OLT 2024

The appellant appealed the municipality's refusal to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate a high-density residential development.

The parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal for a 6-storey, 90-unit mixed-use apartment building and 28 townhouses.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to the applicable Official Plans, and represented good land use planning by promoting residential intensification on an underutilized site with full municipal services.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the revised instruments.

The Appellants appealed the Town of Innisfil's Community Benefits Charge By-law.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement.

Based on the uncontroverted expert affidavit evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed settlement and amendments to the by-law represented an appropriate recovery of the charge to facilitate growth and complied with the Planning Act.

The Tribunal approved the settlement and amended the by-law accordingly.

The appellants appealed the Township of King's Urban and Rural Zoning By-laws.

The parties reached a settlement agreement.

The Tribunal approved site-specific modifications to the Urban ZBL for the Via-Ru Lands, changing the zoning from 'Future Use' to 'Residential Future'.

The Tribunal also scoped and adjourned the Bushland appeal and dismissed the Ontario appeal, as requested by the parties.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the hearing of multiple appeals against the City of Toronto's Zoning By-law 63-2024, which implements the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing to commence on October 6, 2025, substituted one appellant, and accepted the withdrawal of another.

The appellants appealed the Niagara Escarpment Commission's partial conditional approval of a development permit application for the applicant's property.

The applicant had constructed accessory structures and imported fill without prior approval.

The Commission approved the structures but refused the importation of fill.

The appellants argued the Commission erred by not ordering the removal of the fill under s. 24(6) of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, alleging the fill caused adverse environmental impacts to their neighbouring properties.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding it lacked the statutory authority to issue a removal order under s. 24(6) and that the appellants failed to provide credible evidence of adverse impacts.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an 80-storey mixed-use development at 83-95A Bloor Street West.

The Tribunal previously allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendments in principle, withholding its final Order until the City confirmed that conditions were satisfied.

Having been advised by the City Solicitor that the conditions were met, the Tribunal issued its final Order amending the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's approval of Official Plan Amendment No. 573, which enacted Site and Area Specific Policy No. 772 for a portion of Danforth Avenue.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement.

Based on the uncontested affidavit evidence of the City's Senior Planner, the Tribunal found the modified amendment consistent with provincial policies and good land use planning.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the amendment was approved as modified.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law regulating cannabis cultivation, the Tribunal was advised that a full settlement had been reached.

One party withdrew their status on consent.

The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing to consider the settlement agreement and directed the parties to file supporting materials, including expert evidence.

The appellant appealed the Town of Kingsville's refusal and neglect to make a decision regarding an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Heritage Alteration Application to permit a six-storey apartment building and commemorative parkette.

Following the execution of Minutes of Settlement by all parties and the withdrawal of the heritage appeal, the Tribunal allowed the planning appeals in part, amending the Official Plan and Zoning By-law in accordance with the settlement.

The parties attended a Case Management Conference seeking directions on the implementation of a settlement previously approved by the Tribunal concerning a Community Planning Permit By-law.

The Tribunal determined a Motion for Directions was necessary and scheduled a one-day video hearing for January 22, 2025.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit six industrial warehouse buildings.

The parties reached a settlement on Revised Amendments that expand the settlement boundary, rezone the lands to Prestige Industrial with holding provisions, and protect environmental and proposed Highway 413 lands.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the Revised Amendments consistent with provincial policy and good planning, and allowed the appeals in part to approve the modifications.

The applicant appealed the conditions of a draft plan of subdivision approval for 16 residential lots in the Town of Fort Erie.

The dispute centered on three new conditions requested by the Region of Niagara requiring a Restoration Plan and associated securities to protect a 30-metre buffer to a provincially significant wetland.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the conditions were necessary and reasonable to mitigate impacts on the natural heritage system.

The appeal was dismissed and the conditions were added to the draft plan approval.

The parties submitted a draft procedural order on consent regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The Ontario Land Tribunal considered and revised the terms, issuing the procedural order to govern the pre-hearing steps and scheduling a 25-day in-person hearing to commence on March 2, 2026.

The applicants appealed the failure of the City of Cambridge and Region of Waterloo to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision for a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a full settlement agreement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision, finding them consistent with provincial and municipal planning policies.

The Official Plan Amendment appeal was withdrawn as no longer required.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a 50-storey mixed-use building in Toronto.

The parties requested a third CMC on consent to allow Metrolinx, which recently received expropriation approval for the subject lands, time to serve a 90 days' notice to expropriate.

The Tribunal scheduled a third CMC for February 21, 2025, and ordered the parties to provide a Draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision and order dated November 5, 2024.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the title of proceedings and appearances list were amended to correctly identify the applicant as Soneil Markham Inc.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a 34-storey mixed-use building.

The parties agreed to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day video hearing to commence on June 9, 2025, and directed the parties to finalize the Procedural Order by December 9, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical omission in its April 24, 2024 decision.

The amendment adds that the Tribunal had received a Participant Status Request from Shelagh Hurley and granted her Participant status.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a residential development of up to 290 townhouse units.

The parties reached a settlement that increased setbacks from Collins Creek and removed single-detached dwellings in favour of townhouses.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicants against the City of Toronto's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit a 29-storey residential building.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day video hearing to commence on April 28, 2025, and issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.