Hugh S. Wilkins

The appellant appealed the City of Kitchener's failure to make decisions regarding official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications for a proposed 15-storey residential building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal addressed process issues regarding short notice and granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Hal Jaeger, and Aaron Scriver.

Participant status was granted to several individuals.

The Tribunal directed the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a second Case Management Conference for October 5, 2021, to finalize the procedural order and entertain further status requests.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring stormwater management and soil and sediment remediation work at a property in Lincoln, Ontario.

During a status update telephone conference call, the parties informed the Tribunal that the Ministry intended to issue a further Order regarding a Delineation Plan, which the appellants anticipated appealing.

The parties requested that a further Case Management Conference be scheduled to finalize procedural steps for both the present and anticipated appeals.

The Tribunal scheduled the CMC for October 1, 2021.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a property on Queen Street West.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference where it granted participant status to an adjacent landowner on consent.

The Tribunal also approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a five-day video hearing for November 2021.

The Township of Oro-Medonte brought a motion seeking directions in an appeal of a zoning by-law amendment regulating cannabis production facilities.

The Township sought to exclude an issue regarding whether the by-law restricted normal farm practices, arguing the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board had exclusive jurisdiction.

The Township also sought to bifurcate the appeals and consolidate one appellant's appeal with a separate Development Charges Act appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held that it had jurisdiction to consider whether the by-law restricted normal farm practices as part of its planning analysis, though it could not issue a formal declaration of contravention under the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, 1998.

The Tribunal dismissed the requests to bifurcate the appeals and to consolidate the development charges appeal, finding that consolidation of the zoning appeals was more efficient and the development charges appeal involved distinct issues.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a Director's Order under the Environmental Protection Act.

The parties agreed on a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, which the Tribunal approved.

A two-day video hearing was scheduled for October 2021.

The appellant appealed the passage of a site-specific zoning by-law amendment that facilitated the redevelopment of a marina on Lake Rosseau.

The appellant argued the amendment was inconsistent with provincial policies, did not conform to the official plan, and would result in overbuilding, incompatible development, and negative environmental impacts.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the proposed development would improve environmental protection through enhanced wastewater and stormwater management, maintain the character of the area, and represent good land use planning.

The Tribunal accepted the evidence of the municipal and applicant planners over the appellant's planner.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a Director's Order under the Environmental Protection Act, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

Tamlann Investments Inc., a former owner of the subject lands and an orderee, was granted party status over the appellant's objection.

Erectoweld Limited, a neighbouring property owner, was granted participant status on consent.

The Tribunal also approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a seven-day hearing.

The appellant school board appealed a municipal order requiring it to pay clean-up costs for a heating oil spill at a former school site.

The parties reached a settlement agreement that provided for the recovery of previous costs and the sharing of future remediation costs.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found the proposed revocation of the municipal order to be consistent with the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest, approving the settlement and dismissing the proceeding.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Brampton's Official Plan Amendment No. 2006-105 and Orlando Corporation's appeals concerning the City's failure to approve its Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The City indicated its intent to bring a motion to modify the Official Plan Amendment, and Orlando Corporation announced a proposed settlement of its zoning appeal, subject to the City's motion.

The Tribunal set a schedule for the filing of motion and settlement materials and scheduled a telephone conference hearing to consider both matters.

The Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic District School Board appealed a municipal order requiring it to pay clean-up costs for a heating oil spill at a former school site.

The parties reached a settlement agreement providing for the recovery of previous costs and the sharing of future remediation costs.

The Ontario Land Tribunal approved the proposed revocation of the municipal order, finding it consistent with the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest, and dismissed the proceeding.

The appellant appealed the City of Thunder Bay Committee of Adjustment's approval of a consent application to sever a residential property.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that revised the conditions of the consent, specifically regarding the minimum southerly interior side yard setback.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed consent, subject to the revised conditions, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed with the City's Official Plan, and had regard to the criteria in section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was dismissed in part and provisional consent was granted.

The Applicants sought costs after the Director revoked an Environmental Compliance Approval for a hauled sewage site, which led to the dismissal of their applications for leave to appeal.

The Applicants argued the Director acted unreasonably by issuing the Approval and failing to revoke it before the applications were filed.

The Tribunal dismissed the costs request, finding it lacked authority to award costs for conduct occurring prior to the commencement of the proceeding, and that the Director acted reasonably in revoking the Approval after receiving new expert evidence.

The applicants sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue a Permit to Take Water to CRH Canada Group Inc. for aggregate washing at the Teedon Pit.

The Tribunal found that both applicants had standing.

Applying the leave test under section 41 of the Environmental Bill of Rights, the Tribunal concluded there was good reason to believe no reasonable person could have issued the Permit, given the failure to adequately apply the precautionary principle, preventive strategies, and sustainable development principles in light of scientific uncertainty regarding groundwater impacts.

The Tribunal also found the decision could result in significant environmental harm due to the potential for well contamination and flooding.

Leave to appeal was granted.

The appellant appealed specific conditions imposed under an Amended Environmental Compliance Approval relating to an animal by-product processing plant.

At a pre-hearing conference, the Tribunal granted Presenter status to three entities, approved a partial settlement resulting in the withdrawal of part of the appeal, and directed the Director to amend the ECA accordingly.

A further pre-hearing conference was scheduled to allow the parties to pursue settlement discussions on the remaining issues.

The applicants sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval for a hauled sewage disposal facility.

Before the application was decided, the Director revoked the underlying Environmental Compliance Approval.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application for leave to appeal as moot.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring them to decommission an unapproved septic tank at their restaurant and route sewage to holding tanks in compliance with their Environmental Compliance Approval.

The parties reached a settlement wherein the appellants agreed to install an external gravity connection to route wastewater to the holding tanks and disconnect the septic system, subject to monthly engineering reports.

The Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Ontario Water Resources Act, accepted the withdrawal of the appeal, and dismissed the proceeding.

The Municipality of East Ferris issued an order under the Environmental Protection Act requiring the Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic District School Board to pay costs for cleaning up a heating oil spill at a former school site.

The School Board appealed, arguing it was not the legal successor to the 1957 school board that owned the property when the school was built.

The Environmental Review Tribunal found that under the 1968 Separate Schools Act, the 1969 school board took over the functions, responsibilities, and liabilities of the 1957 board, making it the legal successor for the purposes of section 91 of the Environmental Protection Act.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring them to submit a completed application for a permit to take water for a constructed dam.

During a status update telephone conference call, the parties proposed a stay of the Director's Order on consent.

The Tribunal found that the requested stay satisfied the statutory tests under the Ontario Water Resources Act and the Tribunal's Rules of Practice, as it would not result in danger to health, safety, or the environment.

The Tribunal granted the stay pending the outcome of the appeal and directed the parties to mediation.

The appellant appealed a Director's Order requiring it to perform work on its on-site septic system, including ceasing the discharge of raw sewage and retaining a licensed waste hauler.

Following the dismissal of a stay motion, the parties requested Tribunal-assisted mediation at a prehearing conference.

The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a mediation session, with a further prehearing conference to follow if mediation is unsuccessful.

The Environmental Review Tribunal issued a procedural order following a pre-hearing conference regarding two consolidated appeals related to a heating oil spill at a former school site.

The first appeal concerned a municipal order directing the school board to pay cleanup costs, while the second concerned a Director's order issued to both the municipality and the school board.

The Tribunal established a procedural schedule for the first phase of the municipal order appeal and directed the parties to provide an update on their mediation efforts regarding the Director's order.