Sylvain R. Rouleau

ClubLink brought a motion for costs against the City of Ottawa and the Kanata Greenspace Protection Coalition (KGPC) following a hearing to finalize an interim order approving a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision.

ClubLink argued the respondents engaged in unreasonable and bad faith conduct by attempting to re-litigate settled issues and advancing prematurity arguments.

The Tribunal found that the City and KGPC's conduct in opposing the final order based on matters already determined was unreasonable and amounted to bad faith.

The Tribunal awarded partial indemnity costs of $15,000 jointly and severally against the City and KGPC.

The applicant appealed the City's refusal of proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and a demolition permit to allow a 5-storey mixed-use development in the Port Dalhousie Heritage Conservation District.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning and heritage evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development represents appropriate intensification, is consistent with provincial and municipal policies, and respects the heritage character of the area.

The appeals were allowed in part and the instruments approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the final form of the Zoning By-law Amendment.

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 Municipality of Middlesex Centre and the County of Middlesex brought a motion for directions to settle several appeals regarding site-specific modifications to Official Plan Amendment 59.

The settlements proposed expanding settlement area boundaries and converting employment lands to residential and commercial uses.

Sifton Properties Limited contested the settlements, arguing that a quantitative land needs assessment was required under the Provincial Policy Statement 2024 prior to approval.

The Tribunal found that the PPS 2024 removed the requirement for a municipal comprehensive review for boundary expansions, allowing for incremental expansions.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the settlements, finding them consistent with the PPS 2024, in conformity with the County Official Plan, and supportive of providing local housing options.

The appellant appealed Condition 19 of a draft plan of subdivision approval, which required undefined upgrades to Old Lakeshore Road.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement to amend the condition.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested land use planning evidence that the revised condition, which limits the scope of road upgrades and aligns them with the Town's Development Charge Background Study, is reasonable, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to local official plans.

The appeal was allowed in part to amend the condition.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the Town of Fort Erie's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law, and the refusal of site-specific applications for a 10-storey residential apartment building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to one individual and denied it to another due to a lack of nexus to the appeals.

A 10-day merit hearing was scheduled, and the Procedural Order was approved.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the Town of Fort Erie's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 56 and Zoning By-Law Amendment No. 144-2021.

The Tribunal also convened the first CMC for related site-specific appeals.

On consent, the Tribunal ordered that the appeals be heard together, with the site-specific appeals proceeding first, and scheduled a further CMC to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant sought a Final Order from the Ontario Land Tribunal to approve a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) and Draft Plan of Subdivision (DPS) for a residential redevelopment, following an earlier Interim Order that approved them in principle.

The respondent municipality and a greenspace coalition opposed the final approval of the ZBA, arguing that unresolved issues regarding City-owned easements and overland flow routes made it premature.

The Tribunal found that it had the jurisdiction to issue a Final Order without the consent of all parties.

It held that the only prerequisites set out in the Interim Order were the receipt of the draft ZBA, DPS, and consolidated conditions, which had been satisfied.

The Tribunal concluded that easements and overland flows were not prerequisites for the Final Order and that it is common practice to approve a ZBA and DPS concurrently.

The Tribunal issued the Final Order approving both instruments.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality for failing to make decisions on applications for a mixed-use redevelopment.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a local resident without objection.

A 15-day merit hearing was scheduled, and the parties were directed to finalize and file a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference to obtain a status update regarding a previous Interim Order that approved a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision in principle.

The appellant sought direction to progress the matter towards a Final Order after the municipality and another party failed to respond to draft conditions.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day hearing event to consider the issuance of a Final Order.

The applicant appealed the Township of Seguin's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit the redevelopment of a cottage and boathouse with increased lot coverage, gross floor area, and dock size.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that reduced the proposed maximums.

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

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law was amended in accordance with the settlement.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Brantford's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment 11.

The Tribunal scheduled future hearing dates and approved a procedural order.

Additionally, the Tribunal heard and approved a settlement between BSC Landco Inc. and the City regarding the property at 555 Greenwich Street.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to rezone a portion of the property from 'Core Natural' to a 'Holding - General Employment' zone, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The appellant appealed the City's denial of an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and a heritage demolition permit for a property in a heritage conservation district.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring property owner on consent.

The Tribunal also granted the parties' joint request to consolidate the three appeals, finding that they involve the same property, proposed development, and common heritage issues.

Future dates for a subsequent Case Management Conference and a merit hearing were scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Brantford's Comprehensive Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment 11.

The Tribunal granted requests from several parties to withdraw their appeals.

Additionally, the Tribunal granted a request by Losani Homes to consolidate its site-specific appeals of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law with its appeals of privately-initiated applications for the same properties, finding it would be an effective and efficient use of resources.

Further Case Management Conference dates were scheduled.

The applicant appealed the Town's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan approval to permit a commercial development including a restaurant with a drive-through service facility.

The applicant also appealed the Town's passage of Heritage Designation By-laws for two of the subject properties.

The Tribunal upheld the heritage designations, finding the properties met the prescribed criteria and there was no compelling reason to overturn them.

On the planning merits, the Tribunal found the proposed development, specifically the drive-through facility, was not good planning.

It required an excessively high noise wall that conflicted with urban design guidelines, presented unacceptable vehicle-pedestrian conflicts, necessitated the removal of all mature vegetation without adequate space for replanting, and was incompatible with the rural small-town character of Caledon East.

The appeals were dismissed and the applications refused.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit the construction of an oversized detached garage on a waterfront property.

The parties reached a settlement to rezone the property to permit the garage with a larger footprint than the principal dwelling.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to the applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law was amended.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipality for failing to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment Application.

The application seeks to facilitate the development of 19 new residential units.

The Tribunal directed the parties to provide a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a five-day video hearing for October 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Township of Seguin's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit the redevelopment of a cottage and boathouse.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Lake Joseph North Association on consent.

The parties expressed openness to mediation, and the Tribunal approved a draft Procedural Order, scheduling a three-day video hearing for September 2025.

The City of Brantford brought a motion to scope appeals of its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law (CZBL) and to bring the unappealed portions of the CZBL into full force and effect on a city-wide basis.

The appellant parties consented to scoping their appeals to their specific sites or areas.

Relying on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found that granting the motion represented good planning as it would streamline the development process.

The Tribunal granted the motion pursuant to s. 34(31) of the Planning Act, bringing the CZBL into force save and except for the specific properties under appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated February 4, 2025.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the decision was amended to correct the spelling of counsel Diana Doracin's name in the appearances list.

In all other respects, the original decision and order remain unchanged.