Alice Michelle Mihailescu

At a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment, the Tribunal granted party status to Atura Power and participant status to three local residents.

The Tribunal also approved a Procedural Order and scheduled a 15-day merits hearing.

The Tribunal convened a settlement hearing regarding appeals of Official Plan Amendment No. 409 and Zoning By-law 702-2024, which regulate development on Ookwemin Minising (formerly Villiers Island) in Toronto's Port Lands.

The modifications address building heights, density, land uses, and meanwhile uses.

Based on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement represents good planning, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms with the applicable Official Plan.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment to redevelop the Richard L. Hearn Generating Station into a mixed-use neighbourhood.

At a Case Management Conference, the Toronto Port Authority, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, GFL Environmental Inc., Amrize Canada Inc., and Portlands Energy Centre L.P. sought and were granted party status on consent.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the parties to finalize a draft Procedural Order and issues list.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by 20 Leslie Street Inc. arising from the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment within the statutory timeline.

The Tribunal granted party status to Atura Power, a specified person operating an electric utility nearby, and participant status to a local resident concerned about shadowing and business impacts.

A nine-day hearing was scheduled for November 2026.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Stillwater Station Ltd. for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a mixed-use community in Ottawa.

The Tribunal granted party status to Canadian National Railway Company on consent.

A 12-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence in April 2026, and the parties were directed to submit a final Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the City of Ottawa Committee of Adjustment's refusal of consent and minor variance applications to sever a property and construct two semi-detached dwellings.

The City did not attend the hearing but provided a planning report supporting the applications subject to conditions.

The Tribunal heard expert planning evidence that the proposal represents appropriate low-rise intensification, is compatible with the neighbourhood, and meets the four tests under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals and authorized the consent and variances subject to the City's recommended conditions.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment for a proposed mixed-use residential development at 280 Commissioners Street.

The Tribunal granted party status on consent to four entities: 115 Saulter South LP, Toronto Port Authority, PT Studios Inc., and Atura Power.

The Tribunal directed the appellant to file a final draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 19-day video hearing for April and May 2027.

The appellant appealed the City of Ottawa's passing of a Zoning By-law Amendment that would facilitate the construction of 660 residential units.

A Case Management Conference was held where the applicant for the by-law amendment was granted party status.

The Tribunal approved a draft Procedural Order and Issues List on consent, and scheduled a 10-day merit hearing to commence in May 2026.

The parties settled an expropriation compensation claim for $50,000 plus reasonable costs to be agreed upon or assessed.

The claimant subsequently brought a motion for costs of $401,387.18.

The City opposed the quantum and sought its own costs, arguing the claimant acted unreasonably by pursuing a speculative damages claim and delaying settlement.

The Tribunal held that the settlement agreement did not permit the City to claim its own costs and that it could not evaluate the merits of the unlitigated compensation claim on a costs motion.

The Tribunal found the claimant's conduct was not unreasonable and awarded the claimant its costs, subject to specific reductions for a technology fee, excessive consultant hours, and duplicative legal time.

The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Land Tribunal.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and ordered the moving party to pay costs of $5,000 to the responding party.

The applicant appealed the City of Kingston's refusal of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high-density, mixed-use development on a contaminated brownfield site.

The proposed development includes the remediation of the site, which features a Provincially Significant Wetland and is adjacent to the Rideau Canal UNESCO World Heritage Site.

The Tribunal found that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the City's Official Plan, as it promotes efficient land use, intensification, and brownfield remediation.

However, the Tribunal did not accept jurisdiction over the capping of the wetland itself, as the PPS prohibits development in such areas, and instead approved the applicant's alternative requested relief.

The applicant, Charles Frederick Armstrong, challenged the constitutionality of the Township of Russell’s Sign By-Law, which restricted the display of municipal election signs.

The court found that the by-law violated Armstrong’s freedom of expression under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that the violation was not justified under section 1.

The court also found that the Township was unjustly enriched by requiring Armstrong to pay $450 for the return of his signs, which had been removed under the unconstitutional by-law.

The applicants brought a motion for directions under the Planning Act seeking a determination that their applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment were complete.

The City of Hamilton had deemed the applications incomplete based on four outstanding items, including reformatted energy and financial reports, a recreation and school assessment, and sub-watershed planning.

The Tribunal found that the substance of the reports had already been provided and that the additional requirements were unreasonable for the purpose of deeming the applications complete.

The motion was granted and the applications were deemed complete.

The appellant appealed the City of Ottawa's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 3 (OPA 3), which added the Orleans Corridor Secondary Plan.

The appellant argued that the Secondary Plan inappropriately restricted their property to non-residential uses and a four-storey height limit due to a lack of committed funding for a nearby planned transit station.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the City's 'wait and see' approach to zoning based on infrastructure funding contradicted the Planning Act and failed to recognize provincial policy directions for growth and housing.

The Tribunal ordered modifications to OPA 3 to include the subject property in the Station Area, permit 40-storey heights and mixed-use residential development, and remove the requirement for a Demonstration Plan.

Theia Partners Inc. and the City of Ottawa brought a joint motion to dismiss appeals filed by prospective appellants regarding an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment.

The moving parties argued that the prospective appellants lacked standing under the Planning Act, as amended by Bill 185 (Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024), which restricted third-party appeal rights.

The Tribunal found that the prospective appellants were not 'specified persons' and did not own land to which the amendments applied.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals for lack of standing.

The moving party sought leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Land Tribunal dated October 27, 2023.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.

As no costs outlines were filed, the court made no order as to costs.

The City of Toronto brought a motion on consent for an order bringing into force the unappealed portions of Official Plan Amendment No. 409 (OPA 409) and Zoning By-law 702-2024, which relate to the redevelopment of Villiers Island in the Port Lands.

The Tribunal granted party status to several entities and approved a minor modification to OPA 409 to address concerns raised by LaFarge Canada Inc. regarding its adjacent cement terminal.

The Tribunal ordered that the unappealed sections of OPA 409 came into force on July 30, 2024, and established a procedural order for the hearing of the remaining site-specific and precinct-wide appeals by the Toronto Port Authority.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Ottawa's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 3.

The parties advised that they are engaged in ongoing settlement discussions and requested a further CMC to provide an update.

The Tribunal scheduled a further video CMC for May 27, 2025, and directed the parties to provide a draft Procedural Order and Issues List if a settlement is not reached.

The City of Ottawa appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision that granted an applicant's request to amend a condition of a provisional consent for a land severance.

The condition related to demonstrating adequate water quality for the proposed lots.

The applicant sought to amend the condition to allow for a minor sodium aesthetic exceedance that would be treated with an in-home reverse osmosis system.

The City argued the exceedance violated its guidelines and Official Plan.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the guidelines were non-statutory interpretive tools, the health parameters were met, and the amendment conformed to the Official Plan and was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Ottawa's Official Plan Amendment No. 2023-48 (Orleans Corridor Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal received updates on settlement discussions and withdrawals, scheduled a three-day merit hearing for the Guibord appeal commencing February 10, 2025, and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for the Brigil and Youville appeals for February 18, 2025.