Ira Todd Kagan

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development consisting of single detached units, townhouses, and apartments.

The parties reached a settlement resolving most issues, deferring consideration of one medium-density block, and addressing noise classification.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, approving the instruments in principle subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Vaughan's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit two purpose-built rental apartment buildings.

The parties reached a settlement, which was endorsed by City Council and supported by adjacent landowners.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the finalization of the instruments and necessary easements.

The appellant sought to modify the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 231 to redesignate a 3.5-acre site from General Employment to Mixed Use Areas, permitting residential development alongside existing employment uses.

The City opposed the conversion, arguing it would fragment the South of Eastern Employment Area and risk land use conflicts with nearby impactful industries.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the site was underutilized, not required over the long term for employment purposes, and that the proposed conversion would optimize land use by providing needed housing, including affordable housing, without adversely affecting the viability of the employment area.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent following a case management conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's refusal of official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a 10-storey mixed-use building.

The order establishes the issues list, procedural dates, and schedules a 10-day video hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal against the City of Markham's by-law designating a property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The parties had already exchanged written materials and proposed a three-day hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal approved the proposed procedural order and scheduled the hearing for February 2025.

This was the first Case Management Conference concerning an appeal by Format Lakeshore Inc. against the Town of Oakville's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for an 11-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Halton and Frastell Associates Inc., and participant status to Lorna Sinclair and Arbour Memorial Inc. The Tribunal also approved a Procedural Order and scheduled a seven-day video hearing to commence on February 18, 2025.

The City of Vaughan brought a motion at a Case Management Conference seeking to resolve several site-specific appeals of its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and Transition By-law.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved site-specific amendments for properties owned by Dufferin Vistas Ltd., Condor Properties Ltd., and Armland Management Inc. The Tribunal also provided directions for other appeals to be considered at future Case Management Conferences and acknowledged the withdrawal of certain appeals.

The defendants were charged with undertaking development in a wetland without a permit under the Conservation Authorities Act.

The prosecution brought a motion to preclude the defendants from challenging the TRCA's jurisdiction and the existence of a wetland, which the court dismissed as violating the presumption of innocence.

The defendants brought an application under s. 11(b) of the Charter alleging unreasonable delay.

The court found a net delay of 21.5 months, exceeding the 18-month presumptive ceiling for provincial offences.

Finding no exceptional circumstances to justify the delay, which was exacerbated by a lack of judicial resources, the court stayed the charges.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by the applicant against the respondent's decision to designate a property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Tribunal directed the parties to prepare a procedural order, set hearing dates for January 2025, and issued the procedural order to govern the future conduct of the proceeding.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Cambridge's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed high-rise development.

The Tribunal scheduled a 20-day merit hearing to commence in September 2025 and a pre-hearing status telephone conference call for June 2025.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and plan of subdivision to permit a high-density mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement that was endorsed by City Council following successful mediation.

The Tribunal convened a settlement hearing but the parties required more time to finalize the planning instruments.

The Tribunal issued an order vacating the hearing dates and directing the parties to submit the finalized planning instruments by June 30, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding various appeals of the City of Brampton's Official Plan Amendment for interim policies of Major Transit Station Areas.

The parties requested a second CMC to allow time to narrow the Issues List and prepare a draft Procedural Order.

The Tribunal scheduled a second CMC for May 30, 2024, to proceed by video.

The applicant appealed the City of Vaughan's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a transit-oriented development at 88 Steeles Avenue West.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, which permits two high-rise residential towers, represents good planning and conforms to applicable provincial and municipal policies.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle on an interim basis, contingent on the fulfillment of specified conditions.

The appellant, a self-represented area resident, appealed the City's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment permitting a 14-storey apartment building.

The Tribunal found the notice of appeal deficient under the Planning Act for failing to identify inconsistencies with provincial or municipal policies.

After hearing the applicant's expert planning evidence, which supported the development as modest intensification, and finding the appellant's evidence lacked planning grounds, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals both on statutory non-compliance and on their merits.

This decision arises from a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Vaughan's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed residential development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals and entities without objection from the parties.

The parties advised the Tribunal of an ongoing settlement proposal that City Council has accepted.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day hearing on the merits and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the hearing.

The applicants sought judicial review to quash O. Reg. 382/19, which amended transitional rules for planning appeals before the Ontario Land Tribunal, arguing it was ultra vires its enabling statute.

The regulation reimposed a more restrictive procedural regime on third-party appeals of municipal planning decisions.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Attorney General had broad, express statutory authority under s. 43.1 of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017 to make the transitional regulation.

The court held the regulation was consistent with the enabling statute and did not improperly deprive the applicants of vested substantive rights.

The court also declined to address procedural fairness issues, finding them premature as they should be raised in the applicants' pending motion for leave to appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals against a Zoning By-law Amendment passed by the City of Vaughan.

The Tribunal granted party status on consent to the property owners, Kirby 27 Development Limited and Copper Kirby Development Limited.

Despite the appellants' request to delay scheduling due to pending court matters, the Tribunal approved the Draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 19-day video hearing on the merits to commence in June 2025.

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

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and Air Liquide Canada Inc. The Tribunal declined the applicant's request to link Air Liquide's party status to disclosure obligations, directing that disclosure issues be addressed separately.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the procedural order and address any outstanding disclosure motions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Site Plan Application for a proposed drive-through facility within the prescribed timeframe.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan.

The appeal was allowed and the site plan was approved subject to post-approval conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant for a Zoning By-law Amendment due to the City's failure to make a decision within the statutory timeframe.

The parties requested approval of a draft Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the proceedings leading up to the merit hearing, while noting upcoming Tribunal-led mediation.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List.