Rodney John Gill

Multiple appellants appealed the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake's approval of Official Plan Amendment No. 99, which adopted the Glendale Secondary Plan.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached settlement agreements that proposed various policy and mapping modifications to the Secondary Plan, including adjustments to land use designations, building heights, and density permissions.

Based on uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments were consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conformed to applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the amended Secondary Plan.

The applicant appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the development of three residential apartment buildings.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to two area residents and the Region of Peel.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal adjourned the proceeding sine die to allow the parties to participate in Tribunal-led mediation.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent application to sever a property to create a new residential lot.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement and the Committee of Adjustment conditionally approved a related minor variance.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposed consent was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the applicable Official Plans, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed and provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the procedures leading up to a 9-day hearing scheduled to commence on October 20, 2026.

The hearing concerns appeals by the applicant regarding the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a 50-storey mixed-use building within a Protected Major Transit Station Area.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto for failing to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments within the statutory timeframe.

The applicant seeks to permit a 50-storey mixed-use building within a Protected Major Transit Station Area.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a local resident, noted an upcoming mediation assessment, and scheduled a nine-day hearing for October 2026.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings leading up to a 12-day hearing scheduled to commence on July 15, 2026.

The hearing concerns appeals by The Address Inc. under subsections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act regarding the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a proposed 37-storey and 35-storey residential development.

The Order sets out the procedural dates, issues list, and order of evidence.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake's Official Plan Amendment 99 (Glendale Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal granted participant status to an individual, denying her request for party status as it did not meet the requirements of Rule 8.2.

The parties advised that settlement agreements had been reached or were near completion.

The Tribunal scheduled a settlement hearing and/or third Case Management Conference for March 6, 2026, and set deadlines for the submission of settlement materials and procedural documents.

The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal under sections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act due to the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high-rise residential development.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party and participant status to interested individuals on consent.

A 12-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence in July 2026, and the parties were directed to submit a final Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal against the City of Guelph's Development Charges By-law.

The appellant sought an exemption for a proposed student residence.

The Tribunal determined that a two-day merit hearing with viva voce evidence was appropriate and scheduled the hearing for January 2026.

The Appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 56-storey mixed-use tower at 2350-2352 Yonge Street.

The City opposed the development, arguing the site was only suitable for a midrise building and raised concerns about back-to-back towers, blank walls, combined tower floor plate size, and impacts on the public realm.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the Appellant's experts, finding that the proposed tower separation, blank wall treatment, and combined floor plate size were acceptable and had appropriate regard for the Tall Building Design Guidelines.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, subject to the Appellant increasing the ground floor retail depth to 15 metres and satisfying other technical pre-requisites.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 54-storey mixed-use building at 2346 Yonge Street.

At an uncontested settlement hearing, the Tribunal accepted expert land use planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conforms to the Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, approving the amendment in principle and withholding the final order until several conditions, including finalization of the by-law and servicing reports, are satisfied.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a 3,034-unit mixed-use development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement, resolving all issues including concerns from an adjacent property owner regarding stormwater overflows.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conformed to the City's Official Plan.

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

The appellant municipality appealed a decision of the Assessment Review Board regarding the classification of multi-unit rental residential properties under a realty tax incentive scheme.

The Board had interpreted the phrase 'a building permit' in O. Reg. 282/98 to mean any building permit issued for the development, allowing the respondents to benefit from the incentive despite the project being well underway.

The Divisional Court found that the Board erred in principle by failing to apply the modern approach to statutory interpretation.

The appeal was allowed, the Board's decision was quashed, and the matter was remitted for a fresh determination.

This was a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of Official Plan Amendment No. 95 for the Glendale Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal granted non-appellant party status jointly to White Oaks Tennis World Inc. and 1526882 Ontario Inc. A request for party status by another individual was deferred to the next CMC due to short notice.

The Tribunal scheduled a second CMC and directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order and finalized Issues Lists.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval to permit a mixed-use residential development.

The parties reached a settlement endorsed by City Council.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending submission of the final instruments.

At a Case Management Conference regarding a land compensation claim under the Expropriation Act, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued procedural directions.

The parties advised that the estimated hearing length could be reduced from 40 to 29 days.

The Tribunal ordered the parties to file written submissions on their preferred mode of hearing and set a deadline for any motions to limit or exclude evidence.

The hearing was rescheduled to commence on June 9, 2025, and end on July 18, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals for official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a 56-storey mixed-use building in Toronto.

The Tribunal granted party status to four entities on consent.

The Tribunal also ordered that the appeals be heard together with a related adjacent appeal at a 15-day hearing commencing in October 2025, and approved the Procedural Order to govern the proceedings.

The appellant objected to the City of Toronto's designation of the property at 15 Elm Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.

The appellant argued the property, a heavily altered vernacular building, did not meet the criteria for cultural heritage value under O. Reg. 9/06.

The City contended the property was a rare surviving Confederation-era house-form building that contributed to the understanding of the historic immigrant neighbourhood known as The Ward.

The Tribunal found the property met three of the four criteria, concluding it was a rare example of vernacular Georgian architecture, yielded information about working-class immigrant residents, and supported the character of the area.

The appeal was allowed in part only to the extent that the property did not meet the criterion of being historically linked to its surroundings, and the City was ordered to amend the designation by-law accordingly.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal under s. 34(11) of the Planning Act for the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application.

The application seeks to permit three additional buildings of 44, 35, and 9 storeys at 123 Bellamy Road.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 9-day video hearing to commence on November 18, 2025.

The appellants appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit a high-density mixed-use development with five residential towers.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part on an interim basis, approving the amendments in principle subject to finalization of the instruments and other conditions.