Alex Ciccone

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

The applications seek to permit a six-storey residential apartment building with commercial uses at grade.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent, setting the hearing dates, procedural steps, and the final Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of London's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment to permit a 17-storey residential development.

The Tribunal granted party and participant status to several individuals and organizations.

A Procedural Order was issued to govern the upcoming eight-day hearing, with directions for the parties to resolve the final order of evidence.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 46-unit townhouse development in Kincardine.

The Tribunal abridged the time for service, granted participant status to a neighbour, and scheduled a further CMC that may be converted to a settlement hearing, as the parties are in the process of executing Minutes of Settlement.

The applicant appealed the refusal of a consent application by the Norfolk County Committee of Adjustment.

The application sought a minor boundary adjustment to add a 1.181-acre parcel from an adjacent property to the subject property to facilitate the construction of an accessory structure.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the application was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Official Plan, and satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed and provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by 2691823 Ontario Inc. against the City of Hamilton's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and refusal to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment.

The proposed development is a six-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to James and Nancy MacLeod and the Niagara Escarpment Commission, and participant status to several individuals and a community group.

A 12-day merits hearing was scheduled for September 2023, and deadlines were set for the submission of issues and a final draft Procedural Order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the proceedings for an appeal regarding a proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for the property at 380-396 Ontario Street in the City of Stratford.

The order sets out the hearing dates, issues list, and deadlines for the exchange of witness statements and other evidence.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to permit an oversized detached accessory structure in the front yard of a property located in the Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Area.

The parties reached a settlement to permit a 140 square metre accessory structure in the front yard with a minimum setback of 102 metres, subject to a site plan agreement to address ecological impacts on a significant woodland.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with provincial policies and local official plans, and allowed the appeal in part to amend the zoning by-law.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Township of Guelph Eramosa's decision to approve a Zoning By-law Amendment for a rural industrial facility.

The Tribunal reviewed and approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 12-day video hearing on the merits for February 2023.

The applicant appealed the County of Brant's failure to make a decision on a rezoning and plan of subdivision application for a 390-unit residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal heard requests for party and participant status from numerous individuals.

The Tribunal reserved its decision on all status requests to allow for further discussions between the parties and consultation with interested individuals, scheduling a second Case Management Conference for December 2022.

Motions were brought by CastandGrey 5 Corp., CastandGrey 7 Corp., and Hamilton Country Properties Ltd. for party status in the appeals of the Rural Hamilton Official Plan and Urban Hamilton Official Plan.

The City of Hamilton also brought a motion to dismiss the appeals of the Twenty Road West Landowners without a hearing.

The Tribunal granted party status to the moving landowners, finding they had a direct interest in the urban boundary expansion and that their participation would serve the public interest without causing prejudice, provided they sheltered under existing issues.

The Tribunal also granted the City's motion to dismiss the Twenty Road West Landowners' appeals, finding that the landowners had previously agreed to withdraw their appeals in a binding Minutes of Settlement, and their continued pursuit of the appeals was not in good faith.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision granting minor variances to an industrial property to reduce setbacks and separation distances.

The applicant sought the variances to relocate sea containers and establish a defined parking area for heavy vehicles associated with its legal non-conforming contracting business.

The appellant argued the variances would intensify the use and exacerbate existing noise, odor, and traffic impacts.

The Tribunal found the variances would optimize the site's use, improve safety, and mitigate existing impacts, satisfying the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was dismissed and the variances were authorized subject to a three-year temporary condition.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the Rural Hamilton Official Plan and the Urban Hamilton Official Plan.

The parties provided an update, noting that the City of Hamilton Council recently decided against an urban boundary expansion.

The Tribunal scheduled dates for a motion to dismiss, requests for party/participant status, a further Case Management Conference, and an eleven-week hearing commencing in January 2023.

A Procedural Order and Issues List were also approved.

Following a successful appeal of the City's refusal to enact a zoning by-law amendment, the appellants sought full indemnity costs against the City.

The appellants argued the City's conduct was unreasonable.

The Tribunal dismissed the costs motion, finding that a municipality is permitted to defend its council's decision in the ordinary course without being subject to a costs sanction, and the City's conduct was not unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, or in bad faith.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the Friends of Meadowlily Woods Community Association against the City of London's approval of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a residential development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals, finalized the Issues List, and approved the Procedural Order.

A five-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence on July 4, 2022, via video conferencing.

The applicant appealed the City of Kitchener Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent application to sever a portion of a property to construct a new semi-detached dwelling.

The subject property contained a designated heritage dwelling and a detached garage proposed for demolition.

The Tribunal heard uncontroverted expert planning and heritage evidence that the proposed consent was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and local official plans, and had appropriate regard for the criteria in section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and granted provisional consent subject to conditions requested by the City.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario against the City of London's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for a 40-storey mixed-use development on a site containing heritage buildings.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals and organizations, and scheduled an eight-day hearing on the merits.

The applicant appealed the City of Woodstock's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to rezone a property from R1 to R2 to permit a converted dwelling with a basement apartment.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, preferring the evidence of the applicant's planner that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the County Official Plan, and represented good planning by providing sensitive residential intensification without adverse impacts on the neighbourhood.

A case management conference was held to consider hearing appeals related to the City of Burlington's Official Plan Amendment 119, Zoning By-law Amendment 2020-418, and the new Official Plan together.

The Tribunal ordered the matters to be heard together for case management purposes.

Additionally, the Tribunal granted a motion by 409 Brant St. Ltd., finding that ZBA 2020-418 does not apply to its site, which had the statutory effect of releasing the site from the Interim Control By-law and reinstating its prior zoning.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of an application to amend a zoning by-law to permit the construction of a new veal barn and an increase in permitted livestock.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order establishing the issues list, witness requirements, and schedule for the upcoming video hearing.

The appellant appealed the Township's Committee of Adjustment decision denying minor variances to permit a larger dwelling with reduced setbacks and a reduced septic system setback on a waterfront property.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, preferring the appellant's planning evidence that the proposal would not create negative visual impacts due to significant vegetative buffering and that the upgraded septic system represented a net improvement.

The Tribunal found the variances met the four tests under the Planning Act and authorized them subject to site plan control and other conditions.