OLT 2025

The appellants appealed the City of Niagara Falls' refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a three-storey on-street townhouse dwelling with five units.

At the Case Management Conference, the Tribunal converted the hearing to a settlement hearing.

Based on uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal conforms to the Official Plan, is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, and represents good planning.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law was amended.

The Tribunal issued an order on consent of the parties to amend the procedural timelines contained in a previously issued Procedural Order for appeals concerning a proposed industrial warehouse development.

The amended dates relate to the exchange of witness statements, visual evidence, joint book of documents, and the preliminary hearing plan.

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application to permit a 14-storey mixed-use building, an increase from a previously approved 11-storey building.

The subject property is located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area near the Lawrence subway station.

The Tribunal found that the proposed variances to height, gross floor area, and setbacks met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal held that the proposal represented an appropriate optimization of density in a strategic growth area, consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

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

The applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to adopt a requested official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment to facilitate a 36-storey mixed-use residential building.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an updated Procedural Order, as agreed to by the parties, to govern the procedures leading up to the 13-day hearing scheduled to commence on July 2, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Soneil Markham Inc. against the City of Brampton's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The application seeks to permit a mixed-use development with multiple towers.

The Tribunal approved the finalized Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a 15-day merit hearing to commence in March 2026, allowing time for ongoing mediation in related appeals.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit the development of two towers.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal issued an order amending the procedural timelines leading up to the hearing scheduled for July 21, 2025.

The applicant appealed the municipality's refusal of a site-specific zoning by-law amendment to permit the conversion of an existing boathouse into a sauna and indoor storage.

The municipality did not participate in the appeal, but a neighbouring property owner opposed the application, citing environmental and visual impact concerns.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, relying on a municipal planning report which concluded the minor height increase on the existing footprint would have no measurable impact and that the proposal was consistent with provincial policy and conformed to the Official Plan.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit the development of 18 townhouse units.

The parties reached a settlement on the zoning appeal.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development represents appropriate intensification, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the Official Plan.

The Tribunal approved the settlement and allowed the appeal in part to amend the zoning by-law.

The applicant appealed the failure of the approval authority to make a decision on a proposed draft plan of subdivision and a zoning by-law amendment to permit a 22-unit vacant land condominium.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a full uncontested settlement.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with provincial policy and local official plans.

The appeals were allowed in part, approving the zoning by-law amendment and the draft plan subject to conditions.

The parties requested on consent to amend procedural timelines contained in a previously issued Procedural Order.

The Tribunal granted the request and amended the deadlines for the Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues, the joint document book, and the preliminary hearing plan.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval to permit a mixed-use residential development.

The parties reached a settlement endorsed by City Council.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending submission of the final instruments.

The appellant appealed the City of Guelph's passage of a heritage designation by-law concerning a property containing a stone gate, farmhouse, and stone shed.

The parties reached a settlement to amend the by-law's schedules to facilitate the stabilization of the property and its potential integration into a heritage conservation district.

Based on uncontested expert heritage planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and amended the by-law in accordance with the joint submission.

The claimants seek compensation for injurious affection arising from the township's alleged failure to properly construct, maintain, and operate a drainage system.

A case management conference was held to review and approve a revised procedural order and set new hearing dates.

The Tribunal directed the claimants to submit a finalized procedural order and scheduled a five-day video hearing for May 2026, noting the parties' interest in potential mediation.

The Tribunal received a request on consent of the parties to amend procedural timelines contained in a Procedural Order issued on January 8, 2025.

The Tribunal ordered the amendment of dates for the exchange of witness statements, expert reports, participant statements, summoned witness outlines, and reply witness statements.

In all other respects, the Procedural Order remains the same.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building and 15 townhouse units.

Following a settlement hearing, the Tribunal accepted uncontested land use planning evidence that the proposal represents appropriate infill development.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the redevelopment in principle, but withheld its final order pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including the securing of affordable rental units and necessary infrastructure upgrades.

The applicant appealed the City of Vaughan's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to facilitate a mid-rise mixed-use development.

Following an interim order, the parties confirmed that the required conditions, including the finalization of the amendment instruments and submission of updated reports, were satisfied.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments, while adjourning the site plan appeal sine die.

The Tribunal issued a final order approving an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for the City of Hamilton, following an interim decision that allowed the appeals in part.

The amendments permit the development of a mixed-use building with 30-storey and 39-storey towers connected by a podium at 117 Jackson Street East.

At a Hearing of Necessity regarding the proposed expropriation of lands for a sanitary sewer diversion project, the owner objected to proceeding due to the late service of the expropriating authority's expert witness curriculum vitae and the lack of witness statements.

The owner sought to call the authority's staff as witnesses to ensure a full record.

The expropriating authority consented to a brief adjournment to rectify the late service.

The Tribunal ordered a one-day continuation of the hearing and directed the service of the required expert documents and a jointly prepared hearing plan.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal considered requests for participant status and the consolidation of three appeals relating to a proposed 38-unit residential redevelopment on a property subject to a heritage designation.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several neighbouring property owners on consent.

Finding that the appeals involved the same property, proposed development, and common heritage issues, the Tribunal consolidated the appeals to ensure an efficient and cost-effective hearing.

A procedural order and issues list were also approved.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a draft plan of subdivision to permit a residential community.

Following a case management conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent of the parties to govern the conduct of the upcoming video hearing.