Eric Davis

The appellant appealed the municipality's designation of its property under the Ontario Heritage Act, arguing the property had not been properly evaluated and the heritage attributes were not adequately described.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement based on a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared by the appellant's expert.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, ordering that the property be designated in accordance with an amended by-law that accurately reflects the property's cultural heritage value and attributes as identified in the expert report.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent of the parties to govern the procedures leading up to a 7-day hearing regarding a zoning by-law amendment appeal.

The amendment seeks to permit an autobody repair establishment on agricultural lands in the Municipality of South Bruce.

The City of Guelph brought a motion for directions seeking partial approval of its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law, save and except for certain sections under appeal.

The City also sought to scope the appeals of Industrial Equities Guelph Corporation and Paisley & Whitelaw Inc. to site-specific or area-specific appeals.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the notices of appeal for both respondents only provided reasons related to specific properties and did not justify city-wide appeals.

The Tribunal deemed the unappealed portions of the By-law to be in full force and effect and ordered the respondents to scope their appeals accordingly.

The appellant appealed the Township's Committee of Adjustment decision denying a minor variance application to reduce the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS 1) setback from 565 metres to 200 metres for a proposed residential dwelling on a severed lot.

Based on new evidence regarding the adjacent property's farming operations, the Tribunal found that only one barn was capable of housing livestock, requiring a revised MDS 1 relief of 485 metres.

The Tribunal preferred the appellant's expert planning evidence, finding the revised variance met the four tests under the Planning Act, and allowed the appeal in part.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against a Zoning By-law Amendment passed by the Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula, the Tribunal granted participant status to nine individuals on consent.

The parties indicated ongoing without-prejudice discussions to resolve or define issues.

The Tribunal ordered a status update by December 22, 2023, and scheduled a ten-day video hearing to commence on January 27, 2025.

The moving party sought approval of a settlement reached with the municipality regarding an appeal of the new Official Plan.

The settlement involved site-specific modifications to redesignate the subject lands to 'Neighbourhood Residential' and 'Open Space' to facilitate a draft-approved subdivision.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed modifications had regard to matters of provincial interest, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and County Official Plan, and represented good planning.

The motion was granted and the Official Plan was modified and approved accordingly.

The appellants appealed the Township of Puslinch's refusal of an application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit shipping containers and the storage of motorized personal vehicles.

Following a case management conference and settlement discussions, the appellants withdrew their appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal consequently ordered the appeal dismissed.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Guelph's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and related Official Plan Amendment No. 88.

The Tribunal granted party status to 2793031 Ontario Inc. on consent.

The parties advised that discussions were ongoing to scope the issues and potentially bring parts of the by-law into force.

The Tribunal scheduled a scoping motion and a second Case Management Conference, and directed the submission of a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit the development of a three-storey triplex on a waterfront property in Grand Bend.

The municipality and a local community association opposed the development, arguing the building's scale and massing were excessively large and incompatible with the neighbourhood's character.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the applicable Official Plans.

The Tribunal concluded that the unique characteristics of the large, dually-zoned lot made the proposed medium-density development an appropriate transition between nearby high-density and low-density uses, and that the design was compatible with the eclectic neighbourhood.

The Appellants sought approvals for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plans of Subdivision to facilitate a large residential development.

The central issue was whether a 14-unit portion of the development (Block 1 Stage 5), which required a private roadway through a Natural Heritage Feature and Area (NHFA), should be permitted.

The Tribunal denied the development of Block 1 Stage 5, finding that the roadway would negatively impact the NHFA's ecological functions and wildlife linkages, rendering it inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.

The Tribunal also reviewed various conditions of Draft Plans approval, striking down conditions that unlawfully required the developer to fund non-local services or convey lands for purely environmental purposes without compensation.

The balance of the development was approved in principle, subject to resolving parkland dedication requirements.

The appellants appealed the Town of Fort Erie's approval of a zoning by-law amendment that permitted the redevelopment of a commercial property to include a restaurant with a drive-thru and a car wash, alongside an existing gas station.

The appellants, who owned an abutting residential property, raised concerns regarding noise, litter, and reduced rear yard setbacks.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert evidence in noise and land use planning, finding that the amendment was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and local official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the City of Cambridge Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application to permit an increase in the maximum number of used motor vehicles sold per service bay from two to five.

The subject property operates as a motor vehicle repair business in an industrial zone, where used car sales are permitted as an accessory use.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal and authorized the variance, finding that it satisfied the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal accepted expert planning evidence that the variance maintained the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, was desirable for the property, and was minor in nature, as the primary use would remain vehicle repair and the character of the area would not be negatively impacted.

The Big Tub Harbour Citizens Committee (BTHCC) and Lyons Big Tub Resort Marina Ltd. appealed a Zoning By-law Amendment passed by the Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula.

Lyons brought a motion to strike several issues from BTHCC's appeal, arguing the notice of appeal failed to explain how the by-law was inconsistent with applicable policy documents as required by s. 34(19.0.1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal agreed, finding BTHCC's appeal lacked the mandatory statutory explanation.

The Tribunal dismissed BTHCC's appeal entirely and allowed Lyons' appeal to proceed solely on the issue of parking provisions.

The applicant appealed the Township of Amaranth's refusal to approve a zoning by-law amendment and a consent application to sever a residence surplus to a farming operation.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal heard uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence supporting a revised severance configuration.

The Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans, as it preserves prime agricultural lands while permitting the continuation of an existing residence.

The appeals were allowed in part, approving the zoning by-law amendment in principle and granting provisional consent subject to conditions.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a Zoning By-law Amendment that would permit an autobody repair establishment.

The parties presented a finalized draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and scheduled a seven-day hearing on the merits.

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 Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Guelph's Official Plan Amendment No. 79, which introduced the Clair-Maltby Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal granted party status to Timberworx Custom Homes Inc. and provisional party status to Foundation for the Support of International Medical Training Inc. A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues Lists, and an eight-week merit hearing was scheduled to commence in January 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Jackson Harvest Farms Ltd. against the Town of Wilmot's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a gravel pit operation.

The Tribunal granted party status to Citizens for Safe Groundwater Inc. and participant status to 37 individuals on consent.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for March 2023 and a 22-day hearing for October 2023, anticipating administrative consolidation with a related Aggregate Resources Act license referral.

The applicant appealed the Town of Collingwood's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a 100-unit residential development.

Prior to the hearing, the applicant reached settlements with the Town, the County of Simcoe, and the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development consistent with provincial policies and local official plans.

The appeals were allowed, the Zoning By-law Amendment was approved, and the Draft Plan of Subdivision was approved subject to conditions.

The Association of Ontario Chicken Processors appealed a reconsideration decision of the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg & Chick Commission regarding a new Cost of Production formula.

The appellant sought six amendments to the formula, including changes to the prime rate calculation, exclusion of depreciation from working capital, adjustments to farm labour benefit and wage rates, use of a real rate of return, and addition of a risk premium.

After hearing extensive expert testimony from all parties, the Tribunal found the expert evidence presented by the respondent and third party to be more reliable and acceptable on all six issues.

The appeal was dismissed.