Ontario Land Tribunal

At a Case Management Conference for an appeal against the City of Markham's heritage designation of a property, the parties disagreed on the issues list for the draft Procedural Order.

The appellants included procedural and substantive issues, while the City argued only its listed issues were relevant.

The Tribunal directed the appellants to file a motion to scope the issues and scheduled a hearing for the motion alongside the next Case Management Conference.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding appeals against Official Plan Amendment 126 to update the Brookhill Neighbourhood Secondary Plan in Clarington.

The Tribunal granted party status to Brookhill North Landowners Inc. and confirmed statutory party status for the Municipality of Clarington.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of Susan Seger as she did not make oral or written submissions prior to the adoption of the plan, and directed that any challenges to the validity of the remaining appeals must be brought by motion.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled.

The applicants appealed the Town's failure to make a decision on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and plan of subdivision to permit a 141-unit residential subdivision.

At a status hearing, the parties advised they were continuing settlement discussions and requested an adjournment sine die.

To ensure proper docket management, the Tribunal instead scheduled a further status hearing by telephone conference call for March 2025.

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 additional residential buildings at 20 Godstone Road.

Following a settlement hearing, the Ontario Land Tribunal approved the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment in principle.

After being advised that the pre-conditions were cleared to the City's satisfaction, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendment to Zoning By-law 569-2013.

The appellant appealed the City of Oshawa's By-law 27-2024, which designated a property as a heritage property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties requested an adjournment sine die to allow the City to seek instructions from City Council regarding Tribunal-led mediation.

The Tribunal granted the request and adjourned the matter sine die, noting that the parties will contact the Case Coordinator to initiate mediation and set the next hearing date when necessary.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a 10-storey mixed-use building and a 33-storey residential tower.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The appeals were allowed on an interim basis, with final approval withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including infrastructure upgrades, wind studies, and rental housing replacement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference to receive status updates on multiple remaining appeals against the City of Toronto's comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 569-2013.

The Tribunal received updates on various site-specific and topic-specific appeals, noted several withdrawals and ongoing settlement discussions, and scheduled a further case management conference for May 2025.

The applicant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing a minor variance to permit a change to the legal non-conforming use of an existing commercial building from an automobile service station to an equipment rental and repair business.

The Tribunal found that the legal non-conforming use had continued and evolved in accordance with the principles in Saint-Romuald, as the new use was similar in nature and did not involve heavy vehicles.

The Tribunal concluded that the use was appropriate for the area and that the City failed to demonstrate any undue adverse impacts.

The appeal was allowed and the continuation of the non-conforming use was authorized.

A first Case Management Conference was held for an appeal by the developer concerning the value of a cash-in-lieu of parkland contribution paid under protest to the municipality.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order and scheduled a two-day video hearing for May 2025.

The applicant appealed the County of Brant's refusal of applications for a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision to facilitate the development of 37 estate homes.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal was informed that the parties are engaged in mediation.

The Tribunal scheduled a 15-day video hearing commencing June 2, 2025, and ordered the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order by December 31, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an order amending a previously issued Procedural Order.

The amendment inserts a Summary of Participant Issues/Interests into the Procedural Order as agreed to between the parties in relation to appeals concerning an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and plan of subdivision for a proposed residential development and golf course.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding an appeal by Via Rail Canada Inc. concerning proposed changes to conditions of approval for a draft plan of subdivision in the City of Ottawa.

The Tribunal received no further requests for party or participant status, considered the parties' updated Procedural Order submitted on consent, and scheduled a new five-day hearing commencing April 28, 2025, to allow additional time to review reports.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the hearing of multiple appeals against the City of Toronto's Zoning By-law 63-2024, which implements the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day hearing to commence on October 6, 2025, substituted one appellant, and accepted the withdrawal of another.

This was the second Case Management Conference regarding appeals against a Zoning By-law Amendment and an Official Plan Amendment to permit a mixed-use development with three residential towers in Cambridge.

The Tribunal consolidated the appeals, as they relate to the same subject lands and revised proposal.

The Tribunal also reviewed and approved the final draft Procedural Order, scheduling an 18-day video hearing to commence in October 2025.

The Appellants appealed the Town of Innisfil's Community Benefits Charge By-law.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement.

Based on the uncontroverted expert affidavit evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed settlement and amendments to the by-law represented an appropriate recovery of the charge to facilitate growth and complied with the Planning Act.

The Tribunal approved the settlement and amended the by-law accordingly.

The applicants appealed the failure of the City of Cambridge and Region of Waterloo to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision for a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a full settlement agreement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision, finding them consistent with provincial and municipal planning policies.

The Official Plan Amendment appeal was withdrawn as no longer required.

The Town of Collingwood brought a motion to dismiss appeals filed by Huntingwood Trails (Collingwood) Ltd. regarding a proposed 69-unit residential development.

The Town argued the appeals had no reasonable prospect of success due to a potential Ministry of Transportation bypass and concerns from the local conservation authority regarding a proposed watercourse crossing.

The Tribunal found that the potential bypass was not a 'planned corridor' under the Provincial Planning Statement and that the conservation authority's concerns did not render the appeals hopeless.

The Tribunal also denied the Town's alternative request to phase the hearing, finding that a single comprehensive hearing would be more efficient.

The motion to dismiss was denied.

The applicant appealed the refusal of an application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a sign shop establishment.

The parties reached a full settlement on consent.

Based on uncontested land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the Zoning By-law was amended to permit commercial indoor storage within the existing building.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 69-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring resident on consent.

The Tribunal also approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and scheduled an eight-day video hearing to commence in June 2025.

At a first Case Management Conference concerning an expropriation compensation claim, the Tribunal ordered the Claimant to serve and file a Statement of Claim by January 31, 2025.

The Respondent is to file a Reply in accordance with the Rules, and the parties are to submit a draft Procedural Order for the Tribunal's review one week following the Reply.