OLT 2024

At a Case Management Conference concerning appeals of the Town of Fort Erie's Official Plan Amendment No. 56 and Zoning By-Law Amendment No. 144-2021, the appellants requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing dates to facilitate ongoing settlement discussions.

The Tribunal granted the request, vacating the August 2024 hearing dates and scheduling a further Case Management Conference.

The Tribunal convened Case Management Conferences for claims for compensation filed by the claimant against several utility companies for delays in providing locates.

Following the recent repeal of s. 17(1)(c) of the Ontario Underground Infrastructure Notification System Act, the respondents argued the Tribunal no longer had jurisdiction to award compensation.

The Tribunal initiated a motion to determine its jurisdiction via a written hearing and set a schedule for submissions.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to increase the permitted height of a mixed-use building from 85 to 94 storeys.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement to permit a 91-storey building.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan, noting it would provide additional housing and serve as a landmark without creating unacceptable adverse impacts.

The appeal was allowed in part and the amendments were approved in principle.

The claimant requested a Hearing of Necessity regarding the proposed expropriation of their lands by Metrolinx for the Kitchener Corridor Expansion project.

Metrolinx presented unchallenged expert evidence that a grade separation and flyover were necessary for safety and to accommodate increased rail traffic, and that the claimant's lands were the ideal location due to topography.

The Tribunal found that the proposed takings were fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to achieve the expropriating authority's objectives, and reported that the takings were reasonably defensible.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal rescinded the previous procedural order and issued an amended procedural order setting out the schedule for discoveries, expert meetings, mediation, and the video hearing.

The appellant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding a site plan application for an urban distribution and logistics facility.

The Tribunal previously issued an interim order approving the revised site plan in principle, subject to the receipt of a final site plan and an executed site plan agreement.

Having received confirmation that these conditions were met, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and granted final approval of the site plan.

The applicant appealed the Town of Gravenhurst Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent application to create one new lot.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties advised of a dispute regarding whether the underlying Draft Plan of Subdivision had lapsed, which the applicant had separately appealed to the District Municipality of Muskoka.

The Tribunal found that scheduling a hearing was premature given the uncertainty surrounding the subdivision appeal, which could impact the positions of the Town and the District.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference to allow the parties to update the Tribunal or present a settlement.

The Applicant appealed the City's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit two 15-storey apartment buildings.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Peel and participant status to two individuals on consent.

The Tribunal declined to set dates for a merit hearing as the parties were engaged in mediation and an issues list had not yet been finalized, instead scheduling a second Case Management Conference.

The appellant appealed a municipally initiated comprehensive zoning by-law amendment that introduced a new Natural Environment zone on his properties, arguing it did not permit ongoing agricultural uses.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties agreed to scope the appeal to apply only to the appellant's properties.

The Tribunal ordered the appeal scoped accordingly and deemed the unappealed portions of the zoning by-law to have come into force on the day it was passed, pursuant to s. 34(31) of the Planning Act.

At a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a retirement home, the applicant challenged the validity of the appeal under s. 34(19) of the Planning Act.

The applicant argued the appellant corporation was incorporated after the council decision and did not make prior submissions.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to bring a formal motion to determine the validity of the appeal and set a schedule for motion materials and a hearing date.

The appellant filed an appeal against the City of Ottawa's Parkland Dedication By-law 2022-280.

The Tribunal found that the appeal was filed outside the 40-day statutory appeal period prescribed by section 42(4.5) of the Planning Act.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal without a hearing pursuant to its Rules of Practice and Procedure and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The claimants brought a claim for determination of compensation under the Expropriations Act regarding an expropriated property.

The parties reached a settlement and confirmed that all payments, including costs and interest, had been made.

The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the matter without costs.

The applicants appealed the failure of the Township of Springwater and the County of Simcoe to make decisions on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The parties reached a full settlement agreement.

Based on the uncontradicted affidavit evidence of a land use planner, the Tribunal found the proposed instruments consistent with provincial policies and in conformity with applicable official plans.

The appeals were allowed in part, and the instruments were approved subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed the City of Mississauga Committee of Adjustment's denial of minor variances required to construct a two-storey single detached dwelling.

At the hearing, the parties presented a settlement involving an amended application with reduced variances for eaves height, ridge height, front yard setback, and dwelling depth.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the amended application met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, was consistent with provincial policies, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed and the amended variances were authorized subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed the City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law No. 2023-156, which rezoned their properties to a Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES-4).

The parties reached a settlement to apply a Residential Five Zone (RES-5) to the subject properties, permitting a wider range of low-density dwelling types.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the settlement supports appropriate infilling and intensification consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

The appeal was allowed in part to amend the zoning by-law in accordance with the settlement.

The appellant appealed the Township's Committee of Adjustment decision refusing a minor variance to reduce the minimum side yard setback from 5 metres to 1.83 metres to permit the construction of an open louvered pergola.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found that the proposed variance met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, was minor in nature, and was desirable for the appropriate use of the land.

The appeal was allowed and the variance was authorized subject to conditions.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference (CMC) regarding appeals of Environmental Penalty Orders issued for contaminated water emitted from a former graphite mine.

The Appellant requested a brief adjournment on consent to retain new counsel.

The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a further CMC for June 25, 2024.

A first Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals for the failure of the City of Kitchener to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendment applications for a 13-storey apartment building.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and participant status to two neighbours.

A Procedural Order and Issues List were approved, and a four-day merit hearing was scheduled for January 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the city's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for a mixed-use development.

The Tribunal abridged the notice period for certain addresses, granted participant status to two individuals, and scheduled a 10-day merit hearing for October 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation following an expropriation by Metrolinx.

The parties agreed to a Procedural Order and requested a 15-day hearing.

The Tribunal scheduled the hearing for October 2025 and issued the Procedural Order to govern the future conduct of the proceeding.