal would not create substantial land use compatibility issues, that access to open space on retained lands would continue, and that detailed interior floorplans were not required at the zoning stage.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part only to amend the by-law to reflect the approved maximum density of 28 bedrooms, and otherwise dismissed the appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Township of Guelph Eramosa's decision to approve a Zoning By-law Amendment for a rural industrial facility.

The Tribunal reviewed and approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 12-day video hearing on the merits for February 2023.

Motions were brought by CastandGrey 5 Corp., CastandGrey 7 Corp., and Hamilton Country Properties Ltd. for party status in the appeals of the Rural Hamilton Official Plan and Urban Hamilton Official Plan.

The City of Hamilton also brought a motion to dismiss the appeals of the Twenty Road West Landowners without a hearing.

The Tribunal granted party status to the moving landowners, finding they had a direct interest in the urban boundary expansion and that their participation would serve the public interest without causing prejudice, provided they sheltered under existing issues.

The Tribunal also granted the City's motion to dismiss the Twenty Road West Landowners' appeals, finding that the landowners had previously agreed to withdraw their appeals in a binding Minutes of Settlement, and their continued pursuit of the appeals was not in good faith.