D. Arnold

The appellant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal to grant minor variances to permit a two-storey garden suite.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement involving revised variances for height, separation distance, and lot coverage.

Based on uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised variances satisfied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed in part and the revised variances were authorized.

The expropriating authority sought to expropriate temporary and permanent easements over the owners' properties to facilitate a road widening and bus rapid transit project.

The owners requested a Hearing of Necessity under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal found that the proposed permanent easement for a hydro pole and the temporary easements for construction access and grading were fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to achieve the expropriating authority's objectives.

The Tribunal recommended that the temporary easements include a fixed expiry date and specific details regarding permitted uses to provide certainty to the owners.

The Tribunal also recommended that the expropriating authority pay $200 in costs to each of the participating owners.

The appellant appealed the municipality's failure to approve a site plan and its decision regarding conditions of a heritage permit for a proposed mixed-use development.

At the first Case Management Conference, a resident sought participant status to raise concerns about the building's mass and height.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding those issues were already resolved in a prior settlement and Tribunal decision.

The Tribunal ordered the appeals to be heard together and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to facilitate ongoing settlement discussions.

The appellant appealed the conditions imposed by the City of Kitchener on a heritage permit allowing the demolition of a shed, two additions, and a belfry on a designated heritage property.

The City requested the Tribunal impose only one condition: that the owner enter into a heritage easement agreement to construct a replica belfry on the original 1864 schoolhouse.

The Tribunal found that the belfry was a heritage attribute and its loss required mitigation.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, granting consent to demolish the structures subject to the condition that the parties enter into a heritage easement agreement for the replica belfry, which must be released from title upon completion.

The property owners requested a Hearing of Necessity under the Expropriations Act regarding Metrolinx's application to expropriate a temporary easement over a portion of their driveway.

The easement was required to regrade and repave the driveway to tie into a newly constructed sidewalk for the Hazel McCallion LRT project.

The owners argued the expropriation was unnecessary and overly broad.

The Tribunal found that the regrading was required to achieve proper stormwater drainage and access, which could not be accomplished solely through work on the public right-of-way.

The Tribunal concluded the proposed expropriation was fair, sound, and reasonably necessary, but recommended including a fixed two-year expiry date to provide certainty to the owners.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a fifth Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the respondent municipality's failure to approve a site plan for a commercial development within the statutory timeframe.

The parties reported ongoing expert consultations and requested further scheduling.

The Tribunal scheduled a sixth Case Management Conference for March 6, 2026, and a four-day hearing on the merits commencing May 12, 2026.

The appellants appealed a municipal by-law designating their farm property as being of cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

At a settlement hearing, uncontroverted expert heritage planning evidence was presented indicating that only the historic stone cottage on the property met the criteria for designation, while the other structures did not.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and ordered the by-law amended to apply solely to the cottage.

The appellant appealed the City of Richmond Hill's by-law designating a property as being of cultural heritage value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The parties reached a settlement and presented proposed amendments to the by-law at a settlement hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert heritage planning evidence, the Tribunal found the property met the prescribed criteria for designation and that the proposed amendments were appropriate.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to amend the by-law in accordance with the settlement.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the appellant against the municipality's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed mixed-use development.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing on the merits and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

A fourth Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by the applicant against the respondent's failure to approve site plans for a commercial development within the statutory timeframe.

The Tribunal removed the applicant's former counsel from the record on consent.

The Tribunal issued procedural directions, including deadlines for the respondent to comment on technical studies and for the parties to submit a draft Issues List, and scheduled a fifth Case Management Conference.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by Parklane Home Builders Limited against the Town of Fort Erie's by-law designating a property as having cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a three-day video hearing on the merits for March 2026 and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

The Tribunal also encouraged the parties to consider mediation to narrow or resolve the issues.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation following the expropriation of portions of a property by the City of Windsor.

The Tribunal scheduled a Tribunal-facilitated mediation session and a three-day video hearing.

A Procedural Order was approved, setting out the issues list and deadlines for the exchange of evidence and expert reports.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's By-law 1368-2024, which designated the West Queen West Heritage Conservation District.

The Tribunal granted participant status to three community organizations on consent.

The Tribunal also scheduled a nine-day video hearing for February 2026 and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant concerning the municipality's failure to approve site plans for a proposed commercial development within the statutory timeframe.

The Tribunal found it premature to schedule a hearing on the merits as expert reports were still being exchanged and a parking issue remained under discussion.

The matter was adjourned to a fourth Case Management Conference to identify remaining issues or consider a settlement.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a City of Ottawa by-law designating a property as having cultural heritage value.

The parties disputed the inclusion of certain issues in the Issues List for the upcoming hearing.

The Tribunal determined that the appellant's proposed issues relating to future development and official plan conformity were outside the scope of the Ontario Heritage Act and excluded them from the Issues List.

A Procedural Order was approved and a two-day video hearing was scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a City of Richmond Hill by-law designating a property as having cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The parties reported that productive settlement discussions were underway.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference to either consider a proposed settlement or set hearing dates and finalize a Procedural Order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a City of Toronto by-law designating the Kensington Market Heritage Conservation District.

The Tribunal granted a request to substitute HSRE-Parallax 1, LP as an appellant in place of BRL Realty Limited due to a transfer of land ownership.

A five-day video hearing was scheduled for June 2026, and a Procedural Order was approved to govern the proceedings.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a by-law designating a property as having cultural heritage value.

The appellant's representative requested time to obtain instructions, as the appellant was out of the country.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for October 2025 to assess next steps, including the potential finalization of a procedural order and scheduling of a merits hearing.

The appellants appealed the municipality's by-laws designating their properties as having cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Tribunal heard expert heritage planning evidence from the municipality demonstrating that the properties were representative examples of early twentieth-century residential styles and maintained the historic residential character of the streetscape.

The Tribunal found that the properties met the prescribed criteria for designation and dismissed the appeals, leaving the designating by-laws in full force and effect.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Worldwide Properties (Alliston) Inc. concerning the Town of New Tecumseth's failure to approve site plans for a proposed commercial development within the statutory timeframe.

The parties requested an adjournment to allow the appellant to submit outstanding functional servicing, stormwater management, and erosion control documents, and for the Town to review them.

The Tribunal directed the appellant to use reasonable best efforts to submit the documents by June 20, 2025, and scheduled a third Case Management Conference for September 17, 2025.