D. Pateman

The appellant appealed the municipality's adoption of an official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment intended to facilitate a mixed-use development.

At the first case management conference, the parties advised the tribunal that they were engaged in resolution discussions.

The tribunal scheduled a second case management conference on the joint request of the parties and directed the filing of a procedural order and issues list.

The appellant appealed the Township of Champlain's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments intended to permit a 95-unit residential development consisting of townhouses and a multi-residential block.

Prior to the hearing, the appellant and CN Rail reached a settlement that included mitigation measures for the adjacent rail operations.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments were consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, conformed to the applicable Official Plan, and had regard for matters of provincial interest.

The appeals were allowed and the amendments approved.

The applicant appealed the Township's Committee of Adjustment decision refusing minor variances to permit a wellness centre as a home business within a dwelling and a detached garage.

The Tribunal found that the proposed use did not conform with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan's definition of a 'home business', as it would operate in both the dwelling and an accessory structure, and its scale would dominate the residential use.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the variances failed the four-part test under section 45(1) of the Planning Act and dismissed the appeal.

The City of Niagara Falls requested an adjournment of an upcoming hearing regarding 2023 planning instruments, arguing the proceeding may become moot due to a prior Tribunal decision that precluded the appellant's appeal of superseding 2025 planning instruments under Bill 185.

The appellant opposed the adjournment.

The Tribunal exercised its discretion to cancel the scheduled hearing to allow the appellant time to consider whether to seek a review or appeal of the prior decision, and to avoid potentially unnecessary proceedings.

The Tribunal ordered the parties to provide a status update within 60 days.

The City of Niagara Falls brought a motion for directions to determine whether Cytec Canada Inc. had standing to appeal three planning instruments under the Planning Act.

Following amendments by the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024, appeals are restricted to 'specified persons'.

Cytec argued it qualified as an environmental compliance approval (ECA) holder.

The Tribunal found that the plain language of subsection 1(1)(l) of the Planning Act requires the ECA activity to be undertaken on lands within 300 metres of the planning area.

Because Cytec's ECA applied to lands further away, and not to its 'Beechwood Lands' within the 300-metre radius, it did not meet the definition.

The Tribunal ordered that Cytec's appeals were precluded.

The Summerhill Residents Association requested a review of a TLAB decision that authorized minor variances for a rear three-storey addition to a townhouse.

The Association alleged that the presiding Member violated procedural fairness by plagiarizing the applicant's expert planner, made errors of law regarding Official Plan policies on prevailing density, and acted outside jurisdiction by approving a landscaping variance involving encroachments.

The TLAB Chair dismissed the review request, finding no evidence of bias, plagiarism, or jurisdictional error.

The Chair held that the presiding Member properly exercised discretion in preferring the expert planner's evidence over the Association's submissions and correctly applied the statutory tests.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision denying three minor variances for a proposed rear addition to an existing townhouse.

The variances related to rear yard soft landscaping, distance between main walls, and floor space index.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposal represented a modest addition compatible with the neighbourhood's physical character.

The Tribunal found that the variances met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act and allowed the appeal, subject to a standard urban forestry condition.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Cambridge's refusal to enact a Zoning By-law Amendment for a proposed residential development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and the Waterloo Region District School Board on consent.

A request for party status by adjacent landowners Funchal Enterprises Inc. and Urros Investments Inc. was denied, but they were granted participant status with leave to re-apply for party status at the next CMC.

The parties indicated an interest in Tribunal-led mediation once the related draft plan of subdivision appeal is filed.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make decisions on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and plan of subdivision to permit a high-density mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement that was endorsed by City Council following successful mediation.

The Tribunal convened a settlement hearing but the parties required more time to finalize the planning instruments.

The Tribunal issued an order vacating the hearing dates and directing the parties to submit the finalized planning instruments by June 30, 2024.

This decision arises from a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Vaughan's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed residential development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals and entities without objection from the parties.

The parties advised the Tribunal of an ongoing settlement proposal that City Council has accepted.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day hearing on the merits and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Centennial Hotels Limited against the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed 71-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to Dream Office (GP) Inc., Canada Life Assurance Company, and the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood Association.

The parties indicated they are pursuing private mediation, and a second Case Management Conference was scheduled for June 2024.