Ontario Land Tribunal

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct technical and typographical errors in its October 10, 2024 decision regarding a hearing of necessity.

The corrections updated the property description, the details of the rapid transit project, and the specific land area requirements for partial acquisition, temporary construction easements, and a permanent hydro easement.

The claimant's property was expropriated by Metrolinx for the construction of a subway station.

Following the claimant's death, a case management conference was adjourned multiple times to allow for the appointment of an estate trustee due to a dispute over the property's ownership.

After an estate trustee was appointed, the claimant requested a hearing date.

The Tribunal declined to schedule a hearing date over the respondent's objection that pleadings had not yet been exchanged.

The Tribunal ordered the claimant to deliver a Statement of Claim and the respondent to deliver a Reply, and adjourned the case management conference.

The applicant appealed the City of Brampton's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 330-unit high-rise mixed-use building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and participant status to three local residents.

The Tribunal also scheduled an eight-day hearing on the merits and approved the Procedural Order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the pre-hearing steps and the hearing of a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

The hearing is scheduled for eight days commencing in October 2025.

The order sets out the timetable for documentary discovery, examinations for discovery, exchange of expert reports, and other procedural milestones.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by 65 Northfield Drive Inc. concerning the failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment, an appeal of a Zoning By-law, and the failure to make a decision on a Draft Plan of Subdivision for a proposed 12-tower mixed-use development.

The Tribunal noted the parties' ongoing mediation efforts, confirmed the 12-day hearing scheduled to commence on January 30, 2025, and acknowledged recent updates to the procedural order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Town of Aurora Official Plan, 2024.

The Tribunal granted party status to Allaura Limited Partnership, 16 20 22 Allaura Blvd Inc., and Macont Developments Inc. on consent.

The parties indicated an interest in Tribunal-led mediation, and the Appellants agreed to provide a draft issues list to the Town to facilitate instructions from Town Council.

A second Case Management Conference was not scheduled pending the outcome of mediation efforts.

The applicants appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit three infill dwellings.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that included protecting an existing woodland by rezoning a portion of the property to Open Space.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement and proposed amendment consistent with provincial policies and municipal official plans, representing good planning in the public interest.

The appeal was allowed and the zoning by-law amendment was approved.

The appellants appealed a condition of consent imposed by the Town of Leamington that required closing access to County Road 34 from the severed lands.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties informed the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement, approved by the Municipal Council, to install an entrance gate instead of closing the access.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit settlement documents, after which a settlement hearing will be scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in the appearances section of a previous decision issued on October 18, 2024.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the name L. Bisset was deleted and replaced with R. Kallio as counsel for the respondent municipality.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The applicant brought a motion to deny Party status to the Rockcliffe Park Residents Association (RPRA) in an upcoming merit hearing regarding a minor variance appeal to expand a legal non-conforming duplex.

The Tribunal found that while the RPRA had a direct interest, it would not meaningfully assist the Tribunal because it did not intend to call expert evidence on the planning and heritage issues.

The Tribunal denied Party status, granted Participant status instead, and established the issues list for the merit hearing.

The moving parties sought an order directing the Region of York to re-issue a notice of decision regarding an Official Plan Amendment, arguing the original notice sent via email to their planning consultant's former employee was defective.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that the Region fulfilled its obligations under s. 17(35) of the Planning Act and O. Reg. 543/06 by sending the notice via email to the individual who had submitted the written request for notice on behalf of the consulting firm.

The Tribunal held that the legislation permits email service and does not require the approval authority to confirm receipt or provide notice to parties who participated in the public process but did not submit a written request.

The Applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 77-unit residential development.

The Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical error in its previous decision dated March 17, 2022.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Special Zoning Map 14-17 in Attachment 1 of the original decision was deleted and replaced with an amended map.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The appellant appealed a Director's Order requiring the removal of an excavator from a flood plain and related environmental remediation.

Following several case management conferences, the excavator was successfully extracted and all requirements of the Director's Order were satisfied.

The appellant subsequently withdrew the appeal.

The Tribunal found it in the public interest to dismiss the proceeding and close the file.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Tricar Properties Limited against the City of Guelph's failure to make decisions on zoning by-law amendment and site plan approval applications.

The Tribunal consolidated the appeals, granted participant status to an additional individual, approved the Procedural Order and Issues List, scheduled a motion hearing for discovery, and added five additional days to the scheduled hearing on the merits.

The appellant appealed a Director's Order issued by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation, and Parks regarding a property in Guelph.

At the third Case Management Conference, the Ministry advised that the Order had been fulfilled.

The appellant requested additional time to review newly disclosed documents and determine how to proceed with the appeal.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal granted the request and ordered the matter held in abeyance until the appellant requests a subsequent conference or until April 22, 2025.

The applicant appealed the City's refusal of a draft plan of subdivision and brought a motion for directions to determine the applicable land use designation for the site.

The site's designation was affected by a complex sequence of events involving a new Official Plan, a Minister's modification, a subsequent municipal Official Plan Amendment (OPA 5), and the retroactive reversal of the Minister's modification by the Official Plan Adjustments Act (OPAA).

The Tribunal found that while the OPAA retroactively reversed the Minister's modification, it did not revoke the subsequently passed OPA 5.

Therefore, OPA 5 remains in force, designating the site for residential development.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the appellant against the City of Burlington's Development Charges By-law No. 41-2024.

The appellant expressed interest in a mediation assessment and requested time to determine if mediation will proceed.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for November 21, 2024, to allow the parties to explore mediation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by 3300 Rutherford Developments Inc. for the City of Vaughan's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications.

The applications seek to facilitate a high-rise mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals, noted ongoing without-prejudice discussions between the parties, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference for January 16, 2025.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment to permit a quarry operation.

At the commencement of the hearing, a party brought a last-minute motion to dismiss the appeal, arguing the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the ownership of the proposed haul route was in dispute and the subject of a newly commenced Superior Court action.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the appeal due to the motion's late service but found it could not proceed with the hearing.

The Tribunal adjourned the matter, noting that proceeding would require determining private property rights outside its jurisdiction, could result in a moot order, and might contradict a previous Divisional Court ruling regarding the feasibility of the haul route.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the expropriation of a commercial property.

The parties agreed to a three-day hearing on the merits to be held in June 2025 and submitted a draft Procedural Order.

The Tribunal issued the Procedural Order to govern the pre-hearing steps and the hearing itself.