OLT 2023

At a Case Management Conference for appeals of a Zoning By-law Amendment, the Tribunal granted party status to the property owner and a neighbouring developer.

The appellants, who attended with limited-retainer counsel, requested an adjournment to retain specialized municipal counsel and respond to the applicant's motions for summary dismissal.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, finding that the prejudice to the appellants of proceeding without proper counsel outweighed any prejudice to the applicant, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to hear the motions and finalize the procedural order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order following a case management conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the respondent's refusal to approve a zoning by-law amendment.

The amendment sought to permit a five-storey residential building with 74 units.

The order sets out the organization of the hearing, filing dates, and the issues list.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to 15 individuals, noted the parties' interest in Tribunal-led mediation, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a zoning by-law amendment passed by the Township.

The parties could not agree on an Issues List.

The Tribunal found that many of the issues proposed by the appellants were outside its jurisdiction, such as alleged irregularities in the passage of the by-law and contractual liability.

The Tribunal adopted the five issues proposed by the Township and scheduled a two-day merit hearing.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference for an appeal against a zoning by-law passed by the Township of Tay.

The Tribunal granted participant status to three nearby property owners.

A request to consolidate the appeal with another related appeal was deferred to a second Case Management Conference, which was scheduled for January 2024.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law amendment and site plan control applications for a proposed mixed-use development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status on consent to an adjacent landowner, 115 Saulter South LP.

The Tribunal also granted participant status to Hydro One Networks Inc. and Tepfam Holdings Inc., with leave to renew requests for party status at the next conference.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the upcoming 10-day video hearing regarding appeals by Snowy Owl Woods Holdings Inc. (Mistral Development Inc.) against the Municipality of Port Hope for its failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a plan of subdivision.

The applications propose a development of 43 single detached dwellings and a block for a 10 to 21-unit apartment building.

The Order establishes the issues list, order of evidence, and procedural dates leading up to the hearing scheduled to commence on June 3, 2024.

The applicant appealed the City of Brampton Committee of Adjustment's refusal of applications for provisional consent and minor variances to effect a lot line adjustment and access easement for lands containing a heritage-designated Hindu temple.

The Shree Jagannath Temple Canada, which occupies the temple, opposed the application, arguing it would negatively impact parking and future expansion.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the proposed lot size would provide adequate parking and allow the temple to continue its current operations.

The Tribunal concluded that the consent satisfied the criteria under s. 51(24) of the Planning Act and the variances met the four tests under s. 45(1).

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the Town's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The amendment sought to permit a commercial refueling station.

The Tribunal scheduled an 8-day video hearing to commence on March 25, 2024, and directed the appellant to submit a final draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellants appealed the Township's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit an existing small-scale shed within the shoreline setback on their seasonal recreational property.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised amendment that defined the structure as a 'marine storage shed' and established specific regulations for its size and setbacks.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendment was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and County Official Plan, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding appeals by the applicant for the failure of the City of Mississauga to adopt a requested official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment to permit a 38-storey mixed-use tower.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring developer on consent.

A 15-day hearing was scheduled to commence on May 6, 2024, and the parties were directed to finalize the procedural order.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a conditional approval for a development permit under the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, the applicants for the permit sought and were granted party status on consent.

The president of the condominium corporation withdrew his request for party status, agreeing to participate as a witness instead.

The parties discussed the issues, including driveway location and drainage, and agreed to review revised development plans before scheduling a subsequent Case Management Conference.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The claimant, a commercial tenant operating a daycare, sought damages for injurious affection arising from the acquisition of an easement and construction at the High Park Subway Station.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order setting a seven-day hearing on the merits and establishing pre-hearing timelines.

The applicant, acting as Estate Trustee for the deceased claim holder, applied to vest the deceased's interest in three mining claims in herself in her capacity as Estate Trustee.

The applicant also requested an extension of time to perform and file assessment work.

The Tribunal granted the application, vesting the mining claims in the Estate Trustee pursuant to s. 74(2)(a) of the Mining Act, and extended the deadline for assessment work to April 4, 2025, pursuant to s. 74(2)(b).

The Building Industry and Land Development Association appealed the Town of Oakville's adoption of Official Plan Amendments 53 and 329, which updated policies in response to Bill 109.

The parties reached a settlement modifying the amendments to direct that applicants should host Public Information Meetings prior to submitting development applications.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the modifications represented good planning by formalizing a process for early public engagement.

The appeal was allowed in part to approve the modified amendments.

The appellant appealed the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake Committee of Adjustment's denial of a minor variance application to increase lot coverage from 33% to 40% for a new single-detached dwelling.

The Town Council subsequently supported the variance and did not call witnesses.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the variance met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, having regard to provincial interests and maintaining the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The appeal was allowed and the variance authorized.

The Claimant sought compensation for injurious affection after the Ministry of Transportation closed one of two accesses to its mixed-use property during highway improvements.

The Ministry argued the closed access and the commercial use of the property were illegal, precluding compensation.

The Tribunal found that the access and commercial use were legal and grandfathered.

Applying the test for injurious affection where no land is taken, the Tribunal awarded the Claimant $149,160 based on a 'cost to cure' approach to construct an internal loop driveway, plus $27,500 for disturbance damages.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Infinity Development Group Inc. against the City of Burlington's refusal of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for a 29-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal scheduled a 14-day merit hearing to commence in February 2025 and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The City of Toronto proposed to expropriate properties for the Beecroft Road Extension Project.

The property owners requested a hearing of necessity under the Expropriations Act.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held an inquiry to determine if the proposed takings were fair, sound, and reasonably necessary.

The Tribunal found that a full taking of the parcels was required to complete the transportation network infrastructure and recommended the expropriation of the fee simple interest in the lands.

The Ministry of Transportation applied to close ten municipal roads intersecting Highway 3 to facilitate highway widening and enhance safety.

The Armstrongs opposed the closure of the Cameron Side Road and 9th Concession Road intersection due to concerns about farm machinery access.

Counsel for the Armstrongs abruptly left the hearing before cross-examining the Ministry's expert.

Based on the unchallenged expert evidence that the closures were necessary for safety and that sufficient alternative access existed, the Tribunal approved the application.