OLT 2023

The appellant appealed the City of Thorold's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a three-storey, 34-unit apartment building on a property currently containing a single detached dwelling.

The Tribunal found that the proposed residential use, increased density, and built form were appropriate and compatible with the existing neighbourhood.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the appellant's land use planner, concluding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan, Regional Official Plan, and local Official Plan, and represented good planning in the public interest.

The appeal was allowed in part to amend the zoning by-laws.

The applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to make a decision on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications to permit a mixed-use redevelopment of a commercial site.

Prior to the merit hearing, the parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal comprising four new buildings, a retained heritage building, and a public park.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the settlement proposal is consistent with provincial policy, conforms to regional and local official plans, and represents appropriate intensification.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendments in principle, withholding its final order pending the satisfaction of conditions related to sanitary servicing and finalization of the instruments.

The Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding appeals from the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law amendment applications for a mixed-use development at 309 Cherry Street.

The applicant requested a further CMC in June 2024 to allow time to review the outcomes of the City's ongoing review of the Port Lands Official Plan, which may necessitate changes to the proposed zoning or an Official Plan Amendment.

The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a further CMC.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the Town's failure to make decisions on Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan applications for a proposed drive-through restaurant.

The Tribunal granted participant status to eight individuals who raised concerns about traffic, lighting, and litter.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List, and to address a potential appeal regarding a Heritage Demolition Permit.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Far Sight Homes and others against the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville for failing to make decisions on Official Plan, Zoning By-law, and draft plan of subdivision applications.

The Town requested consolidation with another ongoing appeal, but the Tribunal deferred that decision pending a future conference in the other matter.

The Tribunal set a 10-day hearing commencing June 3, 2024, and granted participant status to a local resident.

The Applicant sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval for a hot-mix asphalt plant to operate in conjunction with an existing quarry.

The Applicant argued the decision was unreasonable because the Director failed to properly consider the Statement of Environmental Values, cumulative effects, common law rights, and applicable guidelines.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to demonstrate that no reasonable person could have made the decision, as the Director appropriately considered the relevant studies, policies, and mitigation measures.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

This was the third Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a proposed Official Plan Amendment (OPA 131) in the City of Mississauga.

The parties advised that a site-specific Official Plan Amendment (OPA 160) had been adopted for one of the subject properties, which modifies OPA 131.

The Tribunal adjourned the appeal and scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference to allow the appeal period for OPA 160 to expire and to determine next steps.

The appellant appealed the City of Burlington Committee of Adjustment's decision denying several minor variances required to construct a new two-storey dwelling.

Prior to the hearing, the appellant and the City reached a settlement that slightly reduced the requested garage projections.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the amended variances met the four tests under the Planning Act and authorized the variances.

The applicants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval within the statutory timeframe.

The applications seek to facilitate the development of 53 residential units in stacked townhouses with a ground-floor commercial unit.

At the Case Management Conference, the parties requested a further date to continue settlement discussions.

The Tribunal scheduled an additional Case Management Conference for November 23, 2023.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for the failure of the City of Waterloo and the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit an 18-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Region for the Zoning By-law Amendment matter and participant status to a local resident.

A 15-day hearing of the merits was scheduled, and a Procedural Order with an Issues List was approved to govern the proceedings.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a two-tower, 682-unit mixed-use development at 45 The Esplanade.

The Ontario Land Tribunal previously allowed the appeals in part and approved the development 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 Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit the development.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a Zoning By-law Amendment approved by the City of London to permit a development of three mixed-use buildings.

The parties resolved outstanding issues regarding the Issues List.

The Tribunal approved the final Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a 7-day video hearing for May 2024.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the approval of an Official Plan Amendment to permit the expansion of a Place of Worship in the Greenbelt Plan Area.

The Tribunal granted Party Status to the applicant but denied a Party Status request from a local resident who sought to act as a negotiator rather than raise planning concerns.

The Tribunal also deferred a request to consolidate these appeals with a related Zoning By-law Amendment appeal, scheduling a combined Case Management Conference to address procedural matters.

The appellant appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an 11-storey mixed-use building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement for a revised eight-storey mixed-use building.

Based on uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal represented good planning, provided appropriate transition, and was compatible with the surrounding context.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the finalization of the planning instruments and related agreements.

The appellant municipality and an individual appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision granting a consent to sever a residential property to create a new lot.

The municipality argued the severance did not conform to its Official Plan regarding neighbourhood character and lot fabric.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontradicted expert planning evidence that the proposed lot frontage was significantly narrower than the established neighbourhood lot fabric.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and refused the provisional consent, finding it did not satisfy section 51(24)(c) of the Planning Act.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Southcote Hills Inc. against the City of Hamilton for failing to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a proposed 57-unit townhouse development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two local residents, directed the parties to submit a Draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled an eight-day video hearing to commence on July 29, 2024.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing a minor variance to permit a cabana accessory structure with a reduced exterior side yard setback.

At an uncontested hearing, the appellant's land use planner provided expert testimony that the variance met the four tests under the Planning Act, was consistent with provincial policies, and conformed to local official plans.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested planning evidence, which was corroborated by municipal planning staff, and allowed the appeal, authorizing the variance subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Welland's refusal of applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a draft plan of subdivision to permit townhouse and single detached dwellings.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to three individuals who raised concerns about density, traffic, and neighbourhood character.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day video hearing for the merits of the appeal and directed the parties to submit an issues list.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a zoning by-law amendment application to permit four mixed-use buildings.

The applicant and the City of Toronto had reached a settlement, but negotiations with Metrolinx regarding road network alterations and the operation of the Guildwood GO Station were ongoing.

The Tribunal scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference to allow the parties to finalize a settlement or, alternatively, to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List for a merit hearing.

The expropriating authority applied to expropriate a temporary limited easement interest over a portion of the owner's property to regrade a driveway in connection with a light rail transit project.

The owner requested a hearing under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal found that the proposed taking was necessary to complete the regrading but lacked appropriate access.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposed taking would be fair, sound, and reasonably necessary only if modified to include adjacent access lands.