Patrick John Harrington

The appellant appealed the City of Sarnia Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance to permit a maximum height of 13 metres for two proposed four-storey apartment buildings on the former Sarnia General Hospital lands.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the variance met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting the site's previous use included buildings up to six storeys.

The appeal was allowed and the variance was authorized.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the appellant against the municipality's enactment of an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment.

The amendments were requested by the applicant to permit a 23-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to the applicant, approved the procedural order, and scheduled a nine-day video hearing to commence on November 6, 2023, along with a second Case Management Conference on June 5, 2023.

Jane Teston Holdings Inc. appealed the City of Vaughan's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit an 11-storey (later revised to 8-storey) residential building.

The City opposed the development, arguing it was an overdevelopment and would cause unacceptable traffic impacts on local roads.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence, finding that the traffic modelling was appropriate and that the development represented a gentle form of intensification that conformed with the Growth Plan, York Region Official Plan, and City of Vaughan Official Plan.

The appeals were allowed in part, approving the amendments in principle.

The applicant appealed the City of Brampton's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed instruments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the applicable Growth Plan and Official Plans, and represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the Niagara Falls Canada Hotel Association and the Niagara Home Builders' Association against two Region-wide Development Charge By-laws passed by the Regional Municipality of Niagara.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered the appeals consolidated, directed the filing of a Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a nine-day merit hearing for February 2024.

The applicant appealed the City of Kitchener's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit a three-tower mixed-use development containing 1,124 residential units.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development, which includes significant residential intensification and streetscape enhancements near transit, is consistent with provincial policies and represents good planning in the public interest.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Brampton's adoption of Official Plan Amendment 206-210 (Heritage Heights Secondary Plan).

The parties agreed to collaborate on policy wording and continue drafting the Procedural Order and Issues List, with a focus on resolving issues related to the GTA West Corridor.

The Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference for July 6, 2023, and directed the parties to submit a revised draft Procedural Order by June 22, 2023.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding seven appeals filed against Official Plan Amendment No. 54 to the Town of Milton Official Plan, which introduces the Trafalgar Secondary Plan.

The parties requested additional time to finalize the Issues List and explore potential settlements.

The Tribunal ordered the submission of an updated draft Procedural Order and finalized Issues List, scheduled a second Case Management Conference for September 26, 2023, and set a 10-week hearing on the merits commencing May 6, 2024.

The appellant developer appealed the calculation of development charges by the Town of Oakville and the Region of Halton, arguing that 21 'one-bedroom plus den' units were incorrectly classified as two-bedroom units.

The appellant contended that the dens did not meet the Ontario Building Code's requirements for a habitable bedroom.

The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Development Charges By-laws explicitly include dens in their definition of a bedroom for the purpose of calculating growth-related costs, and that the Ontario Building Code's habitability standards do not override the clear language of the by-laws.

The appellant appealed the Town of Orangeville's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a mixed-use development on vacant lands designated for employment.

Following case management conferences, the parties reached a settlement and presented revised instruments that maintained the employment designation while adding site-specific permissions for stand-alone residential uses.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendments.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by 7818 Dufferin Inc. against the City of Vaughan's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of York on consent.

The parties submitted a finalized Procedural Order and Issues List, which the Tribunal approved.

A 9-day hearing on the merits was scheduled to commence on January 22, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second case management conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the city's failure to make decisions on requests to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and to approve a proposed plan of subdivision for the redevelopment of parts of a golf course.

The Tribunal directed the parties to revise the draft Issues List to be organized by issue rather than by party to avoid overlap.

A 19-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence on March 5, 2024.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a zoning by-law amendment and an official plan amendment for a mixed-use development in the Town of Oakville.

The Tribunal ordered the consolidation of the two appeals and stayed the zoning by-law amendment appeal pending the resolution of the official plan amendment.

The Tribunal also granted party and participant status to several requesting entities without objection and scheduled a further Case Management Conference.

The appellant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and plan of subdivision to permit the redevelopment of parts of a golf course.

At the second case management conference, the Tribunal directed the parties to revise the draft issues list to be organized by issue rather than by party to avoid overlap.

The Tribunal also scheduled a 19-day hearing and provided directions regarding the calling of lay witnesses and the participation of added parties.

The applicant appealed the Town of Oakville's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Draft Plan of Subdivision for a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed instruments met all legislative tests, conformed to the applicable official plans, and constituted good planning.

The appeals were allowed and the planning instruments were approved.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision denying a minor variance to increase the permitted lot coverage for an accessory structure from 8% to 11.2%.

The appellant sought to replace an existing temporary structure used for boat storage with a permanent one.

The appellant's planner argued that a variance was not required under the zoning by-law, or alternatively, that the variance met the four tests.

The Tribunal found that a variance was indeed required, but agreed that the application met the four tests under the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed in part and the variance was authorized subject to a condition requiring screening vegetation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding an appeal of the City of Hamilton's Official Plan Amendment No. 17 UHOP by the appellant.

The parties resolved their differences regarding the order of witnesses and submitted a revised Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal issued the Procedural Order and scheduled a five-day video hearing on the merits.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct typographical errors in its January 10, 2023 decision.

The amendments corrected the appearances to include the Millcroft Greenspace Alliance as a party and corrected references to the Millcroft Greenspace Alliance in the body of the decision.

Mattamy brought a motion to consolidate two competing Official Plan Amendment (OPA) appeals regarding the Southwest Georgetown secondary plan, and to have its site-specific zoning and draft plan appeals heard together with the OPA appeals.

The Town brought a preliminary motion to strike the reply affidavit of Mattamy's planning expert, arguing it contained legal advocacy.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion to strike, finding the affidavit relevant but noting it would separate the planning opinion from the advocacy.

The Tribunal dismissed Mattamy's motion in its entirety, finding that hearing the site-specific appeals together with the OPA appeals would be premature, potentially prejudicial to the approval authorities, and could inappropriately invert the planning hierarchy.

The Tribunal also found no appreciable benefit to formally consolidating the two OPA appeals.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Georgian Mayfield Inc. against the City of Brampton for failing to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The City requested a third CMC to obtain instructions from City Council.

The Tribunal scheduled a third CMC and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List or a settlement document prior to the next appearance.