OLT 2025

The applicants appealed the City's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications to facilitate 48-storey and 38-storey residential buildings on neighbouring properties.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal ordered the appeals to be heard together.

The Tribunal also granted participant status to two individuals and a community association.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow for further settlement discussions.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Newdev Investments Ltd. and 1375920 Ontario Limited against the City of Markham's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan approval.

The applications seek to permit the construction of two 3-storey stacked townhouse blocks.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two neighbours and approved the Procedural Order to govern the upcoming 5-day merit hearing scheduled for October 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an order amending its previous order dated April 17, 2025, regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to adopt requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments.

The amendment clarifies that the balance of the appeals are dismissed, and allows parties to seek further assistance if issues arise from the implementation of the final orders.

The applicant appealed the Town of Newmarket's failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and site plan approval to permit a 79-unit apartment building.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on the uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the zoning by-law amendment and site plan agreement.

The appellants appealed the Township's failure to make a decision on their zoning by-law amendment application to permit the replacement and redevelopment of an existing waterfront dwelling and garage.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the settlement proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to the County Official Plan, and represented good land use planning.

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

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a three-tower mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement, which was endorsed by City Council.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions.

The appellant appealed the City of Guelph's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law.

The parties reached a partial settlement regarding site-specific modifications for a proposed parking structure at 201 Elmira Road South, specifically reducing the minimum parking stall dimensions while applying the 1995 Zoning By-law regulations to the rest of the structure.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the site-specific modifications.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 25-storey mixed-use building.

Following an interim decision where the Tribunal withheld its final order pending the satisfaction of certain conditions, the parties confirmed the conditions were met.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the site-specific zoning by-law amendment, including holding symbol provisions.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval for a high-density residential development.

The parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal featuring reduced building heights and density.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good planning, is consistent with provincial policies, and conforms to the City's Official Plan.

The appeal was allowed in part, with the Zoning By-law Amendment approved in principle on an interim basis pending finalization of the instrument and satisfaction of pre-requisite conditions.

The appellant appealed a municipal by-law designating a farmhouse under the Ontario Heritage Act.

Following a structural assessment revealing significant deterioration, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on expert architectural evidence that the property met only one of the required criteria for designation, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and repealed the designating by-law, noting the parties' agreement to salvage and relocate historic materials.

The claimant commenced a proceeding under subsection 26(1) of the Expropriations Act for the determination of compensation regarding a property in Vaughan.

The parties subsequently advised the Ontario Land Tribunal that they wished to dismiss the proceeding on consent.

The Tribunal ordered the proceeding dismissed on a without costs basis.

The Tribunal issued an order on consent of the parties to adjourn the scheduled hearing from July 2025 to December 2025.

The procedural timelines leading up to the hearing were amended accordingly.

The appellant appealed the Town of Aurora's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a 33-unit residential development.

At the second Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to adjacent landowners who raised concerns about the proposed location of a road connection, finding no prejudice or delay would result.

Participant status was granted to two individuals.

A third Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the parties to continue settlement discussions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Brampton's Official Plan Amendments concerning Major Transit Station Areas.

The City requested that potential settlements be addressed via written hearings once council instructions are received, and that a party status request by Brampton Plan be deferred.

The Tribunal agreed, deferring the party status request and scheduling a further Case Management Conference for October 2025.

The claimant, originally Envirosystems Incorporated, amalgamated to become GFL Environmental Services Inc. On consent of the parties, the Ontario Land Tribunal ordered that the expropriation compensation proceeding continue under the new corporate name.

The Vice-Chair also seized himself of ongoing case management.

The appellants appealed the extension of Interim Control By-law No. 83-2024 by the Town of Carleton Place.

During a status update telephone conference call, the parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a proposed settlement and requested a written settlement hearing.

After confirming that proper notice had been served and an updated Affidavit of Service was filed, the Tribunal scheduled a written hearing to consider the proposed settlement.

The applicant appealed the Township's deferral/denial of an application for consent to sever a rural property into three new building lots.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence of the Township's planner, the Tribunal found the proposed severance and conditions were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed and provisional consent was granted subject to the agreed-upon conditions.

Following a case management conference, High-Tech Realty Inc. submitted a request for party status in the appeals concerning official plan and zoning by-law amendments for the property at 4696 Yonge Street.

With the consent of the existing parties, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted party status to High-Tech Realty Inc.

The appellants appealed the failure of Haldimand County to approve a zoning by-law amendment application to permit an existing secondary suite and an addition to a dwelling.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals present but denied it to those absent.

Although the parties had resolved their issues and requested to convert the event into a settlement hearing, the Tribunal determined it was prudent to proceed with a written hearing on a different date to account for the participants' concerns.

The Appellant appealed the City of Ottawa Committee of Adjustment's refusal of consent and minor variance applications to sever and create four lots for long semi-detached dwellings.

The Tribunal heard uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposal supports residential intensification, is compatible with the neighbourhood character, and meets the four tests for minor variances under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, authorized the variances, and granted provisional consents subject to agreed-upon conditions.