Hugh S. Wilkins

The appellants appealed the Niagara Escarpment Commission's conditional approval of a development permit allowing the applicant to demolish a seasonal dwelling and construct a new dwelling and accessory building.

The appellants raised concerns regarding environmental impacts, visual blight, and past infractions by the applicant.

The Ontario Land Tribunal, functioning as the Niagara Escarpment Hearing Office, found that the proposed development conformed with the Niagara Escarpment Plan, 2017, and was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.

The Tribunal concluded that the appellants' concerns were adequately addressed by the permit conditions and dismissed the appeal, confirming the Commission's decision.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Niagara Escarpment Commission's conditional approval of a development permit application.

The application sought to subdivide a property into single-dwelling lots and townhouse blocks.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order, finalized the Issues List, and scheduled a four-day video hearing on the merits.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order issued by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks concerning the deposit and removal of waste at a property.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties presented a consensus Draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a five-day video hearing on the merits.

The appellant appealed the Town of Orangeville's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a mixed-use development on vacant lands designated for employment.

Following case management conferences, the parties reached a settlement and presented revised instruments that maintained the employment designation while adding site-specific permissions for stand-alone residential uses.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendments.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a Certificate of Property Use issued for a property in Guelph.

The parties agreed on most issues for the hearing, and the Tribunal resolved a disagreement over the wording of one issue regarding contaminant migration.

The Tribunal scheduled a 12-day video hearing to commence in December 2023 and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's refusal to permit the construction of a single-family dwelling.

The Tribunal directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to finalize these documents and set a hearing date.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference (CMC) regarding an appeal of an amendment to a Renewable Energy Approval for the Niagara Region Wind Farm.

The Approval Holder failed to serve the Notice of CMC to all assessed property owners within 550 metres of the project location by the required methods at least 15 days prior to the CMC.

Consequently, the Tribunal adjourned the CMC and directed the Approval Holder to properly serve the notice.

Motions to dismiss filed by the Approval Holder and the Director will be heard at the rescheduled CMC.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an order regarding appeals of the Town of Collingwood's By-law No. 2022-007, which prohibited development unless adequate municipal water and wastewater services were available.

The Tribunal ordered that the by-law be deemed to have come into force on February 28, 2022, for the properties at 70 and 510 First Street.

Additionally, the Tribunal ordered that these specific lands be removed from the area covered by Interim Control By-law No. 2021-024.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's appeals of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment without a hearing.

The appellant, a self-represented tenant, had appealed the instruments on grounds relating to human rights, affordable housing, and procedural fairness.

The Tribunal found that the appellant failed to explain how the proposed instruments were inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement or provincial plans, as required by the Planning Act.

Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal did not disclose any apparent land use planning grounds upon which the instruments could be refused, and therefore had no reasonable prospect of success.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference and settlement hearing regarding appeals of the Town of Penetanguishene's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law.

One appellant requested an adjournment, which was granted.

A participant challenged the validity of the second appellant's appeal, but the Tribunal found the appeal valid as the appellant had made written submissions prior to the by-law's passage.

The Tribunal approved a proposed settlement for the second appellant, amending the zoning by-law to permit a 31-unit townhouse development, finding it consistent with provincial policies and good planning.

The remainder of the by-law was deemed in force, save for lands subject to the remaining appeal.

The appellant appealed the City of Markham's passage of a zoning by-law amendment intended to facilitate employment uses on the subject lands.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that included site-specific development standards and the protection of natural heritage features.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposed amendment was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed with the Growth Plan and applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The Agnew Lake Property Group brought a motion to dismiss appeals of a Zoning By-law Amendment passed by the Township of Nairn and Hyman.

The appellants raised concerns regarding road access and the creation of utility lots.

The Tribunal found that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment only made minor corrections to lot areas to align with an approved draft Plan of Subdivision, and did not affect road access or permitted uses.

The Tribunal concluded that the appeals did not disclose any apparent land use planning grounds and had no reasonable prospect of success.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of draft plan of subdivision approval conditions.

The Township of Georgian Bay and the District of Muskoka requested and were granted party status without opposition.

The Tribunal directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a further Case Management Conference to allow time for settlement discussions and potential mediation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Town of Collingwood's Zoning By-law No. 2022-007, which restricts development unless adequate municipal water and wastewater services are available.

The Tribunal granted party status to four entities and participant status to one entity.

A nine-day video hearing was scheduled, and the Tribunal approved the finalized Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring them to assess and remediate a failing septic system at their RV resort.

The Ministry presented evidence of sewage ponding and saturation, arguing that the system posed risks to human health and the environment.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontradicted expert evidence that a professional assessment and interim remedial measures were necessary.

The appeal was dismissed, and the Director's Order was confirmed and amended to include additional required actions to prevent further environmental harm.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 21-storey residential building.

The parties reached a settlement, which was supported by the local residents' association.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and representative of good planning.

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

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding two appeals by ONE Properties Limited Partnership concerning a proposed business park development and wetland relocation in Hamilton.

The Tribunal approved the finalized draft Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties and scheduled a 15-day video hearing to commence in October 2023.

The appellant appealed the refusal of the Quinte Conservation Authority to grant permission for development to construct a dwelling and install a holding tank on a property surrounded by wetlands and Lake Ontario.

The Tribunal found that the proposed development did not comply with Ontario Regulation 319/09, as the appellant failed to demonstrate that there would be no negative impact on the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of lands.

The Tribunal also found that the proposed development was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, and did not have regard for the Conservation Authority's Policy Manual.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to make decisions regarding proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and a draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate residential development and the retention of a heritage dwelling.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal heard uncontested expert planning evidence supporting the proposed instruments.

The Tribunal found the proposed instruments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable official plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part, and the instruments were approved.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a 9-storey mixed-use development and a 4-storey rental replacement building.

The parties reached a settlement, which was supported by uncontested expert planning evidence.

The Tribunal found the proposed amendments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including the approval of a rental housing demolition application.