OLT 2023

The South Bracebridge Environmental Protection Group appealed the Town of Bracebridge's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the development of a private school complex.

The Tribunal found that the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms with the applicable Official Plans, provided that the minimum buffer for wetlands and watercourses is increased from 15m to 30m.

The Tribunal also required the inclusion of a holding symbol that can only be lifted after site-specific environmental impact statements, including comprehensive amphibian and bat surveys, demonstrate no negative impacts on significant wildlife habitat.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement these amendments.

The appellant appealed a municipally initiated zoning by-law amendment intended to regulate cannabis cultivation and production facilities in the Township of Clearview.

The parties reached a settlement and presented a revised amendment to the Tribunal.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendment consistent with provincial policies and representative of good land use planning.

The appeal was allowed in part, with the final order withheld pending the submission of a final site plan application and the final form of the zoning by-law amendment.

The appellants appealed the Town's refusal of minor variances and non-decision on site plan approval, as well as a town-initiated official plan amendment and zoning by-law, to permit a two-storey addition to a residential dwelling in the Grimsby Beach area.

The parties reached a settlement involving a revised site plan and a site-specific zoning by-law amendment.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development met all legislative tests, respected the area's cultural heritage, and constituted good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision granting consent for the creation of two residential lots, arguing that the proposed lots did not meet the required setback from his adjacent industrial property.

The Tribunal found that the proposed consent conformed with the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan, and the applicable official plans.

The Tribunal also determined that there was sufficient space within the proposed parcels to maintain the required 70-metre setback from the industrial use.

The appeal was dismissed and provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants requested a minor revision to a zoning by-law amendment previously approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal for the development of 46 townhomes.

The Tribunal found the requested change, submitted on consent, to be consistent with its previous decision and order.

The Tribunal ordered the approval of the revised by-law.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval to permit a 31-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement agreement, which was supported by uncontested expert planning evidence.

The Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan, and allowed the appeals in part on an interim basis, withholding the final order until specified conditions are met.

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 permit a high-density mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement proposing three tower elements on two podiums with up to 1,250 residential units.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable official plans, and in the public interest.

The appeals were allowed and the planning instruments were approved.

The appellant appealed the Township of Tiny's comprehensive zoning by-law and a specific amendment establishing policies for short-term rental accommodations.

At the commencement of the hearing, the appellant withdrew the appeal.

The Township did not seek costs.

The Tribunal ordered the file closed.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high-density residential development.

The parties reached a settlement and presented revised applications to the Tribunal.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised applications consistent with provincial policies and local official plans.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, with final approval withheld pending the finalization of the amendments to the City's satisfaction.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a 22-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a local resident, scheduled a three-day merit hearing, and approved the parties' Draft Procedural Order.

The appellant appealed the Township of Scugog's adoption of a Community Improvement Plan for the Downtown Port Perry Area because his property was excluded.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties advised that a settlement was expected.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference, which may be converted to a settlement hearing if an agreement is reached.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an accessory dwelling unit on a property in the Hamlet of Colgan.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on the uncontroverted planning evidence that the amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans, and represents good planning, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the Zoning By-law Amendment.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by The R.W. Bloor Street Development Corporation against the City of Toronto's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a 94-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc. and Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2208 on consent.

A 10-day hearing on the merits was scheduled for June 2024, and a Procedural Order with an Issues List was finalized.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for injurious affection resulting from the construction of municipal sewage works encroaching on the claimant's property.

The Tribunal directed the parties to deliver fresh pleadings and issued a Procedural Order setting a six-day hearing to commence in September 2024.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment and site plan application to permit a 20-storey building that retains a heritage church building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party and participant status to several local residents and corporations.

Due to an outstanding heritage matter and ongoing discussions, the Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for December 15, 2023.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from a permanent easement expropriated by Metrolinx.

The parties agreed to a five-day hearing on the merits and subsequently submitted a consent Procedural Order, Issues List, and Order of Evidence.

The Tribunal scheduled the hearing and issued the Procedural Order to govern the proceeding.

The appellant appealed the Town of Amherstburg's passing of a zoning by-law amendment that permitted a reduced rear yard setback for a proposed mixed-use development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to the applicant and one adjacent resident, but denied party status to another resident who did not intend to call evidence.

Participant status was granted to two individuals.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit a consolidated issues list and draft procedural order ahead of a second Case Management Conference.

The Appellants brought a motion seeking a declaration that their appeal of a Zoning By-law Amendment passed by the Township of Seguin was valid.

The Appellants argued they did not receive notice of the public meeting and therefore could not make submissions, requesting the Tribunal use its discretion to allow the appeal.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act strictly limits appeal rights to those who made oral or written submissions before the by-law was passed, and the Tribunal has no discretion to override this statutory requirement.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference for an appeal under s. 51(34) of the Planning Act concerning the County of Lanark's failure to make a decision on a 9-lot draft plan of subdivision.

The Tribunal approved the parties' draft Procedural Order, noted there were no requests for party or participant status, and scheduled a seven-day video hearing.

The appellants appealed a zoning by-law amendment application to rezone their property from Residential Rural to Residential Waterfront to facilitate the development of a dwelling.

At the second Case Management Conference, the parties discussed ongoing issues regarding property access via a bridge.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference to allow the parties time to work together to find a solution regarding access.