Yasna Faghani

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 49-storey mixed-use building.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal scheduled a 15-day hearing and directed the parties to submit a final Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal also advised the parties to consider mediation.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a proposed development of stacked townhouses.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and participant status to a local resident.

A participant status request from the Pearson Accountability Alliance was denied as the organization did not attend the hearing and the applicant noted that aircraft noise issues were being addressed with the Greater Toronto Airport Authority.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the procedural order and issues list.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a comprehensive zoning by-law and a refused consent application for five new residential lots in the Township of Tiny.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several neighbouring property owners but denied it to two individuals whose concerns related to a water pump test not conducted on the subject property.

A 10-day merit hearing was scheduled for November 2026, and the parties were directed to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

At a Case Management Conference for appeals regarding the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed high-rise development, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to two condominium corporations representing adjacent residents, and participant status to two nearby residents.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the City of London's refusal of a Zoning By-Law Amendment application to facilitate the development of three 14-storey apartment buildings.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered status requests from three neighbouring property owners.

After clarifying the roles of parties and participants, all three individuals requested and were granted participant status on consent.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing and approved the Procedural Order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of an appeal by the applicant regarding the respondent municipality's failure to adopt a requested official plan amendment.

The proposed amendment seeks to redesignate the subject lands to expand the urban boundary.

The procedural order establishes the hearing dates, the issues list, the order of evidence, and the deadlines for the exchange of witness lists, expert reports, and visual evidence.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated April 1, 2026.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Tribunal amended the expiry date of the minor variance from November 19, 2027, to April 1, 2028.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The applicant appealed the Town of The Blue Mountains' refusal of a minor variance application to permit the construction of a three-storey, three-unit motel.

The requested variances related to planting strip location and parking aisle width.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence that the variances met the criteria under section 45 of the Planning Act and represented good land use planning.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized subject to conditions agreed upon by the parties.

The applicants appealed the Committee of Adjustment's denial of their minor variance application to permit the construction of a detached accessory building containing two additional residential units.

The subject property had a unique configuration where the functional rear yard was technically classified as the front yard under the zoning by-law, necessitating variances for location and setback.

Relying on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, was desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and was minor in nature.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized.

At the first Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding the City's failure to make a decision on a mixed-use development application, the Toronto Wholesale Produce Association and the Ontario Food Terminal Board requested party status.

The Tribunal granted party status to both entities, noting their direct interest in land use compatibility issues due to their proximity to the subject property.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the parties to discuss scoping issues and potential mediation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Fergus South Inc. against the Township of Centre Wellington's failure to make decisions on official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and draft plan of subdivision applications.

The applications propose a mixed-density residential development of up to 323 units.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Upper Grand District School Board, as an elementary school would be required if the applications are approved.

The parties expressed interest in mediation, and the Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for August 5, 2026, directing the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal after the Municipality of Chatham-Kent failed to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 9-storey residential apartment building.

The Tribunal found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Official Plan, and represented good infill intensification.

Based on uncontroverted expert evidence regarding land use planning and traffic impacts, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and approved the zoning by-law amendment.

The applicant appealed the Town of Kingsville's refusal and the County of Essex's failure to make a decision regarding applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to facilitate a land swap.

The proposal sought to exchange the land use designations of two 4.4-hectare parcels, moving future residential development away from natural features and into an agricultural area.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the proposed land swap constitutes a 'development' and creates a 'new settlement area' under the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024.

The applicant failed to provide the required environmental, servicing, and agricultural impact assessments to demonstrate consistency with provincial policies.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Burlington's Official Plan Amendment 2, which establishes the framework for three Major Transit Station Areas.

The Tribunal deferred a party status request from a local business pending the scoping of the appeals.

The parties were directed to continue discussions regarding the contents of the Notice of Appeal and to advise the Tribunal if a motion is required.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled.

The applicant appealed the failure of the Township of Centre Wellington and the County of Wellington to make decisions regarding applications for Official Plan Amendments to permit a settlement area boundary expansion.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal consolidated the two appeals on consent.

The Tribunal also granted participant status to the Upper Grand District School Board and a local resident, while deferring several party status requests to a future Case Management Conference to allow for further discussions among the parties.

The applicants appealed the Township's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment to recognize existing structures and reduce the minimum setback for a sewage treatment system on a shoreline property.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on the uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendment, which establishes a building envelope for a new cottage and specifies the sewage disposal area, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the applicable Official Plans.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law was amended accordingly.

The applicants appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit a dog kennel with reduced setbacks.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to an adjacent property owner who operates an equine training facility, finding his anticipated evidence necessary for adjudication.

Participant status was granted to several neighbours.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and scheduled a six-day merit hearing.

The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendments to permit a 6-storey mixed-use building in Toronto.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement modifying the building's rear angular plane and height.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial and municipal planning policies.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the finalization of the amendment documents.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to facilitate a 45-storey mixed-use building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement which refined the built form and addressed shadow and traffic concerns.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Official Plan, and optimizes density within a Major Transit Station Area.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of technical servicing and engineering conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of St. Catharines Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variance applications to increase the maximum floor area of accessory dwelling units from 80.0 square metres to 87.77 square metres.

The Tribunal found that the requested variances met the four-part test under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the units remained subordinate to the principal dwelling and there was no evidence of unacceptable adverse impacts.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized.