OLT 2022

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding multiple appeals related to the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan, the Vaughan Official Plan, and various site-specific zoning and subdivision applications.

The Tribunal adjourned the Phase 3 hearing on consent to allow parties to finalize settlements and scheduled a further hearing for March 2023.

Additional dates were set for the remaining Vaughan Official Plan appeals and the Solmar Inc./Eastwood Holdings Corp. appeals, with directions provided for video hearing participation.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and proposed Plan of Subdivision for an 18-lot residential development.

The Tribunal granted Party status to an adjacent industrial operator.

The Tribunal also provided directions to the parties to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application for a mixed-use waterfront development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal comprising nine buildings, including a hotel, townhouses, and an apartment building.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the applicable Official Plans.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement by-law.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of an Official Plan Amendment to permit retail and commercial uses in an agricultural area.

Due to the potential impacts of Bill 23 (More Homes Built Faster Act), the Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference to allow the parties to update the Tribunal on the status of discussions and finalize the Procedural Order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference and hearing regarding multiple appeals related to the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan, the 2010 Vaughan Official Plan, and various site-specific development applications.

The Tribunal granted an adjournment of the Phase 3 hearing for the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan appeals to allow parties to finalize settlements.

The Tribunal also scheduled a further Case Management Conference for the remaining Vaughan Official Plan appeals and agreed to an altered hearing plan for the Solmar Inc. and Eastwood Holdings Corp. appeals.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development consisting of townhouses and detached/semi-detached dwellings.

Following a public hearing, the Tribunal previously determined the appeals should be allowed in part.

The Tribunal, having been advised that conditions to the issuance of the final order were satisfied, ordered the Official Plan and Zoning By-laws amended accordingly.

The City of Toronto brought a motion to dismiss the Claimants' Notice of Arbitration for delay.

The Claimants sought compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from a 1997 expropriation.

The City argued the 21-year delay prejudiced its ability to respond.

The Tribunal found the delay was not solely the fault of the Claimants, noting periods of self-representation and the City's own delays in producing documents.

The Tribunal concluded the circumstances did not justify the extraordinary remedy of outright dismissal, which would deprive the Claimants of their right to seek compensation.

The motion was dismissed with no costs.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a site plan application to permit the redevelopment of four 3-storey townhouse units.

Following a settlement hearing where the Tribunal previously allowed the zoning by-law amendment appeals in principle, the Tribunal heard uncontested expert planning evidence supporting the site plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the site plan application in principle, subject to pre-approval and post-approval conditions.

The Tribunal issued an amending order to correct a minor technical error in a Zoning By-law Amendment previously approved for a 16-storey mixed-use building in Toronto.

The correction addressed an error in the calculation of the total maximum gross floor area and the maximum gross floor area for residential uses.

The amendment was made pursuant to the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, which allow for the correction of technical or typographical errors without prior notice to the parties.

The appellant appealed the Town's approval of official plan and zoning by-law amendments that would facilitate a medical clinic and professional office development on a property in Virgil.

The appellant, who operates a nearby medical centre, argued the amendments were inconsistent with provincial policies, would remove needed residential lands, and would negatively impact existing commercial areas.

The Tribunal found the proposed instruments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed with the Growth Plan and the Region's Official Plan, and conformed with the Town's Official Plan.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's market impact study, finding a need for the proposed medical uses and no evidence that the development would cause blight or significant adverse market impacts.

The appeals were dismissed.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 13-storey hotel.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties indicated good prospects for settlement but required time for the City to obtain instructions.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for March 2023, which may be converted to a settlement hearing, and directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List beforehand.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the Town of Aurora's refusal to grant an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for a proposed residential development.

The Tribunal granted Party status to the Region of York on consent.

Due to an Interim Control By-law enacted by the Town, the parties requested and the Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing for 2024 and a second Case Management Conference for 2023.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 46-unit townhouse development in Kincardine.

The Tribunal abridged the time for service, granted participant status to a neighbour, and scheduled a further CMC that may be converted to a settlement hearing, as the parties are in the process of executing Minutes of Settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of Official Plan Amendment No. 49 of the District of Muskoka and Official Plan Amendment No. 56 of the Township of Muskoka Lakes.

The Tribunal granted party status to 2084311 Ontario Limited and Friends of Muskoka on consent.

The parties expressed openness to mediation, and a second Case Management Conference was scheduled to receive a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make decisions on applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments.

The applications seek to permit a six-storey residential apartment building with commercial uses at grade.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent, setting the hearing dates, procedural steps, and the final Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a telephone conference call to schedule a motion for a stay of a Director's Order issued under the Environmental Protection Act, which prohibited the burning of waste wood materials at the site.

The Tribunal set dates for the stay motion, established a timetable for the exchange of motion materials, and scheduled a 5-day hearing on the merits.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order following a case management conference regarding appeals by the applicant for a proposed 196-unit subdivision.

The appeals were brought under sections 34(11) and 51(34) of the Planning Act due to the municipality's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law amendment and plan of subdivision applications.

The Tribunal ordered that the revised procedural order provided by the parties is in force and effect to guide the hearing of the merits.

The applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a proposed mixed-use redevelopment.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to several neighbours and directed one unincorporated group to incorporate before the next CMC.

The Tribunal also limited a participant's 28-page submission to three pages of written submissions without evidence, pursuant to section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act.

A second CMC and a seven-day hearing on the merits were scheduled.

The applicants appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing a minor variance to reduce the minimum distance separation (MDS) between their vacant lot and a nearby dairy farm to permit the construction of a single-detached dwelling.

The Tribunal heard uncontradicted expert planning evidence that the variance met the four tests under the Planning Act, as the proposed residential use was permitted, compatible with surrounding uses, and would not impede the dairy farm's expansion more than existing proximate residential lots.

The Tribunal authorized the variance.

The appellant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's decision approving a consent to sever and associated minor variances to facilitate the creation of two lots for single detached dwellings.

The Tribunal accepted the unrefuted expert land use planning evidence that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and met the four tests for minor variances under the Planning Act.

The appeal was dismissed, the variances were authorized, and provisional consent was granted.