Hugh S. Wilkins

The Tribunal held Case Management Conferences regarding appeals by the appellants against a Director's Order requiring stormwater management and soil and sediment remediation.

The parties finalized a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a 13-day video hearing to commence on October 11, 2022.

The Orderees appealed an order issued by the Director under the Environmental Protection Act.

The Tribunal initiated a motion to determine its jurisdiction to process the appeal, which was filed on June 25, 2021, well past the 15-day statutory deadline following service of the order on January 28, 2021.

The Orderees argued that an earlier appeal filed on February 7, 2021 was valid and sought to amend it or extend the time for the June appeal.

The Tribunal found it lacked statutory authority to extend the time under s. 141 of the Act because the Orderees had actual notice of the order.

The June 25, 2021 appeal was dismissed for failing to meet statutory requirements, though the Tribunal noted the February 7, 2021 appeals remained separate proceedings to be addressed at a future Case Management Conference.

The appellants requested costs against the City of Oshawa regarding an appeal of an interim control by-law.

The appellants alleged the City acted improperly and in bad faith by passing the by-law to delay a land-use planning study and by failing to repeal it promptly.

The Tribunal dismissed the costs request, finding it lacked jurisdiction to award costs for conduct prior to the filing of the appeal, and that the City's conduct after the appeal was filed was reasonable and timely.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held case management conferences regarding appeals of a Zoning By-law Amendment and an Official Plan Amendment for a property in the City of Guelph.

The parties informed the Tribunal that a proposed settlement between the applicant and the City was not agreed to by the other appellants.

The Tribunal reviewed and approved a draft Procedural Order and Issues List for the upcoming hearing, which was scheduled for April 2023.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Provincial Mining Recorder to delete an entry of a mining claim from the Mining Claims Registry.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties identified the issues for the hearing, including whether the Leslie Street Land Spit is an artificial land form and whether the lands were withdrawn from prospecting.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference on consent to allow the appellant time to prepare his case and retain experts.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's failure to pass a zoning by-law amendment for a proposed 9-storey development, the Tribunal considered requests for Party and Participant status.

The Tribunal granted Party status to the Annex Residents' Corporation and the Casa Loma Residents' Association Inc., finding they had a genuine and direct interest.

Participant status was granted to several local residents and associations.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled for April 2022 to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellants appealed a Stop Order issued by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks regarding the alleged destruction of species at risk habitat.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties advised that field studies were underway and the Stop Order was being complied with.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference for May 2022 to allow the parties to complete the studies and continue settlement discussions.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's failure to pass a zoning by-law amendment, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted party status to an abutting property owner and participant status to two nearby property owners.

The Tribunal also scheduled a further Case Management Conference to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the appellant against an amendment to an Environmental Compliance Approval.

The parties reported progress in settlement discussions and requested a further conference.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference and permitted participants to make written submissions prior to the conclusion of settlement discussions.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipality's failure to pass a zoning by-law amendment for a proposed 29-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted Party status to a local neighbourhood association, finding it had a genuine and direct interest in the proceeding.

The Tribunal also approved the Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a ten-day video hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a development permit approval for a special events tent.

The parties identified issues including noise and land-use compatibility, and reported that settlement discussions were progressing.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference to allow discussions to continue and directed the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision authorizing minor variances for the applicant's property.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appeal.

At the motion hearing, the parties informed the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement and the appellant would discontinue the proceeding.

The Tribunal ordered the motion and the proceeding dismissed.

The appellant appealed a decision of the City of Hamilton Committee of Adjustment granting minor variances to permit a six-storey mixed-use building.

The variances related to density, height, setbacks, gross floor area, landscaping, parking, and loading.

The Tribunal found that the variances met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposed development was compatible with the surrounding area, provided appropriate transition, and supported intensification and transit policies.

The appeal was dismissed and the variances were authorized.

The appellant appealed the municipality's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and draft plan of subdivision to permit a 70-unit townhouse development on a former tannery site.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on the uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed instruments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan, Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, and applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed and the planning instruments were approved.

The appellant appealed the City of Ottawa Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance to permit a front-facing attached garage.

The Tribunal found that the proposed variance met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, as the garage would be set back from the dwelling, secondary in nature, and compatible with the streetscape character.

The appeal was allowed and the variance authorized.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Kitchener's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted participant status to nine individuals.

The Tribunal also scheduled a further Case Management Conference to finalize the procedural order and issues list, and set a 20-day hearing to commence in August 2022.

The applicant sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for a metal recycling facility, raising concerns about noise and air emissions from a metal shredder.

The applicant argued that the decision was unreasonable because an acoustic audit should have been required prior to issuance, the ECA conflicted with the Fire Code, and the facility was not authorized under municipal planning requirements.

The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that the Director's decision was unreasonable.

The Tribunal held that the Director properly considered the applicable regulatory and policy requirements, that requiring an acoustic audit after the ECA's issuance was consistent with Ministry practice, and that the Director was not required to resolve Fire Code or municipal planning issues before issuing the ECA.

The appellant appealed the Township's passage of a by-law dissolving its electoral ward boundaries to create an at-large voting system.

The appellant argued the decision-making process lacked adequate public consultation and that an at-large system would diminish minority representation, particularly for the local Amish community.

The Tribunal found that the municipality's process was fair and reasonable, noting that the Municipal Act does not require specific public notice or consultation for such by-laws.

Applying the Carter factors, the Tribunal concluded that the by-law provides for more effective representation by improving voter parity across the municipality, and dismissed the appeal.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's failure to pass official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a 29-storey residential building, the Tribunal considered requests for Party and Participant status.

The Tribunal granted Party status to several residents groups and condominium corporations, and Participant status to 30 individuals and groups.

The Tribunal also approved the consolidated Issues List and draft Procedural Order, and scheduled a 17-day hearing for October 2022.

The appellant appealed the Town of Oakville's failure to make a decision on a site plan application for a warehousing property.

The parties reached a settlement to permit the continuation of warehousing uses with expanded parking, new access points, and enhanced landscaping, including a noise barrier.

Based on uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed site plan complied with the Planning Act, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans.

The appeal was allowed in part and the site plan was approved subject to conditions.