J. Farber

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference to obtain status updates on the remaining appeals of the City of Toronto's comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 569-2013.

The Tribunal received updates on various issue-specific and site-specific appeals, noting ongoing settlement discussions.

The Tribunal directed all appellants to provide written updates to the City regarding their intentions to continue settlement discussions or provide an issues list, and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for June 2026.

The Claimant sought compensation for the expropriation of its property by Metrolinx for the Ontario Line transit project.

The Tribunal determined the highest and best use of the property was a high-density two-tower mixed-use development.

The Tribunal screened out the impact of the Ontario Line announcement under section 14(4)(b) of the Expropriations Act.

It rejected Metrolinx's argument for a lease encumbrance deduction due to the common control of the tenant and claimant.

The Tribunal accepted the Claimant's appraiser's market value of $187 per square foot, resulting in a gross value of $88,825,000, and applied a $1,000,000 deduction for environmental remediation costs, awarding a net amount of $87,825,000.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals from the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment application for the Centrepoint Mall site, and appeals of the City-initiated Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615).

The Tribunal granted party status to the City of Vaughan without objection.

The parties agreed to schedule a 10-day merit hearing and submitted a draft Procedural Order, which the Tribunal approved and appended to its decision.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicants against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment application.

The Tribunal granted party status to the City of Vaughan without objection.

The parties agreed to finalize a Procedural Order and schedule a 10-day merit hearing commencing in April 2025.

Metrolinx brought a motion to compel answers to questions refused by the claimant during an examination for discovery in an expropriation proceeding.

The claimant argued the questions were beyond the permitted scope and irrelevant, but subsequently provided some answers voluntarily.

Given the proximity to the hearing date, the Tribunal dismissed the motion, ruling that the disputed matters could be addressed through broad cross-examination at the hearing, with specific evidentiary objections to be ruled upon as they arise.

Metrolinx brought a motion for directions regarding undertakings and refusals from the examination for discovery of the claimant's representative in an expropriation proceeding.

The Tribunal ordered the claimant to produce financial statements and tax returns for the three years prior to the expropriation, finding them relevant to determining the highest and best use of the property.

The Tribunal also permitted Metrolinx to conduct a further examination of up to one hour regarding the financial documents and certain concept plans.

Other requests for further production were dismissed.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding appeals to the Vaughan Official Plan 2010, specifically the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan, along with related site-specific Zoning By-law Amendments and Draft Plans of Subdivision.

Based on uncontested expert planning and engineering evidence, the Tribunal approved modifications to the Secondary Plan's parking and holding symbol policies, finding they support transit-oriented development and conform with provincial and regional policies.

The Tribunal also approved the site-specific zoning and subdivision appeals in principle, subject to conditions, to facilitate high-density, mixed-use developments along the Steeles Avenue corridor.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation by 1255870 Ontario Limited against Metrolinx for the expropriation of lands in Toronto.

The parties indicated they participated in a mediation assessment and anticipate mediation in early 2024.

The Tribunal directed the parties to provide updates on the mediation outcome and provided case management directives.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for land compensation and disturbance damages by 1255870 Ontario Limited against Metrolinx under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a ten-day video hearing and approved the parties' draft Procedural Order.

A correction notice was subsequently issued to amend the video hearing access link.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for land compensation by 1255870 Ontario Limited against Metrolinx under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a ten-day hearing on the merits for November 2024 and approved the draft Procedural Order submitted by the parties.

A second Case Management Conference was also scheduled to consider updates on mediation and settlement efforts.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by multiple developers against the City of Kitchener's Parkland Conveyance By-law No. 2022-101.

The Tribunal granted party status to two additional entities on consent.

The City requested the establishment of a Common Interest Class under Rule 8.4, which was opposed by the appellants and denied by the Tribunal as premature.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled, and parties were directed to exchange their particularized issues for a draft Procedural Order.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application for a 44-storey mixed-use building within the statutory timeframe.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to an adjacent property owner, 1501786 Ontario Limited, who raised concerns regarding height, massing, and setbacks.

The applicant advised that the application was being revised and resubmitted to the City.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled.

The Tribunal issued an amending decision under Rule 24.4 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure to correct a typographical error in a previous decision.

The amendment corrected the hearing start date, confirming that the hearing would commence on February 6, 2023, and approved the revised Procedural Order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal heard motions regarding appeals of the Rural Hamilton Official Plan and Urban Hamilton Official Plan.

Sheltering parties Castandgrey and Country sought to refuse the appellants' partial withdrawal of appeals, arguing the entire Elfrida Area should remain under consideration for urban expansion.

The Tribunal allowed the motions in part, ruling that while it would not refuse the scoping of issues, the full Elfrida Area potential urban boundary remains under appeal and the Ministry's modifications for non-appellant lands are not in force.

A separate motion by LIV Developments Ltd. for party status was denied as it did not advance the public interest and would result in a multiplicity of proceedings.

Multiple appeals were filed regarding the Yonge Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan (YSCSP) and related site-specific zoning and subdivision applications in the City of Vaughan.

Following extensive study and settlements among the parties, the Tribunal approved modifications to the YSCSP that facilitate a transition from low-density, automobile-oriented commercial uses to a high-density, transit-supportive, mixed-use community.

The approved plan directs the tallest buildings to the Yonge-Steeles intersection, incorporates new street networks, and requires substantial linear parkland.

The Tribunal found the modified YSCSP consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan and Regional Official Plan.

Two specific policies regarding parking and holding provisions, along with site-specific zoning and subdivision appeals, were deferred to a subsequent hearing phase.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the 2010 Vaughan Official Plan and related site-specific development applications.

The Tribunal granted revisions to the Procedural Order for the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan hearing, deferring its start by one week to allow experts to review recently circulated transportation studies and development plans.

The Tribunal also granted Party status to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority on Appeal 166.

Finally, the Tribunal allowed a settlement motion by the City of Vaughan, approving modifications to the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre Secondary Plan for a specific site, finding the modifications represented good planning and satisfied statutory requirements.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference to obtain a status update on a land compensation appeal under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal set a 5-day video hearing and directed the parties to submit a revised draft Procedural Order, which was subsequently approved and appended to the decision.

Several property owners appealed the City of Vaughan's 2010 Official Plan regarding policies affecting the Centre Street Corridor.

The parties reached a settlement proposing modified policies and map schedules to allow for increased building heights, density, and mixed uses along the transit corridor while ensuring appropriate transition to adjacent low-rise neighbourhoods.

The Tribunal denied a late request for Party status from a ratepayers association.

Accepting the uncontested expert planning evidence that the modified policies are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conform with the Growth Plan and Regional Official Plan, and represent good planning, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the modified policies.

The applicant, a public interest litigant, sought leave to appeal an Ontario Municipal Board decision but the motion was dismissed as abandoned after a time extension was refused.

The respondents sought costs.

The court held that public interest litigants must adhere to procedural rules and awarded costs to the respondents for the procedural motion.

For the leave motion itself, the court declined to award costs to the municipality, recognizing both parties acted in the public interest, but awarded partial indemnity costs to the private landowner respondents who were forced to participate.