OLT 2024

The appellant appealed the municipality's development charges by-law, arguing it places a disproportionate share of charges on the greenhouse industry.

At the request of the parties, the scheduled merit hearing was converted to a case management conference to facilitate ongoing settlement discussions.

The Tribunal scheduled a second case management conference and directed the parties to submit a draft procedural order and issues list if a settlement is not reached.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Draft Plan of Condominium.

A motion for party status and an adjournment was brought by non-appellants.

The Tribunal deferred consideration of the motion because a finalized Issues List had not yet been submitted, which is required to determine if the non-appellants can shelter under existing issues as mandated by the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The parties were directed to submit a revised Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the proceedings for an appeal by the applicant regarding a zoning by-law amendment to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building in the City of Toronto.

The order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, the issues list, and the order of evidence.

The hearing is scheduled to commence on March 24, 2025, for a duration of five days.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application within the statutory timeframe.

The application sought to facilitate a 20-storey mixed-use building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to one individual and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to allow the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicants appealed the City of Vaughan's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 12-storey residential apartment building.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted party status to a ratepayers association and participant status to a local resident.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing and issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Richmond Hill's Official Plan Amendment No. 18.6.

The Tribunal scheduled a subsequent Case Management Conference for February 27, 2025, and ordered the parties to submit a final draft Procedural Order, Issues List, and a draft Order relating to the OPA by December 16, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent following a case management conference regarding appeals by Lakeshore Developments (Thunder Bay) Inc. against the Municipality of Shuniah's refusal of applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a plan of subdivision.

The procedural order sets out the issues list, order of proceedings, and deadlines for the 14-day video hearing scheduled to commence on April 22, 2025.

The appellant appealed the Town's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a condominium development of single detached dwellings.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement reducing the number of dwellings from 26 to 25 and modifying site regulations to address municipal and neighbour concerns.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial and local planning policies and allowed the appeal, amending the zoning by-law accordingly.

The claimants filed a claim for compensation against the City of Brampton under the Expropriations Act.

The parties subsequently settled the matter and consented to the withdrawal of the claim.

The Ontario Land Tribunal ordered the matter dismissed with prejudice and without costs.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal of an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval to permit a 46-storey mixed-use building.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal consolidated the appeals.

The Tribunal also identified a jurisdictional issue regarding the expansion of the OPA lands post-appeal and directed that a motion hearing be held to determine the status of the expanded OPA prior to the merit hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a revised Procedural Order to govern the hearing of appeals by Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. concerning the City of Toronto's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment and make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment for the property at 65-81 McCormack Street.

The hearing is scheduled to commence on June 16, 2025.

The appellant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's denial of a minor variance application to permit the construction of a new detached dwelling on a waterfront property.

The proposed variances sought relief for gross floor area, dwelling width, and building height.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and authorized the variances, preferring the evidence of the appellant's land use planner.

The Tribunal found that the proposal satisfied the four-part test under the Planning Act, as it represented a reasonable expansion of a legal non-complying use, maintained the character of the area, and would not create negative impacts on adjacent properties.

At a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriation Act, the respondent municipality requested that the scheduled hearing dates be vacated pending the resolution of a related civil action concerning title to the expropriated property.

The claimants opposed the request, arguing it would cause prejudice and that the civil action lacked merit.

The Tribunal found that the request raised a jurisdictional question regarding title that could not be adequately addressed without a formal motion.

The Tribunal directed the parties to bring a motion in writing to determine whether it had jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing as scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the appellant against the Town of Erin's by-law designating a property as a heritage property.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order submitted by the parties and scheduled a three-day video hearing.

The applicant appealed the City of Welland's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 3-storey, 24-unit residential building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that included dedicating portions of the site containing a woodland feature to the City.

Based on uncontroverted planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with provincial policies, in conformity with applicable official plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed and the amendments were approved.

At a Case Management Conference concerning appeals for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval for a proposed townhouse development, the Tribunal considered Metrolinx's request for party status.

Metrolinx raised rail-safety concerns regarding the development and had not cleared a condition of the draft Zoning By-law approval.

Finding that Metrolinx had a direct and genuine interest and its involvement was necessary to resolve the appeals, the Tribunal granted Metrolinx party status on consent and scheduled a two-day hearing to address the outstanding conditions.

The Appellant filed a request for review of an October 11, 2024 Tribunal decision regarding a proposed residential subdivision and heritage permit applications.

The Appellant also requested a stay of the decision pending the outcome of the review.

The Tribunal ordered that the Interim Order and its timelines be stayed and held in abeyance pending the Chair's disposition of the request for review.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered requests to substitute parties in appeals concerning a proposed 49-storey residential building in Toronto.

The Tribunal granted the unopposed request to substitute Carlyle Young Maitland GP Inc. as the Appellant, as it had acquired the subject property.

The Tribunal also granted the request to substitute OEF Village Green Nominee Inc. as a party in place of Greenrock, following OEF's acquisition of adjacent lands.

Finally, the Tribunal cancelled a previously scheduled hearing and set an accelerated written hearing date to consider a settlement offer accepted by City Council.

The appellants appealed the Region's failure to make a decision on their complaint regarding an additional development charge.

The Region had initially assessed and collected a development charge at a discounted industrial rate, certified the payment, and issued a building permit.

Months later, the Region issued a notice of reassessment for an additional $13.7 million, claiming the discounted rate was applied in error because the building would be used as an Amazon fulfillment centre.

The Tribunal held that under the Development Charges Act and the Region's DC By-law, the Region is barred from imposing an additional development charge or correcting an alleged error after the charge has been assessed, collected, certified, and the building permit issued.

The appeal was allowed.

The appellants requested an extension of the lapse date for Draft Plans of Subdivision 22T-02002 and 22T-04004, and amendments to the Draft Plan Conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal, having received an affidavit from a land use planner, granted the request.

The lapse date was extended for two years to December 1, 2026, and the Draft Plan Conditions were amended as set out in the appendices.