Blair S. Taylor

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Hamilton's Development Charges By-laws by West End Home Builders' Association and 2362302 Ontario Inc. The parties reported progress in off-line settlement discussions and requested additional time to exchange information and continue negotiations.

The Tribunal scheduled a further one-day Case Management Conference for June 28, 2022, and directed the parties to provide either settlement documentation or a revised draft Procedural Order and scoped Issues List prior to the next hearing.

The applicant appealed the Town of Whitby's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan application for an 8-storey mixed-use building.

Through Tribunal-led mediation, the parties reached a settlement for a reduced 3-6 storey building with increased setbacks and stepbacks.

Relying on the uncontroverted affidavit evidence of both parties' land use planners, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and local official plans, and represented good land use planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the draft instruments in principle, withholding its final order pending finalization of the documents.

Beachside Development Inc. sought costs against Manning Developments Inc. following the dismissal of Manning's appeal of a zoning by-law amendment.

The Tribunal found that Manning's appeal lacked any land use planning grounds and was filed to delay Beachside's development and advance Manning's own servicing dispute with the Municipality.

Concluding that Manning's conduct was patently unreasonable and vexatious, the Tribunal awarded costs to Beachside on a partial indemnity scale in the amount of $12,500.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's appeal of Official Plan Amendment 13 without a hearing.

The appellant's grounds of appeal primarily focused on a lapsed 2016 minor variance and apprehensions about noise, pollution, and traffic, without providing any supporting expert evidence.

The Tribunal found that the notice of appeal did not disclose any apparent land use planning grounds upon which the appeal could be granted and had no reasonable prospect of success.

The motion was allowed and the appeal was dismissed.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding a land compensation claim arising from an expropriation by the Ministry of Transportation.

The claimants had made a settlement offer in February 2021, to which the Ministry had not yet responded.

The Ministry indicated its response would be issued imminently.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference to allow time for the Ministry's response and to consider potential Tribunal-led mediation.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's approval of site-specific Zoning By-law Amendments permitting a 13-storey residential building.

Following successful Tribunal-led mediation, the parties reached a settlement involving revised building setbacks and balcony locations.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the revised Zoning By-law Amendment based on uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposal represented appropriate residential intensification.

The Town of Grimsby brought a motion for discovery seeking extensive financial and development documentation from the applicant, Rosebay Construction Inc., in a dispute over the valuation of land for a cash-in-lieu of parkland payment.

The Town sought the documents to conduct a new appraisal using a Residual Land Value methodology, having previously relied on a Direct Comparison Approach.

The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that ordering production at this late stage would be prejudicial to the applicant, cause significant delay, and fail to offer a fair, just, and expeditious resolution of the proceeding.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the Ontario Greenhouse Vegetable Growers against the Municipality of Leamington's Zoning By-law No. 17-21, which relates to minimum standards for boarding houses.

The Appellant advised of a pending court challenge to the related Official Plan Amendment No. 8 and suggested Tribunal-led mediation.

The Municipality requested scheduling a 10-day hearing.

The Tribunal declined to schedule a hearing without a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, deeming it premature, and instead scheduled a second Case Management Conference.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a mixed-use development with two tall buildings at 10-30 Dawes Road.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal reviewed the agreed-upon conditions of approval and the land use planning affidavit filed by the applicant.

The Tribunal found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and representative of good land use planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the zoning by-law amendments in principle, withholding its final order until the conditions are satisfied.

At a Case Management Conference for appeals regarding the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to several entities on consent and reserved its decision on two newly formed federal corporations pending written submissions.

The Tribunal declined to set a hearing date, noting the potential for alternative dispute resolution, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.

The appellant appealed the Town's approval of a Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the redevelopment of a former school site into a seniors' residence, an Early ON Family Centre, and five eightplexes.

The appellant argued the public process was flawed due to COVID-19 restrictions and that the existing play area should be preserved as a municipal park.

The Tribunal found the public process complied with statutory requirements and emergency orders.

The Tribunal also determined the play area was not a municipal park and the development represented good land use planning by providing affordable and seniors' housing.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis to require a revised conceptual site plan and draft by-law.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The respondent requested the CMC because the claimant failed to comply with the procedural order regarding document production.

The Tribunal found that the matter was not ready to proceed to a hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal cancelled the scheduled March 2022 hearing, set a new hearing date for September 2022, and scheduled a further CMC for March 2022 to review the revised procedural order.

The respondent's request for costs was reserved to the member hearing the matter on its merits.

The Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 450.

The Tribunal consolidated the applicant's site-specific appeal of OPA 450 with its appeals of its Zoning By-law Amendments and Site Plans.

A 9-day hearing was scheduled for the consolidated appeals, and directions were given for a revised Procedural Order.

The other applicant's appeal was separated to proceed on a stand-alone basis.

The applicant sought costs against the Township of Norwich following a successful appeal of the Township's refusal to amend a zoning by-law to permit a new veal barn.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found that while the Township did not act frivolously or vexatiously, its conduct was unreasonable because it completely abandoned its publicly declared rationale for refusing the application during the hearing.

The Tribunal awarded costs to the applicant in the amount of $6,000 on a partial indemnity basis.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Mississauga's Official Plan Amendment No. 115.

The City brought a motion on consent for partial approval of the unappealed portions of the OPA.

The Tribunal granted the motion, bringing the unappealed portions into force.

The Tribunal deferred consideration of the draft Procedural Order and hearing phasing requests to a further Case Management Conference, as the parties did not have consensus on the conceptual approach to the first phase of the hearing.

The Tribunal previously granted approval to a Phase One draft plan of subdivision.

The parties subsequently submitted a request on consent to approve certain revisions to the draft plan.

The Tribunal ordered that draft plan approval shall apply to the revised draft plan.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 15-storey development, the applicant indicated an intent to pursue a 19-storey development.

The Tribunal declined to finalize the draft Procedural Order and Issues List, directing the applicant to make a formal resubmission of the revised plans to the municipality.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled to consider the revised proposal and any jurisdictional motions.

The respondent requested an urgent Case Management Conference after the claimant failed to comply with the Tribunal's Procedural Order regarding the exchange of expert reports and witness statements.

The claimant indicated a need for further document production to update its business losses due to ongoing construction, contrary to its earlier position that losses had crystallized.

The Tribunal ordered the claimant to produce the additional documents by a specified date, allowed the respondent time to review them, and deferred further scheduling and costs to the next Case Management Conference.

The Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application.

The parties advised they were confident of a settlement.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day settlement hearing, amended dates in the Procedural Order, and released 10 days from the previously scheduled 15-day hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference to consider a proposed settlement of appeals by McMaster University against the City of Hamilton's Development Charges By-laws.

The parties agreed to amend the 2019 DC By-law to implement a statutory exemption for university development under the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities Act.

Finding the proposed amendment fair and reasonable, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendment.