Carlton Thorne

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a high-density mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Region of York and a numbered company, and participant status to two other entities.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the applicant to make a resubmission to the City and for the parties to prepare a draft procedural order and issues list.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct technical and typographical errors in a previous decision dated August 23, 2022.

The corrections clarified the nature of the appellant's appeals under the Planning Act and the role of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority regarding Special Policy Area establishment.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Richmond Hill's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed 10-storey retirement residence.

The Tribunal scheduled a three-day video hearing for April 2023 and directed the parties to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the City of Richmond Hill's failure to make a decision on its Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications within the statutory timeframe.

At the second Case Management Conference, the parties advised they were engaged in without prejudice discussions on a revised development proposal.

On consent, the Tribunal issued a Procedural Order scheduling a third Case Management Conference for April 2023 and a 15-day merit hearing for September 2023 to allow time for the City to consider the revised proposal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Leslie Elgin Developments Inc. against the City of Richmond Hill for failing to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The applications propose a high-density residential development with two apartment buildings.

The Tribunal granted participant status to 13 individuals on consent, scheduled a second Case Management Conference for February 2023 to finalize the Procedural Order, and scheduled a 12-day merits hearing for October 2023.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Robert Salna against the City of Richmond Hill's proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 22 and the Regional Municipality of York's failure to announce a decision on the proposed new Official Plan.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority but denied it to a neighbouring property owner.

The Tribunal issued procedural directions for the parties to define issues and determine if a threshold motion is required before scheduling a hearing on the merits.

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

The parties agreed on a Procedural Order and Issues List for a four-day hearing scheduled to begin on October 18, 2022.

The Tribunal approved the revised Procedural Order on consent.

At a case management conference, the Tribunal considered whether to schedule a motion to adjourn a preliminary motion regarding threshold jurisdictional issues.

The applicant sought the adjournment due to time constraints in reviewing voluminous disclosure materials.

The City and Region consented, but Environmental Defence opposed.

The Tribunal found no prejudice would result from the delay and scheduled the adjournment motion, directing the applicant to prepare an index of the disclosed materials.

The appellant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a mixed-use development.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference, granted participant status to several individuals and groups, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference and a four-day hearing.

The applicant appealed the City of Richmond Hill's failure to make a decision on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications for a proposed mixed-use development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to a local resident.

As the parties were unable to reach a settlement, the Tribunal scheduled a 12-day video hearing on the merits and issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.

The Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical error in its previous decision dated May 27, 2021, pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The amendment replaced Attachment 2 to include the complete Exhibit List (Items 1 to 19).

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The appellant appealed the City's refusal to amend a zoning by-law to permit the future creation of an additional building lot for a single detached residential building.

The City argued the severance would threaten the large estate lot and heavily wooded character of the subdivision.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the proposed infill development was consistent with provincial policies encouraging intensification, would not result in significant tree loss, and was compatible with the character of the neighbourhood.

The Receiver for Northwood Recycling & Energy Inc. appealed a Director's Order requiring work at a waste disposal site.

Following an inspection confirming full compliance with the work items, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal found the proposed settlement, which revoked the Director's Order and dismissed the proceeding, to be consistent with the purpose of the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest.

The appellant appealed a Director's Order regarding a waste disposal site.

At a pre-hearing conference, the City of Oshawa and the Ummah Foundation sought and were granted participant status without objection.

The parties jointly requested and were granted an adjournment of the pre-hearing conference to allow for ongoing settlement discussions and to address a related jurisdictional motion filed in court.

The appellant appealed a Review Decision of the Fire Marshal's delegate upholding an Inspection Order requiring the reduction of stored combustibles to ensure clearance for sprinkler deflectors.

The appellant argued he was not personally responsible as he was not the renter, but an employee of the corporate tenant.

The Commission found the appellant had control over the contents and was a tenant.

The appellant abandoned the hearing after being refused permission to record it.

The Commission proceeded in his absence due to severe life safety hazards and upheld the Order, amending the compliance date.

The respondents brought a motion to strike portions of an affidavit filed by the applicant in an application seeking to quash a municipal by-law under the City of Toronto Act.

The court had previously struck portions of an earlier affidavit for containing irrelevant historical allegations and improper innuendo about prior municipal actions.

On the renewed motion, the respondents argued the revised affidavit continued to include irrelevant references to earlier by-laws and municipal initiatives.

The court held that most of the objectionable material had been sufficiently sanitized and could remain as factual background potentially relevant to the issues, including whether the impugned by-law conferred a prohibited bonus.

However, one paragraph expressing the deponent’s concerns about public funds used in 2000 was struck as irrelevant.