Paul M. DeMelo

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding site-specific appeals of Official Plan Amendment No. 18.8 for the Oak Ridges Local Centre in the City of Richmond Hill.

The appellants confirmed their appeals were scoped to their individual properties.

The Tribunal acknowledged that the unappealed portions of OPA 18.8 came into force pursuant to s. 17(39) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day hearing for the Streamgrove and Worthington appeals to be heard together, and a separate five-day hearing for the Yonge and Bloomington appeal, issuing procedural orders for both.

The Tribunal issued an order amending a previously issued Procedural Order on consent of the parties.

The underlying appeals relate to applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a mixed-use community consisting of 1,344 dwelling units in the City of Niagara Falls.

The amended Procedural Order governs the required procedures leading up to a 5-day hearing scheduled to commence on March 24, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for the city's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The parties requested an adjournment to continue settlement discussions.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment, converted the hearing to a Case Management Conference, and approved a Procedural Order scheduling a five-day merit hearing for April 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Sarnia's Official Plan Amendment No. 3.

The Tribunal directed the parties to continue mediation efforts and submit a draft final Procedural Order and Issues List by January 24, 2025.

A 12-day video hearing was scheduled to commence on September 9, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Richmond Hill's Official Plan Amendment No. 18.6.

The Tribunal scheduled a subsequent Case Management Conference for February 27, 2025, and ordered the parties to submit a final draft Procedural Order, Issues List, and a draft Order relating to the OPA by December 16, 2024.

The appellants appealed the Region's failure to make a decision on their complaint regarding an additional development charge.

The Region had initially assessed and collected a development charge at a discounted industrial rate, certified the payment, and issued a building permit.

Months later, the Region issued a notice of reassessment for an additional $13.7 million, claiming the discounted rate was applied in error because the building would be used as an Amazon fulfillment centre.

The Tribunal held that under the Development Charges Act and the Region's DC By-law, the Region is barred from imposing an additional development charge or correcting an alleged error after the charge has been assessed, collected, certified, and the building permit issued.

The appeal was allowed.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Markham's Official Plan Amendment 53 (Markham Road – Mount Joy Secondary Plan).

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal granted party status to the Toronto Regional Conservation Authority and the York Region District School Board.

The parties agreed to pursue Tribunal-led mediation in the first quarter of 2025.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for March 5, 2025, with the Procedural Order and Issues List deferred pending the outcome of mediation.

The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Land Tribunal.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.

Costs were awarded to the responding parties in the total amount of $8,972.66.

The applicant requested a Telephone Conference Call to settle the wording of issues for a Procedural Order regarding appeals of a failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment.

The Tribunal directed the parties to retain an issue regarding conformity with the new Niagara Official Plan 2022, narrowed to a specific transition policy, and to include issues relating to consistency with the 2024 Provincial Planning Statement alongside the 2020 PPS.

The Tribunal approved the revised Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing for an appeal of a zoning by-law amendment refusal by the City of Niagara Falls.

The hearing is scheduled to commence on February 10, 2025, for five days.

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 the passing of an Official Plan Amendment and the failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment regarding a proposed development.

The developer and a residents' association jointly advocated for a 28-storey apartment building, while the municipality supported a 25-storey building.

The Tribunal found that both proposals were policy-supported, but preferred the 28-storey proposal as it better optimized existing infrastructure and transit investments in the Protected Major Transit Station Area.

The appeals were allowed in part, and the amendments for the 28-storey proposal were approved in principle.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal ordered that two appeals regarding the Town of Oakville's failure to grant final site plan approval for warehouse developments be heard together.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a local residents' association and issued a Procedural Order scheduling a 10-day video hearing for January 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality for failing to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 15-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted party status to a community association and participant status to two other entities on consent.

A five-day merit hearing was scheduled for February 2025.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Cambridge's refusal to enact a Zoning By-law Amendment for a proposed residential development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and the Waterloo Region District School Board on consent.

A request for party status by adjacent landowners Funchal Enterprises Inc. and Urros Investments Inc. was denied, but they were granted participant status with leave to re-apply for party status at the next CMC.

The parties indicated an interest in Tribunal-led mediation once the related draft plan of subdivision appeal is filed.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the County of Lambton's decision to approve Official Plan Amendment No. 3, adopted by the City of Sarnia.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two area residents on consent.

The parties agreed to participate in a scoping exercise to identify the specific sections and schedules of the OPA under appeal.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for November 28, 2024, to provide an update on the scoping exercise and to schedule a hearing date.

The appellants appealed the Municipality of Chatham-Kent's Development Charges By-law No. 148-2022 under section 14 of the Development Charges Act, 1997.

The parties reached a settlement and presented revised development charge rates to the Tribunal.

Based on uncontested expert evidence that the revised rates conformed with the Act and did not increase the amounts payable, the Tribunal approved the settlement and ordered the by-law amended accordingly.

The applicant appealed the County's failure to make a decision on its application for a Draft Plan of Subdivision for a 432-unit residential community.

The issues centered on the adequacy of proposed external servicing improvements, the safety and efficiency of the proposed road network (specifically an S-curve), and the proposed parkland dedication.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's proposed servicing improvements were adequate and did not require a complete replacement of external infrastructure.

The Tribunal also preferred the applicant's transportation evidence, finding the road network safe and efficient.

Finally, the Tribunal held that the parkland dedication had already been settled in a previous agreement.

The appeal was allowed, with final approval withheld pending draft conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 588 and By-law No. 1144-2022, which concern alternative parkland dedication rates.

The City requested consolidation of the appeals.

The Tribunal determined that the site-specific appeals of the OPA are distinguishable from the general appeals of the by-law, and ordered that the matters be heard together but not consolidated.

The Tribunal directed the City to provide a written status report by December 20, 2024, as the parties await a provincial regulation related to section 42 of the Planning Act.

The appellant appealed the Town's refusal of applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval to permit a townhouse development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 30-unit development, and the Official Plan Amendment appeal was withdrawn.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan, Regional Official Plan, and Town Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the draft Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan in principle, withholding its final order pending finalization of the instruments.