Jyoti Zuidema

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Sifton Properties Limited against the County of Brant's failure to make decisions on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a plan of subdivision.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent to govern the upcoming 18-day hearing scheduled to commence on September 25, 2023.

The appellant appealed the County of Brant's failure to make decisions on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision to permit a residential development.

At a case management conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal scheduled an 18-day video hearing and directed the parties to submit a revised procedural order.

The parties indicated ongoing settlement discussions and the potential for future Tribunal-assisted mediation.

The applicant appealed the County of Brant's failure to make a decision on a rezoning and plan of subdivision application for a 390-unit residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal heard requests for party and participant status from numerous individuals.

The Tribunal reserved its decision on all status requests to allow for further discussions between the parties and consultation with interested individuals, scheduling a second Case Management Conference for December 2022.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted Party status to Lafarge Canada Inc. and two local residents, and Participant status to two other residents.

The Tribunal declined to set hearing dates until the issues list is finalized, ordering a further Case Management Conference to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicants appealed the County's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment and failure to decide on a consent application to create two new rural residential lots.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposal has regard for matters of provincial interest, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and the County Official Plan, and complies with Minimum Distance Separation formulae.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the zoning amendment and provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the County of Brant's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment and the Committee of Adjustment's failure to make a decision on a consent application to create a new rural residential lot.

The proposal required a reduction in the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) from an existing livestock barn.

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

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, granting provisional consent and amending the zoning by-law.

This was the second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant from the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application.

The Tribunal noted the withdrawal of party status by several individuals and the abandonment of a motion for property access.

Participant status was granted to two individuals, and a further Case Management Conference was scheduled for November 19, 2021.

The applicants appealed the County of Brant's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment and failure to make a decision on consent applications to facilitate the creation of two new residential lots.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal scheduled an eight-day merit hearing to be conducted by video, denying the County's request for an in-person hearing.

The Tribunal also approved the procedural order and issues list agreed upon by the parties.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal from the County of Brant's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application.

The amendment sought to vary the Minimum Distance Separation requirement to facilitate the creation of two new residential building lots.

The Tribunal granted party and participant status to several individuals on consent and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to finalize the Draft Procedural Order.

The applicants sought judicial review of a Hearing Officer's decision declaring jurisdiction to proceed with a hearing regarding an amended Plan for the Niagara Escarpment Planning Area.

The applicants argued that an investigation and survey under s. 3(2) of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act was a condition precedent to amending the Plan following a boundary alteration.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the statutory requirement for an investigation and survey only applied when the Area was originally established, not for subsequent boundary amendments.