D. Arnold

The appellant appealed the Town's failure to approve site plans for a proposed commercial development within the statutory timeframe.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties requested an adjournment because the appellant had recently submitted required reports that the Town needed time to review.

The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to either identify remaining issues for a hearing or convert to a settlement hearing.

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

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement and presented a proposed amending by-law to the Tribunal.

Based on uncontroverted expert heritage planning evidence, the Tribunal found the property met the prescribed criteria for designation, specifically for its Gothic Revival design and contextual value.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to amend the by-law's description of heritage attributes in accordance with the settlement.

The appellant appealed a City of Toronto by-law designating the Cabbagetown Southwest Heritage Conservation District.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties advised they had reached a settlement to change the appellant's property from 'contributing' to 'non-contributing' status.

A local property owner requested Party status to oppose the settlement, but the Tribunal denied the request, granting him Participant status instead.

A written settlement hearing was scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on official plan, zoning, site plan, and heritage applications for a 28-storey mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association Inc. and deferred a party status request from the Church-Wellesley Village BIA to a second Case Management Conference.

The Tribunal also deferred the issue of consolidating the planning and heritage appeals.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an application by the statutory authority to determine compensation payable to the registered owner for the expropriation of a property in Toronto.

The Tribunal approved the parties' revised draft Procedural Order, which included provisions for Tribunal-facilitated mediation, and scheduled a five-day video hearing to commence in November 2025.

The Town of Whitby sought approval to expropriate the entirety of the owner's property to construct a mid-block arterial roadway.

The owner requested a Hearing of Necessity, arguing that only a portion of the property was required and the remnant lands could be developed as employment lands.

The Tribunal found that while the owner's evidence regarding the potential development of remnant lands was compelling, the expropriation of the entire property was fair, sound, and reasonably necessary.

The full taking was justified because the detailed design and conditions for provincial and federal approvals might require additional lands, and the Town needed ownership to apply for those approvals.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by 65 Agnes Inc. against the City of Mississauga's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 29-storey apartment building.

The parties requested Tribunal-facilitated mediation.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List, scheduling a nine-day hearing on the merits to commence in June 2024.

Following a public settlement hearing and an interim decision approving in principle amendments to the City of Mississauga Official Plan and Zoning By-law to facilitate the redevelopment of 30 Eglinton Avenue West, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued its final order.

The Tribunal received the final form of the planning instruments to the satisfaction of the City's Solicitor and Chief Planner, and ordered the official plan and zoning by-law amended accordingly.

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 appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions regarding applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Control Approval for a proposed 49-storey mixed-use building.

At the second Case Management Conference, the Tribunal scheduled a 19-day video hearing to commence in October 2024.

The Tribunal also approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals from the municipality's failure to make decisions on Official Plan, Zoning By-law, and Site Plan applications for a multi-phased development.

The parties advised that active settlement discussions were underway, including regarding a related heritage appeal.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference to provide a status update on settlement discussions and set a 10-day hearing on the merits in the event a settlement is not reached.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit three mixed-use high-rise buildings.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with applicable growth plans and official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the amendments in principle on an interim basis pending finalization of the instruments.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications within the statutory timelines.

The applications seek to permit a 29-storey apartment building.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference and a nine-day hearing on the merits, and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation by 1255870 Ontario Limited against Metrolinx for the expropriation of lands in Toronto.

The parties indicated they participated in a mediation assessment and anticipate mediation in early 2024.

The Tribunal directed the parties to provide updates on the mediation outcome and provided case management directives.

The expropriating authority applied to expropriate a temporary limited easement interest over a portion of the owner's property to regrade a driveway in connection with a light rail transit project.

The owner requested a hearing under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal found that the proposed taking was necessary to complete the regrading but lacked appropriate access.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposed taking would be fair, sound, and reasonably necessary only if modified to include adjacent access lands.

The appellants appealed the City of Greater Sudbury's approval of a zoning by-law amendment with modifications regarding building height and parking standards for a proposed medium-density residential development on a former school site.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised zoning by-law amendment.

Based on uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendment 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 appeal was allowed in part to approve the revised zoning by-law amendment.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference for an appeal under s. 51(34) of the Planning Act concerning the County of Lanark's failure to make a decision on a 9-lot draft plan of subdivision.

The Tribunal approved the parties' draft Procedural Order, noted there were no requests for party or participant status, and scheduled a seven-day video hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for land compensation and disturbance damages by 1255870 Ontario Limited against Metrolinx under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a ten-day video hearing and approved the parties' draft Procedural Order.

A correction notice was subsequently issued to amend the video hearing access link.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for land compensation by 1255870 Ontario Limited against Metrolinx under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a ten-day hearing on the merits for November 2024 and approved the draft Procedural Order submitted by the parties.

A second Case Management Conference was also scheduled to consider updates on mediation and settlement efforts.

The appellant appealed the conditions of draft plan of subdivision and condominium approvals for a residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties advised that they were engaging in settlement discussions and a Tribunal-facilitated mediation assessment to resolve remaining technical issues.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference to consider the status of the settlement discussions and potentially convert it to a settlement hearing.