OLT 2024

The appellants appealed the City of Thunder Bay's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit an outdoor recreational venue.

The City brought a motion to dismiss the appeal without a hearing under section 34(25) of the Planning Act.

The appellants, who were self-represented, responded with an unsworn affidavit, which the Tribunal found inadmissible.

The Tribunal concluded that the notice of appeal failed to disclose any apparent land use planning grounds, raising only process complaints and apprehensions.

The motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed.

The appellants appealed conditions of consent relating to parkland dedication and archaeological studies for three severed lots.

At the outset of the hearing, the parties requested an adjournment on consent, noting that minutes of settlement had been reached regarding the parkland dedication conditions and productive discussions were ongoing regarding the archaeological condition.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment and converted the hearing to a Case Management Conference, scheduling a future contested settlement hearing.

The appellant, a self-represented area resident, appealed the City's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment permitting a 14-storey apartment building.

The Tribunal found the notice of appeal deficient under the Planning Act for failing to identify inconsistencies with provincial or municipal policies.

After hearing the applicant's expert planning evidence, which supported the development as modest intensification, and finding the appellant's evidence lacked planning grounds, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals both on statutory non-compliance and on their merits.

The applicants appealed the Township's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a boathouse expansion and new dock.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontradicted expert evidence in land use planning, aviation, and ecology, the Tribunal found that the proposed development is consistent with provincial policies, avoids critical fish habitat, and does not negatively impact the adjacent aerodrome.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to implement the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for a proposed 20-lot residential subdivision due to the municipality's failure to make a decision.

The Tribunal granted party status to an abutting landowner concerned with stormwater management and participant status to another individual.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a three-day video hearing on the merits.

The appellant appealed the municipal Committee of Adjustment's denial of minor variance and consent applications to permit the creation of a new lot.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that modified the requested lot frontage and included a condition for a hydrogeological assessment.

Based on the uncontested affidavit evidence of a registered professional planner, the Tribunal found that the revised proposal met the four tests for a minor variance and the criteria for consent under the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed, the variance was authorized, and provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a four-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring resident without objection.

The parties advised they would be meeting to resolve issues and the City would seek direction from City Council.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for July 17, 2024, with a draft Procedural Order and Issues List to be submitted beforehand.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Eastside Chevrolet Buick GMC Ltd. against the City of Markham's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to three entities and participant status to one entity on consent.

A Procedural Order was approved, and a 14-day merit hearing was scheduled for February 2025, with a further Case Management Conference scheduled for October 2024 to allow for potential mediation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit recreational uses and a medical clinic in the Municipality of Middlesex Centre.

The Tribunal granted a request to replace the individual appellant with the newly incorporated rural community association.

The property owner requested party status and was directed to confirm his intention by a specified date.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the procedural order and issues list.

At a second Case Management Conference concerning appeals of the City of Ottawa's failure to make decisions on zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision applications, Tamarack (Cardinal Creek) Corporation sought party status.

The parties consented to Tamarack's request, limited to the issue of the appellant satisfying its obligations under a cost-sharing agreement.

The Tribunal granted Tamarack party status on this scoped issue and approved a revised Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Blue Birch Properties Inc. against the Town of the Blue Mountains for failing to approve a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The Tribunal addressed requests for party and participant status, granting party status to the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority and the Niagara Escarpment Commission on consent.

One individual's request for party status was denied due to a lack of expert witnesses, but participant status was granted instead.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the appellant to present a revised application to the Town Council.

The claimant filed a Notice of Arbitration against the City of Toronto under the Expropriations Act for compensation following a full taking of the subject land.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal noted that the parties intend to engage in mediation.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference and a nine-day arbitration hearing, and directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order.

At a Case Management Conference for appeals against the District Municipality of Muskoka's approval of the Township of Muskoka Lakes' new Official Plan, several community groups and individuals requested party or participant status.

Applying the Oakville Factors and the requirements of the Planning Act, the Tribunal granted party status to four cottage and stakeholder associations, finding their involvement would assist in the effective adjudication of the issues without causing undue prejudice.

The Tribunal denied party status to two individuals, finding their concerns were either site-specific or better suited for participant status, and granted participant status to one of them.

The appellant appealed the refusal of a minor variance application by the Norfolk County Committee of Adjustment.

The variance sought to reduce the interior lot line setback from 1.2 metres to 0.55 metres to permit the installation of a back-up power generator.

Relying on the municipal planning staff report, which supported the application, and the appellant's testimony regarding the site constraints, the Tribunal found that the proposal met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed and the variance was authorized.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order governing the hearing of an appeal by Sifton Properties Limited regarding Official Plan Amendment 14 in the Municipality of Strathroy-Caradoc.

The order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, the list of parties, the issues list, the order of evidence, and a summary of procedural dates leading up to a 10-day video hearing scheduled to commence on February 3, 2025.

The appellant appealed the refusal of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority to issue a development permit.

During the course of the hearing, new legislative amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act and O.Reg 41/24 came into effect.

The Tribunal ruled that the new legislation governs the de novo appeal and granted an adjournment to allow the parties and their experts to address the new law.

The Tribunal also granted the appellant's motion to amend his witness list but denied a request for a site visit as premature.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 536 (OPA 536), which relates to development within the area of influence of rail facilities.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement and requested the Tribunal approve a modified version of OPA 536.

The Tribunal found that the modifications maintain the intent to address public safety concerns arising from derailments, provide greater certainty regarding the 30-metre area of influence, and clarify requirements for rail safety mitigation reports.

The Tribunal approved the modified OPA 536, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on its zoning by-law amendment and site plan approval applications for a 46-storey mixed-use building.

At the second Case Management Conference, the Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing on the merits and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List on consent of the parties.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals against the City of Mississauga's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The parties required more time to negotiate the applicant's access to a neighbouring business's premises and data for technical work.

The Tribunal released previously scheduled motion dates and ordered that any necessary motions regarding access proceed in writing, setting a schedule for the submission of materials and scheduling a brief update appearance.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding appeals by the appellant against the municipality's approval of an official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment for a property owned by the applicant.

The Tribunal granted party status to the property owner, directed the appellant to provide a revised issues list, and scheduled a motion for the property owner to seek dismissal of the appeals without a hearing.

The Tribunal also approved a procedural order and scheduled a ten-day hearing on the merits for January 2025.