Katryna Vergis-Mayo

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's refusal of official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit a mixed-use development with two 40-storey residential buildings.

The parties advised that a settlement in principle had been reached and requested additional time to finalize the materials.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference and established procedural dates for the exchange of revised application materials and settlement documents.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of Official Plan Amendment No. 727 and Zoning By-Law No. 608-2024, the Tribunal granted party status to several landowners.

The Tribunal also granted motions pursuant to section 34(31) of the Planning Act to geographically scope the appeals, deeming the Zoning By-law to have come into force for specific properties, allowing their redevelopment to proceed while the broader appeals continue.

The appellant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances to permit a children's outdoor play area in the front and side yards and to reduce the required parking to zero for an existing day nursery.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body found that the variances met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the parking reduction would improve safety and pick-up/drop-off operations, and that the play area locations were appropriate and partially recognized by an existing encroachment agreement.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized.

The City of Toronto brought a motion to geographically scope the appellant's appeals of Official Plan Amendment No. 727 and Zoning By-law No. 608-2024 to only the appellant's property, and to scope the appeals to only the specific policies and provisions at issue.

The Tribunal dismissed the request for geographic scoping, finding that the appellant's concerns were city-wide and not limited to a specific site.

The Tribunal granted the request to scope the appeals to the specific policies and provisions at issue, deeming the unappealed portions of the instruments to have come into effect.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Richmond Hill's Official Plan Amendment No. 18.6.

The Tribunal scheduled a subsequent Case Management Conference for February 27, 2025, and ordered the parties to submit a final draft Procedural Order, Issues List, and a draft Order relating to the OPA by December 16, 2024.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 536 (OPA 536), which relates to development within the area of influence of rail facilities.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement and requested the Tribunal approve a modified version of OPA 536.

The Tribunal found that the modifications maintain the intent to address public safety concerns arising from derailments, provide greater certainty regarding the 30-metre area of influence, and clarify requirements for rail safety mitigation reports.

The Tribunal approved the modified OPA 536, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan.

The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal a decision of the Assessment Review Board.

The Divisional Court granted the motion for leave to appeal, with costs reserved to the panel hearing the appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal conducted a case management conference to address multiple appeals of the City of Vaughan's Comprehensive Zoning By-law 001-2021 and Transitional By-law 039-2022.

The Tribunal heard and approved several settlement motions on consent, which corrected mapping errors and recognized site-specific exceptions for various properties.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the amendments consistent with provincial policies and good planning.

The Tribunal also issued an order under section 34(31) of the Planning Act deeming the un-appealed portions of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law to be in force.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a residential development at 11-23 Hollis Street.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement proposal for a 48-storey residential tower.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal represents good planning, is consistent with provincial policies, and conforms to the applicable official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, withholding its final order until various pre-requisite conditions are satisfied by the applicant.

The Ontario Land Tribunal considered six settlements of site-specific appeals to the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 231 (OPA 231), which deals with economic health and Employment Areas.

The Tribunal heard uncontested expert planning evidence supporting the settlements for properties in Southwest Etobicoke.

The Tribunal found that the proposed modifications to OPA 231 represented good planning, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Growth Plan.

The Tribunal approved the settlements and modified OPA 231 accordingly.

The Appellant brought a motion requesting a review of a prior Tribunal decision that dismissed its appeal of the City of St. Catharines' Official Plan Amendment No. 26 in full, and sought a stay of the OPA.

The Appellant argued the Tribunal acted outside its jurisdiction, violated rules of natural justice, and made errors of law by dismissing the appeal in full when the responding parties had only sought partial dismissal.

The Tribunal found the Appellant failed to establish a convincing and compelling case under Rule 25.7 that the Tribunal made any of the enumerated errors.

The motion for review and request for a stay were dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding 46 appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 536, which relates to development within the area of influence of rail facilities.

The Tribunal granted party status to seven entities, noted the withdrawal of two appeals in favour of party status, and established a procedural timeline for the submission of consolidated and site-specific issues lists.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for December 1, 2022.