Sara Premi

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 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.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal by Parklane Home Builders Limited against the Town of Fort Erie's by-law designating a property as having cultural heritage value under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a three-day video hearing on the merits for March 2026 and approved the Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

The Tribunal also encouraged the parties to consider mediation to narrow or resolve the issues.

The appellant appealed a by-law passed by the municipality designating a property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

At a case management conference, the parties requested a subsequent conference to allow the municipality to review a recently prepared cultural heritage evaluation report before settling a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a subsequent case management conference.

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 appellant appealed the Town's refusal of zoning by-law amendment and consent applications to sever a residential lot containing a heritage dwelling.

The parties reached a settlement to create two lots with site-specific zoning provisions, addressing heritage conservation and tree protection.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning and heritage evidence, finding the settlement consistent with provincial policies and representing good land use planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The applicant appealed the City of Port Colborne's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a six-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement that included additional visual screening and privacy measures.

Relying on uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with provincial policies, conforming to local official plans, and representing good planning by encouraging intensification and housing diversity.

The appeals were allowed and the amendments approved.

The appellant appealed the City of St. Catharines Committee of Adjustment's decision to refuse a minor variance for increased density, while granting variances for lot area, front yard setback, and landscape buffer, to facilitate a six-storey mixed-use building.

The Ontario Land Tribunal heard uncontroverted expert planning evidence supporting all four variances.

The Tribunal found that the requested variances met the four tests under the Planning Act, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the official plan.

The appeal was allowed and all variances were authorized.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the Town of Fort Erie's Official Plan Amendment No. 56 and Zoning By-Law Amendment No. 144-2021.

One appellant withdrew their appeal, and another reached a settlement with the Town.

The Tribunal scheduled a written settlement hearing for the resolved appeal and a further Case Management Conference for the remaining appellants, who are seeking to amend their development applications.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment in the City of Niagara Falls.

The Tribunal granted participant status to six individuals and entities and directed the parties to finalize a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal also determined that a third-party zoning by-law appeal was not dismissed by the transition provisions of Bill 185, as the merit hearing had been scheduled prior to the legislative cutoff date.

Motion dates were scheduled to address the production of documents and resolve the Issues List.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of a zoning by-law amendment and an official plan amendment, a motion for document production was adjourned.

The parties agreed to a pathway forward wherein the moving party would revise its document request and the responding parties would provide lists of relevant documents.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize issues lists and restructure the order of the merit hearings.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference concerning an appeal by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit a seasonal residential development consisting of 173 cottages.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and confirmed a 13-day hearing commencing in November 2024.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal considered appeals by Cytec Canada Inc. and 2610832 Ontario Inc. regarding the City of Niagara Falls' By-law 2023-078 and Official Plan Amendment 147, which relate to the conversion of employment lands.

The Tribunal ordered that the appeals be heard together sequentially in a three-phase hearing and scheduled dates for potential motions and the merits hearing.

The appellant appealed the municipality's designation of its property under the Ontario Heritage Act, arguing the property had not been properly evaluated and the heritage attributes were not adequately described.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement based on a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared by the appellant's expert.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, ordering that the property be designated in accordance with an amended by-law that accurately reflects the property's cultural heritage value and attributes as identified in the expert report.

The applicant appealed the City of Welland's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium to permit the creation of seven residential dwellings (four single detached and three townhouses).

The matter proceeded as a settlement hearing.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans, and representative of good land use planning.

The appeals were allowed, the Zoning By-law was amended, and the Draft Plan was approved subject to conditions.

The appellants appealed the Region of Niagara's decision to approve, with modifications, the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan Amendment No. 147 (OPA 147), which addresses the conversion of Employment Lands.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal considered and granted several requests for party and participant status.

The Tribunal directed the parties to collaborate on a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference to coincide with a related zoning by-law appeal.

The applicant appealed the City of Welland's refusal to approve an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the construction of 69 stacked townhouse units.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement, and the City supported the applications.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development consistent with provincial policies, representing good land use planning and appropriate residential intensification.

The appeal was allowed and the amendments were approved.

At a Case Management Conference for appeals concerning a proposed residential subdivision on a heritage property, the Tribunal considered a request by adjacent property owners to change their status from Participant to Party.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding their presence necessary to effectively adjudicate the issues, but restricted them from raising new issues.

The Tribunal also finalized the Procedural Order and set the hearing dates.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical or typographical error in its previous decision dated November 1, 2023.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Title of Proceeding was deleted and replaced with a revised version.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The applicant appealed the City of Welland's refusal of applications for a zoning by-law amendment and a draft plan of subdivision to permit townhouse and single detached dwellings.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to three individuals who raised concerns about density, traffic, and neighbourhood character.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day video hearing for the merits of the appeal and directed the parties to submit an issues list.