Kelin Algayer

The Town of LaSalle brought a motion for directions to declare unappealed portions of Official Plan Amendment No. 2 (Howard Bouffard Secondary Plan) in force and effect.

The appellants had agreed to scope their appeals on a site-specific or area-specific basis.

Sorge Enterprises Inc., a non-appellant party sheltering under the appellants' issues, opposed the motion, arguing that the appeals should not be scoped and the broader Environmental Protection Designation should remain under appeal for all lands.

The Tribunal granted the Town's motion, finding that a non-appellant sheltering party has no right to craft issues or dictate the scope of appeals, which is the prerogative of the actual appellants.

The unappealed portions of the OPA were declared in force and effect.

The applicants appealed the City of Niagara Falls' refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Vacant Condominium to permit the development of six townhouse dwellings and one semi-detached dwelling.

The parties reached a settlement modifying the proposal to include one semi-detached dwelling instead of two and extending privacy fencing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The appeals were allowed in part, the zoning by-law was amended, and the draft plan was approved subject to conditions.

Galibier Materials Inc. appealed the Township of Springwater's failure to make a decision on applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit the expansion of an existing aggregate pit.

The Minister of Natural Resources also referred the associated Licence Application to the Tribunal.

Objectors raised concerns regarding air quality impacts from dust and the preservation of a wildlife corridor.

The Tribunal found that the proposed Dust Management Plan and revised phasing and rehabilitation plans adequately addressed the concerns.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, approved the planning instruments, and directed the Minister to issue the licence subject to conditions, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of an Official Plan Amendment, Sorge Enterprises Inc. brought a motion seeking to invalidate the County's Notice of Decision and to be added as an appellant despite filing its appeal out of time.

Sorge argued the Notice was deficient for failing to explicitly list registered owners as having appeal rights.

The Tribunal found the Notice of Decision met all prescribed regulatory requirements and was valid.

Consequently, Sorge's appeal was out of time, and the Tribunal held it lacked jurisdiction to extend the statutory appeal period.

Sorge's request to be added as an appellant was denied, but it was granted non-appellant party status on consent.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by Parklane Home Builders Limited against the Town of Fort Erie's by-law designating a property as having cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a three-day video hearing on the merits for March 2026 and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

The Tribunal also encouraged the parties to consider mediation to narrow or resolve the issues.

The applicant appealed the Town's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to redefine wetland and hazard zones and establish development envelopes.

At the third Case Management Conference, the parties advised that a settlement in principle had been reached.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day settlement hearing.

The Township of Carling sought judicial review of an Information and Privacy Commissioner order requiring disclosure of severance and termination clauses in the employment contracts of several municipal employees.

The Township argued the adjudicator erred in finding the clauses constituted 'benefits' under s. 14(4)(a) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, rather than protected personal information.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the adjudicator's decision was reasonable, adequately reasoned, and properly distinguished between benefits negotiated in an initial employment contract versus those negotiated post-termination.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Barrie's Development Charges By-law 2023-74.

The parties reached an agreement on the terms of a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal issued the Procedural Order on consent, setting a four-week hearing on the merits to commence in September 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct technical and typographical errors in a previous decision issued on April 22, 2024, pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The amendments corrected a paragraph regarding an adjournment request and a toll-free telephone number.

The appellant appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications within the prescribed timelines.

During the merit hearing, the appellant's counsel became ill, prompting a consent request for an adjournment.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, converted the session to a case management conference, and scheduled five days for the continuation of the hearing.