Ontario Land Tribunal Rules on King Township Zoning By-law

In a landmark decision, Pompilio v. King (Township), the Ontario Land Tribunal has ruled in a rehearing that the Township of King did not have the legal authority under the Planning Act to pass Zoning By-law No. 2023-012 ("By-law 12"). The by-law, which sought to regulate development in the Schomberg and King City Urban Areas—including lands within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Area—was challenged by Angelo Pompilio, represented by lead counsel Steven Ferri of Loopstra Nixon and Jenna Morley, formerly with Loopstra Nixon.

The Tribunal found that By-law 12 introduced a “Conformity Review” process and requirements that are not authorized by the Planning Act, and that the by-law amounted to conditional zoning, which is not permitted in Ontario unless specifically prescribed by regulation. The OLT emphasized that municipalities must operate strictly within the authority granted by provincial legislation, and that procedural fairness—including the clear statutory rights and appeal mechanisms set out in the Planning Act—must be maintained for all parties.

Key Points:

• The decision clarifies that municipalities cannot impose additional, non-statutory requirements as a precondition for development approvals.
  

• The Tribunal found that the Township’s attempt to apply a process akin to site plan control through a zoning by-law amendment, in circumstances where site plan control is not permitted pursuant to the Planning Act,  was not permitted, especially after Bill 23 removed this authority.
  

• The ruling underscores the importance of legal compliance and procedural fairness in municipal governance and land use planning.
  

Lead counsel Steven Ferri emphasized the real-world impact of the decision as, "This is the right decision. The Tribunal’s ruling reinforces that the Township did a wonderful job in passing an underlying zoning by-law which already provides appropriate regulation of the use of land without the impugned provisions that would force residents through an extra, unauthorized layer of approvals that is unnecessary and costly to both residents and taxpayers. The amendment would have forced residents to pay thousands of dollars for studies to do something as simple as erecting a shed in their backyard and, if the Township wasn't satisfied with those studies, there would be no recourse or appeal available. The decision is a clear affirmation of the importance of respecting the statutory framework set by the province."

This decision reinforces the principle that municipal actions must be grounded in clear statutory authority and that all parties are entitled to fair, transparent, and legally compliant processes.