Russell D. Cheeseman

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a typographical error in its previous decision dated February 4, 2025.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the decision was amended to correct the spelling of counsel Diana Doracin's name in the appearances list.

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

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order governing the procedures leading up to and including the hearing scheduled to commence on May 26, 2025, regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipality's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Brantford's new Comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 124-2024 and Official Plan Amendment 11.

The Tribunal granted party status to several entities on consent.

The parties agreed to schedule a Motion Hearing to further scope the issues, which may lead to the resolution or withdrawal of some appeals.

The Tribunal scheduled the Motion Hearing for March 4, 2025, and a second Case Management Conference for April 30, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the municipality's failure to render a decision on a site-specific Official Plan Amendment application.

The Tribunal granted party status on consent to two neighbouring entities.

A third entity requested party status but agreed to accept participant status after concerns were raised.

The Tribunal set a timeline for finalizing the Issues List and Procedural Order, and scheduled a five-day video hearing.

The appellant appealed two City-initiated Official Plan Amendments (OPA 218 and OPA 41) and a Zoning By-law Amendment to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

At the first Case Management Conference, the appellant formally withdrew the appeals relating to the Official Plan Amendments.

The Tribunal accepted the withdrawals, closed those files, and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for the remaining Zoning By-law Amendment appeal.

The appellant appealed the Town of Oakville's refusal of a Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit the development of 11 freehold townhouse dwelling units.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good land use planning, is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, and conforms to the regional and local official plans.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment.

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 Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical or typographical error in its decision issued on January 2, 2025.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, paragraph 14 of the original decision was deleted and replaced to clarify the primary area of disagreement regarding whether the proposed development was properly categorized as residential or seasonal resort recreational development.

The appellant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed medium-density residential development, including an eight-storey apartment building and stacked townhouses.

The City opposed the development, arguing it was incompatible with the neighbourhood character and would cause adverse shadow impacts on an adjacent school yard.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, finding that the development integrates well with the surrounding area, meets the City's Sun Shadow Guidelines, is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, and represents good land use planning.

The applicant appealed the County's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a seasonal resort recreational development on lands designated as prime agricultural.

Following initial evidence, the parties reached a settlement that reduced the number of seasonal cottages from 173 to 125, restricted occupancy to April through October, and increased public access to recreational amenities.

The Tribunal approved the revised planning instruments, finding that the seasonal recreational use would not adversely impact nearby agricultural resources, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and represented good planning.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first case management conference regarding appeals by SNAM Investment Group Inc. against the Town of Grimsby's failure to adopt requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments.

The applications seek to facilitate a 548-unit high-rise residential development.

The Tribunal approved the draft procedural order and issues list submitted by the parties and scheduled a 10-day video hearing on the merits for April 2025.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 58-storey mixed-use building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the municipality requested that a hearing not be scheduled because a municipally-initiated growth area review was ongoing and could impact the subject property.

The Tribunal declined to halt the planning process based on hypothetical scenarios, noting that the applicant had followed all required steps.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference and a six-week merit hearing.

The applicant appealed the City of Welland's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment and make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 122-unit residential development on a brownfield site.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments represent good planning, are consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, and conform to the applicable official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part to approve the amendments in accordance with the settlement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the Township of Severn and the County of Simcoe for failing to make decisions on a zoning by-law amendment and a draft plan of subdivision.

The proposed development consists of 534 residential units.

The Tribunal granted participant status to thirteen individuals, approved the final Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a 15-day merit hearing to commence in July 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Spruce Rose Inc. against the Town of Oakville's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two individuals on consent, noted the parties' intent to pursue mediation, and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the five-day merit hearing scheduled for March 2025.

The applicant appealed the Town of Huntsville's decision regarding a Community Planning Permit application to recognize existing non-complying structures and to permit the construction of a boat launch and access path.

The Town had provisionally approved the existing structures subject to conditions requiring the removal of a deck and obtaining building permits, but denied the boat launch proposal due to concerns about environmental impacts on a wetland and fish habitat.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, granting final approval to recognize the existing structures without the Town's conditions, finding them unnecessary and inappropriate.

The Tribunal also granted provisional approval for the boat launch, subject to conditions including the completion of an Environmental Impact Study and obtaining necessary approvals from Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by MacDonald Rose Inc. against the Town of Oakville's refusal of Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications for a proposed 11-unit townhouse development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a local resident, approved the final Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a three-day merit hearing to commence by video on January 13, 2025.

The applicant appealed the Town of Oakville's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to facilitate a 10-unit townhouse development.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and local official plans, and represents good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part and the amendment was approved.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications for a proposed two-storey single-family dwelling.

The subject land is identified as having natural heritage significance.

The Tribunal granted Party status to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Participant status to a local residents' association.

A revised Procedural Order was approved, and a 15-day video hearing was scheduled for July 2025.