OLT 2022

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing appealed the County's approval of consent applications to create nine residential lots near a Provincially Significant Wetland.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal directed the applicants to complete and submit a wetland evaluation study by July 15, 2022, and scheduled a further Case Management Conference to determine if the matter would proceed to a contested hearing or settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by NYX Yonge LP from the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 12-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status on consent to two residents' organizations and deferred two participant status requests to the next CMC.

A second CMC and a 10-day hearing were scheduled.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a development permit for an on-farm diversified use, the Applicant requested party status.

The Hearing Office granted the request on consent, finding the Applicant had a genuine and direct interest in the proceeding.

The parties also discussed the identification of issues and the scheduling of the hearing, resulting in procedural directions and a scheduled hearing date.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding an appeal by Temple Ave Partners Inc. against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 16-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to an adjacent property owner, scheduled a 7-day hearing, and issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit an accessory building with an increased maximum area and a reduced setback from a watercourse on a rural residential lot.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence and a Natural Heritage Evaluation demonstrating no negative impacts on adjacent natural features, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law amendment was approved.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding an appeal by Joseph and Laura Puopolo against the Region of Waterloo's adoption of Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 2 (ROPA 2).

The settlement proposed utilizing the appellants' lands as a stormwater retention pond and outlet facility, freeing up other lands within ROPA 2 for residential development without expanding the urban area.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with provincial policies and the Regional Official Plan, allowed the appeal in part, and amended ROPA 2 accordingly.

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

Prior to the hearing, the applicant revised the proposal to a 21-storey condominium building and reached a settlement with the City and neighbouring residents' associations.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal conforms to the applicable official plans and provincial policies, the Tribunal approved the development subject to the fulfillment of final conditions.

Beachside Development Inc. sought costs against Manning Developments Inc. following the dismissal of Manning's appeal of a zoning by-law amendment.

The Tribunal found that Manning's appeal lacked any land use planning grounds and was filed to delay Beachside's development and advance Manning's own servicing dispute with the Municipality.

Concluding that Manning's conduct was patently unreasonable and vexatious, the Tribunal awarded costs to Beachside on a partial indemnity scale in the amount of $12,500.

A third and final Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals of an official plan amendment, zoning by-law, and plan of subdivision.

The Tribunal confirmed that the hearing will proceed by video, as in-person hearings cannot be accommodated.

The applicant withdrew a request to introduce expert evidence-in-chief exclusively through written statements, resolving the final procedural issue.

The 15-day video hearing will proceed as scheduled.

The City of Oshawa brought a motion to adjourn a scheduled site plan appeal hearing because its expert witness, a natural heritage ecologist, had a scheduling conflict with another Tribunal hearing.

The appellant, NDA Investments Ltd., opposed the adjournment and brought a cross-motion to substitute the new registered owners as appellants and to set procedural directions.

The Tribunal dismissed the City's adjournment request, finding that the City failed to show exceptional circumstances and that the expert's schedule could be accommodated in the other hearing.

The Tribunal granted the cross-motion, substituting the new owners as appellants and issuing procedural directions for the exchange of witness lists and documents to ensure an expeditious hearing.

The appellant appealed the City of Vaughan Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances for a rear yard deck and access stairs.

The requested variances involved reductions to the minimum interior side yard and rear yard setbacks.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the variances met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, maintaining the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, being desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and being minor in nature.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized.

The City of Timmins appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision granting a minor variance to permit a seasonal trailer as a secondary dwelling on a waterfront property.

The property is located on a lake identified by the Ministry of the Environment as being at capacity for development.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal and refused the variance, finding that it did not meet the four tests under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal relied on expert planning evidence that the variance would result in inappropriate intensification contrary to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, which require a rezoning application and supporting environmental studies for additional dwellings in the waterfront zone.

The applicants appealed the County's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment and failure to decide on a consent application to create two new rural residential lots.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposal has regard for matters of provincial interest, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and the County Official Plan, and complies with Minimum Distance Separation formulae.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the zoning amendment and provisional consent subject to conditions.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a site plan application for a 10-unit infill townhouse development.

The parties advised they were engaged in constructive settlement discussions.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference to either hear a settlement or schedule a hearing on the merits.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals for the failure of the City of Vaughan to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications.

The Tribunal granted party status to two individuals and participant status to several others.

A second Case Management Conference and a 15-day hearing were scheduled.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision regarding a site plan approval application for a proposed five-storey vehicle sales facility.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed site plan and conditions were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the site plan was approved in principle subject to conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an application for an aggregate extraction license on private lands.

The application was referred to the Tribunal due to objections from local residents.

The self-represented parties had not prepared a Draft Procedural Order or Issues List prior to the conference.

The Tribunal provided instructions on party obligations, adjusted party and participant statuses, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to allow the parties time to prepare and potentially engage in discussions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Mississauga's Official Plan Amendment No. 115.

The parties presented a revised draft Procedural Order and requested a phased hearing approach.

The Tribunal scheduled a 5-day Phase 1 hearing and a 25-day Phase 2 hearing, and directed the parties to submit a finalized Procedural Order with an Issues List.

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

The Tribunal denied party status to several individuals but granted participant status to two.

A 13-day video hearing was scheduled, and a Procedural Order was issued to govern the proceedings.

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

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal scheduled a five-day video hearing for October 24, 2022, and directed the City to submit its Issues List by May 31, 2022.