Jennifer Alexis Gibb Savini

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the rescheduled hearing of appeals by the applicant concerning the failure of the municipality to make decisions on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a plan of subdivision.

The applications seek to permit a development of 43 single detached dwellings and an apartment building.

The hearing was rescheduled to commence on September 11, 2024, for a duration of three days.

At a Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding a proposed plan of subdivision, the Tribunal addressed competing motions from the appellant and the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte (MBQ).

MBQ raised a jurisdictional challenge based on an ongoing federal land claim encompassing the subject property.

The Tribunal converted the scheduled motion date to a CMC and ordered that MBQ's jurisdictional motion be heard first, as it forms the foundation of the appeal, with the appellant's motion to be scheduled subsequently.

At a Case Management Conference for appeals against the District Municipality of Muskoka's approval of the Township of Muskoka Lakes' new Official Plan, several community groups and individuals requested party or participant status.

Applying the Oakville Factors and the requirements of the Planning Act, the Tribunal granted party status to four cottage and stakeholder associations, finding their involvement would assist in the effective adjudication of the issues without causing undue prejudice.

The Tribunal denied party status to two individuals, finding their concerns were either site-specific or better suited for participant status, and granted participant status to one of them.

The moving party brought a motion to dismiss an appeal of a zoning by-law amendment on the basis that the notice of appeal did not disclose any apparent land use planning grounds.

The appellants, who operate a dairy farm, appealed the by-law due to concerns about Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) requirements and potential conflicts with proposed residential lots.

The moving party argued MDS considerations did not apply because the subject lands were entirely within a Hamlet Designation.

The Tribunal found that the boundaries of the Hamlet Designation were unclear and presented a legitimately contested threshold question.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded the notice of appeal disclosed requisite planning grounds and dismissed the motion.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a mixed-use residential and commercial building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that reduced the building height to 14 storeys and removed balconies to address compatibility concerns.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Official Plan, and represented good land use planning.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law was amended accordingly.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal for the failure of the approval authority to make a decision on a draft plan of subdivision application.

The Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte were granted party status due to an ongoing land claim encompassing the subject property.

The Tribunal determined it was premature to schedule a merit hearing until a motion regarding the Tribunal's jurisdiction over the land claim is heard and decided.

The appellant brought a motion claiming that its first demolition permit application remained valid because the municipality failed to make a decision within the statutory timelines under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Tribunal denied the motion, finding that the municipality had the authority to change its by-law to refuse the demolition permit.

The Tribunal also issued a procedural order and issues list for the upcoming merits hearing regarding the denial of the second demolition permit application.

The appellant appealed the Lakehead Regional Planning Board's refusal of two consent applications to create two new parcels from a 55-hectare property.

The Board had refused the applications on the basis that the Official Plan's growth management strategy capped new severances at 200, a limit that had already been reached.

The Tribunal found that the growth management strategy had expired in 2017 and no longer applied.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, granting provisional consent for the first severance as it complied with the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for the second severance because the Official Plan only permits one severance per parcel held as of June 1, 1997.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit the construction of rental cabins, a boathouse, and an accessory dwelling.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to a neighbouring property owner on consent.

The Tribunal directed the parties to finalize a draft Procedural Order and scheduled a three-day merit hearing.

The appellant brought a motion seeking an order that its demolition permit application was deemed consented to under the Ontario Heritage Act because the Municipality failed to provide notice of its decision within the statutory 90-day period.

The Tribunal agreed that deemed consent occurred due to the lack of timely notice.

However, the Tribunal found that the Municipality possessed the authority under the Municipal Act to revoke the by-law associated with the demolition permit, effectively revoking the permit.

The motion was therefore dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a fourth Case Management Conference concerning appeals by Picton Heights Ltd. regarding the County of Prince Edward's failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a draft plan of subdivision for a 560-unit residential community.

The parties submitted a joint draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the upcoming merit hearing scheduled for April 3, 2024.

The appellant brought a motion for discovery seeking hydrogeological records, site plans, and a site visit related to a proposed quarry expansion.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on the motion.

The Tribunal granted the motion in part, issuing a consent order requiring the applicant to provide specific documents and records by a set date, with each party bearing its own costs.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the upcoming 10-day video hearing regarding appeals by Snowy Owl Woods Holdings Inc. (Mistral Development Inc.) against the Municipality of Port Hope for its failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a plan of subdivision.

The applications propose a development of 43 single detached dwellings and a block for a 10 to 21-unit apartment building.

The Order establishes the issues list, order of evidence, and procedural dates leading up to the hearing scheduled to commence on June 3, 2024.

Sifton Properties Limited appealed the County of Brant's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential subdivision with neighbourhood commercial uses.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and the County Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the Draft Plan of Subdivision and withholding the final order for the Zoning By-law Amendment pending the fulfillment of a condition related to an Official Plan designation change.

The Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision.

Following a settlement on the zoning appeal, the parties requested an adjournment of the merit hearing for the draft plan appeal to continue technical work.

The Tribunal scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference and a three-day merit hearing.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement that included the removal of a contested woodlot, supported by uncontroverted expert ecological and planning evidence indicating the woodlot was in poor health and its removal would not negatively impact the broader natural heritage system.

The Tribunal approved the settlement, finding the proposal consistent with provincial policy, representative of good planning, and in the public interest.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Southbridge Health Care GP Inc. against the Municipality of Port Hope's refusal of a demolition permit for heritage properties.

The Tribunal granted participant status to three individuals and scheduled future hearing dates, including a motion hearing, a second CMC to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List, and a three-day merits hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by 2477454 Ontario Inc. against the County of Prince Edward's by-law designating the Wellington Heritage Conservation District.

The parties indicated their intention to seek Tribunal-led mediation to resolve the issues.

The Tribunal supported this approach and directed the parties to advise the Case Coordinator of next steps once known.

Members of the public in attendance were advised on how to request party or participant status for future proceedings.

The appellant appealed the County's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-Law Amendment and a draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a 560-unit residential community.

The parties reached a settlement regarding the Zoning By-Law Amendment.

Following an uncontested settlement hearing, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-Law Amendment based on expert planning evidence that it was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conformed to the Official Plan.

A Procedural Order and Issues List were approved for the remaining draft Plan of Subdivision appeal, which was scheduled for a future hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant under section 34(11) of the Planning Act due to the municipality's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application.

The parties advised that minutes of settlement had been reached with the municipality, but discussions with the added party were ongoing.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a 10-day video hearing.