OLT 2022

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an application to amend the zoning by-law to permit a 15-storey residential apartment building.

Following a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent to govern the organization and conduct of the upcoming 5-day video hearing.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against a site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment and Official Plan Amendment to facilitate the expansion of a metal fabrication facility.

The Tribunal consolidated the appeals, granted party status to the County of Simcoe on consent, and adjourned the Applicant's Motion to Dismiss to a later date due to health-related issues for one counsel.

Directions were also given for the preparation of a draft Procedural Order.

The appellants appealed the City of Brampton Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances to permit a below grade entrance and reduced side yard setback for a secondary dwelling unit.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement with an amended side yard setback.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the amended variances met the four tests under the Planning Act and authorized the variances subject to a site plan condition, declining to impose enforcement-related conditions requested by the parties.

Following a previous decision allowing the appeal regarding a zoning by-law amendment to permit the construction of a deck and stairs on a waterfront residential property, the parties submitted a draft Zoning By-law Amendment.

The Ontario Land Tribunal reviewed the draft, noted the consent of all parties, and ordered the approval of the Zoning By-law Amendment.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a proposed redevelopment at 90 Eglinton Avenue East.

The Tribunal previously allowed the appeal in part and approved the redevelopment in principle, withholding its final order until certain conditions were met.

Having been advised that all conditions were satisfied, the Tribunal issued its final order amending the zoning by-law to permit the redevelopment, subject to a Section 37 agreement securing financial contributions and parkland dedication.

The applicant appealed the Town's failure to make decisions on applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit residential development on portions of an existing golf course.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments were consistent with provincial policy, protected natural heritage features, and represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part and the instruments approved in principle.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the District Municipality of Muskoka and the Town of Huntsville for failing to make decisions on a proposed plan of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment.

The Tribunal directed the municipalities to provide an outline of their concerns, set a timeline for the exchange of witness statements, and confirmed the hearing would commence on August 8, 2022.

The applicant appealed the City of Windsor Committee of Adjustment's decisions denying a consent application and refusing a minor variance application to sever a property and reduce lot width and area for a new single-family dwelling.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement supporting the appeals.

The Ontario Land Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the variances met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act and that the consent application satisfied the criteria under section 51(24).

The appeals were allowed, the variances authorized, and provisional consent granted subject to conditions.

The appellants appealed the City of Cambridge Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances required to permit a one-bedroom secondary dwelling unit in the basement of their existing home.

The variances sought relief for minimum lot area and frontage.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found that the proposed variances satisfied the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Growth Plan.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a site plan application and the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances for a mixed-use development with three tall buildings.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal heard uncontested planning evidence supporting the revised proposal, which increased building heights and added a podium.

The Tribunal found the variances met the four tests under the Planning Act, authorized the variances subject to a section 37 agreement condition, and adjourned the site plan appeal on consent.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the upcoming hearing regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipal authority's refusal or neglect to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The application seeks to permit the development of an 8-storey apartment building, condominium and townhouse units, and one semi-detached dwelling.

The Procedural Order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, the list of parties, the order of evidence, and the issues list.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 24-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted party status to the school board, a neighbourhood alliance, and two adjacent property owners, and participant status to several local residents.

The Tribunal also approved the Procedural Order and scheduled a 15-day merits hearing.

The applicant appealed the Town of Orangeville's refusal of consent, minor variance, and zoning by-law amendment applications intended to facilitate the creation of a new single-detached residential lot and two semi-detached units on a property containing a heritage dwelling.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans, and compliant with the criteria for consent under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, provisionally granted the consent, approved the zoning by-law amendment, and dismissed the minor variance application as redundant.

The Appellants appealed the Town of Petrolia's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment that would permit residential development within a 10-hectare significant woodlot.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's forestry and species at risk studies did not constitute a complete Environmental Impact Study (EIS) as required by the Provincial Policy Statement, County Official Plan, and Town Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals and refused the amendments, concluding that a full EIS demonstrating no negative impacts on natural features or ecological functions is required before development can be considered.

The applicants sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for a hauled sewage disposal site on an adjacent property.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found that the applicants had standing to seek leave to appeal under section 38(1) of the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicants failed to satisfy the two-part test under section 41.

The Tribunal concluded that the Director's decision was reasonable, as it was based on comprehensive technical reports and included stringent conditions to protect water resources and prevent off-site impacts.

Furthermore, the Tribunal found no evidence that the ECA could result in significant harm to the environment.

The applicant appealed the Town's failure to make a decision on a site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit commercial cooking equipment within an existing Estate Winery.

The Tribunal granted party status to abutting neighbours but denied it to others who did not raise legitimate land use planning issues.

Relying on the uncontested expert planning evidence of the applicant, the Tribunal found that the proposed amendment represents good planning, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the Greenbelt Plan, Growth Plan, and local official plans.

The appeal was allowed and the Zoning By-law was amended.

The Tribunal previously allowed appeals by the applicant regarding the municipality's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 25-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal withheld its final order until the final form of the amendments was provided.

Having received and reviewed the proposed amendments on consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered that the Official Plan and Zoning By-law be amended in accordance with the attached schedules.

The appellant appealed the City of Richmond Hill's refusal to amend the zoning by-law and official plan to permit a 19-unit townhouse development on a site zoned for neighbourhood commercial use.

The City argued the commercial zoning should be preserved and that the residential proposal was incompatible with the existing neighbourhood.

The Tribunal found that the broader neighbourhood was adequately serviced by existing commercial developments and that the proposed infill townhouses were compatible with the established residential fabric.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, directing the amendment of the official plan and withholding the final zoning order pending a finalized by-law, but declined the City's request to require section 118 Land Titles Act restrictions.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal against Leamington's Zoning By-law No. 17-21, which regulates boarding houses and farm worker dwellings.

The parties advised that the Superior Court of Justice recently quashed the related Official Plan Amendment No. 8 and directed the municipality to issue a fresh Notice of Adoption.

The Tribunal adjourned the matter sine die to allow the municipality to fulfill the Court's directions and directed the parties to provide a written update by September 15, 2022.

The claimants brought a motion regarding delayed responses to undertakings from the discovery of the City's appraiser in an expropriation compensation matter.

As previous timeframes could no longer be met, the parties sought a new hearing date to allow for appropriate exchange dates and potential mediation.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference, set new dates for the exchange of appraisal reports, and rescheduled the 15-day hearing for May and June 2023.