Rowan Barron

The applicant appealed the City's refusal of proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and a demolition permit to allow a 5-storey mixed-use development in the Port Dalhousie Heritage Conservation District.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning and heritage evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development represents appropriate intensification, is consistent with provincial and municipal policies, and respects the heritage character of the area.

The appeals were allowed in part and the instruments approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the final form of the Zoning By-law Amendment.

The Ontario Land Tribunal convened a fourth Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Brampton's Official Plan Amendment introducing interim policies for Major Transit Station Areas, and the new City Official Plan.

The City provided a status update on ongoing settlement negotiations and proposed future motions.

The Tribunal deferred consideration of consolidating the appeals and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for July 8, 2026.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment application for a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement to allow residential uses throughout the subject property and introduce policies for affordable housing as an alternative to commercial/office space.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the City's Official Plan.

The appeal was allowed and the Official Plan was amended in accordance with the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern an upcoming 10-day hearing regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of St. Catharines.

The appeals relate to the city's failure to adopt requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments, and the refusal of an application to permit the demolition of a heritage property and redevelopment of the site with a 4-storey residential and commercial building.

The order establishes the schedule for the exchange of witness statements, expert reports, and visual evidence, and finalizes the issues list.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of consent and minor variance applications to create three new residential lots.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a comprehensive settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontradicted expert planning evidence that the proposal, subject to agreed-upon conditions including private servicing requirements, satisfied the four tests for a minor variance and had regard for provincial interests.

The appeals were allowed in part, approving the variances and granting provisional consent.

The appellant appealed the City's denial of an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and a heritage demolition permit for a property in a heritage conservation district.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring property owner on consent.

The Tribunal also granted the parties' joint request to consolidate the three appeals, finding that they involve the same property, proposed development, and common heritage issues.

Future dates for a subsequent Case Management Conference and a merit hearing were scheduled.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 72-storey mixed-use building that includes the relocation and adaptive re-use of a designated heritage building.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan.

The appeal was approved in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including the finalization of the zoning by-law amendment and engineering reports.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the City of Toronto for its failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application within the prescribed timeframe.

The application proposes a 26-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring property owner, scheduled a ten-day merit hearing, and approved the Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law amendment applications to permit a mixed-use development at 2575 and 2625 Danforth Avenue.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal considered a revised proposal for four new mixed-use buildings containing 1,649 new residential units.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal conforms to the Official Plan, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and represents good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the zoning by-law amendments in principle, withholding its final order until various preconditions are satisfied.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Armfield Estates Inc. against the City of Toronto for failing to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and scheduled a third Case Management Conference for June 4, 2025, and a ten-day hearing on the merits commencing November 24, 2025.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a proposed 49-storey residential building.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 62-storey development that includes heritage conservation, increased setbacks, and affordable housing contributions.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the City's Official Plan.

The appeals were allowed in part, and the amendments were approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several preconditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions within the required timeframe on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an 11-storey mixed-use building.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal consolidated the two appeals on consent of the parties and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered requests to substitute parties in appeals concerning a proposed 49-storey residential building in Toronto.

The Tribunal granted the unopposed request to substitute Carlyle Young Maitland GP Inc. as the Appellant, as it had acquired the subject property.

The Tribunal also granted the request to substitute OEF Village Green Nominee Inc. as a party in place of Greenrock, following OEF's acquisition of adjacent lands.

Finally, the Tribunal cancelled a previously scheduled hearing and set an accelerated written hearing date to consider a settlement offer accepted by City Council.

The applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate a 36-storey mixed-use building.

Following a previous decision, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent of the parties to govern the procedures leading up to a 13-day hearing scheduled to commence on May 21, 2025.

This was the second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's adoption of a Zoning By-law Amendment.

The appellant advised that it would be applying for a minor variance to allow office permissions on the subject property, which could resolve the appeal.

The parties jointly requested that the appeal be adjourned sine die to allow the minor variance process to unfold.

The Tribunal agreed with the proposed path forward and ordered the matter adjourned sine die, directing the parties to provide a written status update by December 2, 2024.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision for a 36-lot residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the County of Simcoe and participant status to three individuals.

The Tribunal also approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 10-day merit hearing to commence in November 2024.

The appellants appealed the City of Vaughan's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment that facilitated a high-rise residential development.

The appellants, who owned adjacent properties, primarily objected to the proposed alignment of a new stratified north-south public local road, arguing it would inequitably restrict their own future development potential.

The Tribunal found that the approved road alignment, which was the City's preferred option following a transportation master plan update, represented good planning and was in the public interest.

The Tribunal also noted that the approved development included a significant community benefits package that could be jeopardized by altering the road alignment.

The appeals were dismissed.

This was the second Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Pickering's Official Plan Amendment No. 46, which implements changes related to Bill 109.

The Tribunal reviewed a draft Procedural Order and Issues List submitted on consent, requested minor amendments including adding a party, and scheduled a two-day merit hearing for January 2025.

Minto (Mimico) Inc. brought a motion for directions to the Ontario Land Tribunal, seeking a determination that its site plan applications submitted to the City of Toronto on April 27, 2023, were complete.

The City argued the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because Minto had not attended a mandatory pre-application consultation (PAC) required by a municipal by-law.

The Tribunal found it had jurisdiction under the City of Toronto Act, holding that a municipal PAC by-law cannot override the statutory scheme for determining complete applications or delay the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The Tribunal ordered that Minto's applications were complete as of April 27, 2023.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision application for a multi-tower residential development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal comprising 870 units, including rental replacement units, a new public road, and a public park, while incorporating existing heritage facades.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with provincial policies and conforms to the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several preconditions.