Pitman Patterson

At a Case Management Conference for appeals concerning Official Plan Amendments 861 and 862, the Ontario Land Tribunal ordered the appeals to be heard together.

The Tribunal scheduled a jurisdictional motion brought by the City of Toronto to dismiss certain school board appeals.

Additionally, the Tribunal granted party status to the Confederation of Residents and Ratepayers Associations in Toronto and a local resident, and provisionally granted participant status to 103 individuals and entities, conditional on the outcome of the City's jurisdictional motion.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding 14 active appeals to the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 777 (Sheppard East Secondary Plan).

The City requested the scheduling of a fourth CMC and a three-week merit hearing for March 2027.

The Tribunal established procedural deadlines and scheduled the fourth CMC for September 2026, but declined to schedule the merit hearing at this stage due to ongoing mediation, pending City Council instructions, and the lack of finalized issues lists and procedural orders.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by several school boards and a private corporation against the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 862 and related zoning by-laws.

The instruments aim to facilitate mid-rise intensification along certain Avenues.

The appellants appealed because their lands were excluded from the redesignation.

The City indicated its intention to bring a jurisdictional motion to dismiss appeals concerning lands outside the scope of the instruments.

The Tribunal deferred several party and participant status requests until the second CMC or after the jurisdictional motion is decided, and scheduled a second CMC to coordinate with anticipated appeals of a related Official Plan Amendment (OPA 861).

The Applicants brought a motion challenging the Appellants' standing to appeal a zoning by-law amendment that permitted an event venue on the Applicants' lands.

The Appellants argued they had standing under s. 34(19) 2.2 of the Planning Act because they held a registered easement over the rezoned lands for a water line.

The Tribunal applied the modern approach to statutory interpretation and found that the easement did not confer ownership of the servient tenement.

As the Appellants were not registered owners of the lands to which the by-law applied, they lacked standing.

The motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed.

This was the second Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 777 (Sheppard East Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal granted added party status to Lencroft Holdings Inc., allowing it to shelter under an existing appeal.

The Tribunal also granted requests to adjourn two specific appeals while those appellants pursue site-specific applications.

Procedural dates were established for the exchange of materials ahead of Tribunal-led mediation and a third Case Management Conference.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the pre-hearing steps and the 19-day hearing of consolidated claims for expropriation compensation brought by Bendale Parkway Limited, Mirmor Investments Limited, and Shoppers Drug Mart Inc. against Metrolinx.

The order establishes a timetable for pleadings, discovery, mediation, and the exchange of expert evidence.

A case management conference was held regarding multiple appeals concerning the North Oakville West Secondary Plan.

The appellants and the Town of Oakville have been engaged in settlement discussions and have reached an agreement in principle on a development concept for the Palermo Village Growth Area.

The parties requested that the finalization of the draft Procedural Order and Issues List be put on hold to allow settlement discussions to advance.

The Tribunal granted the request and directed the parties to provide status updates on their respective appeals.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding three applications for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the Scarborough Subway Extension Project.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered that the applications brought by the fee simple owners and a former tenant be consolidated and heard together.

A four-week hearing on the merits was scheduled for May and June 2026.

The Applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high-density residential mixed-use development.

Following a settlement, the Tribunal issued a decision on January 10, 2025.

The Tribunal subsequently issued this amending decision pursuant to Rule 24.4 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure to correct a technical or typographical error in the development statistics chart contained in the original decision.

In all other respects, the original decision and order remain unchanged.

The applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high-density residential mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement proposing five high-rise towers and a public park.

The Tribunal accepted uncontradicted expert planning evidence that the settlement proposal represents good planning, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to applicable official plans.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of municipal infrastructure and servicing conditions.

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.

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 first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipality's non-decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The parties indicated they are seeking Tribunal-led mediation to resolve both the zoning appeal and related site plan approval issues.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order and scheduled a five-day video hearing to commence on April 28, 2025.

The municipality brought a motion during a Case Management Conference requesting that the uncontested portions of its new comprehensive zoning by-law be deemed to have come into force pursuant to s. 34(31) of the Planning Act.

Several appellants had filed appeals regarding specific properties.

Relying on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal granted the motion in part, bringing the by-law into force for all areas except those lands specifically subject to the ongoing appeals.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal considered requests to consolidate site-specific zoning and subdivision appeals with ongoing Official Plan Amendment appeals concerning lands in the Town of Oakville.

The Tribunal granted the consolidation request on consent of the parties.

The Tribunal also directed the parties to proceed to Tribunal-assisted mediation and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for December 2024, along with a four-week merit hearing in June and July 2025.

The City of Vaughan brought a motion at a Case Management Conference seeking to resolve several site-specific appeals of its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law and Transition By-law.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved site-specific amendments for properties owned by Dufferin Vistas Ltd., Condor Properties Ltd., and Armland Management Inc. The Tribunal also provided directions for other appeals to be considered at future Case Management Conferences and acknowledged the withdrawal of certain appeals.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an order to correct a technical error in its previous decision dated September 13, 2023, pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The correction replaced Schedule 1 of the decision, which sets out the procedural order and issues list for an upcoming hearing regarding an Official Plan Amendment for a mixed-use redevelopment of the Scarborough Town Centre.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

At a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of Official Plan Amendments, Zoning By-law Amendments, and Draft Plans of Subdivision in the Town of Oakville, the Tribunal granted party and participant status to several entities on consent.

The Tribunal declined a request by the appellants to consolidate the site-specific appeals and set hearing dates, finding it premature given potential upcoming legislative changes to the Planning Act.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled.

The applicants appealed the City of Markham's failure to make a decision on Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control applications for a proposed mixed-use high-rise development within a Major Transit Station Area.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that revised the proposal to include two 39-storey towers with 990 residential units and commercial space.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with provincial policies and local official plans, and approved the zoning by-law amendment and site plan in principle.

The City of Vaughan brought a motion for directions to approve three settlements (one partial, two full) resolving appeals to its new Comprehensive Zoning By-law 001-2021 and Transition By-law 039-2022.

The appeals related to the failure of the new by-laws to carry forward previous site-specific approvals.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested planning evidence that the proposed amendments to implement the settlements represent good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part to amend the by-laws accordingly.

The Tribunal also granted the City's request to deem the by-laws in force for specific lands where appeals had been withdrawn.