Vanetia R

The applicant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision denying minor variances to permit the retention of an existing front yard driveway and parking space at a residential property.

The City argued the driveway conflicted with Official Plan policies and a recent site-specific zoning by-law amendment.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and authorized the variances, finding that the driveway had existed for over 35 years without issue, was consistent with neighbourhood character, and satisfied the four tests for minor variances under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Bradel Properties Ltd. against the City of London's refusal to extend a Temporary Use By-law for a surface parking lot.

The parties agreed on the need for a Traffic Study and proposed a four-day hearing in early 2023.

The Tribunal scheduled the video hearing for February 7, 2023, and approved the finalized Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the Friends of Meadowlily Woods Community Association against the City of London's approval of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a residential development.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals, finalized the Issues List, and approved the Procedural Order.

A five-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence on July 4, 2022, via video conferencing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario against the City of London's approval of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for a 40-storey mixed-use development on a site containing heritage buildings.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals and organizations, and scheduled an eight-day hearing on the merits.

The appellant appealed the City of London's approval of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments that would permit a 42-unit affordable housing development.

The appellant argued that the neighbourhood was deficient in parkland and that the development should include on-site park dedication.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, accepting the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the development is an appropriate form of intensification, conforms to the Official Plan, and is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.

The Tribunal also found that the City's decision to take cash-in-lieu of parkland was appropriate given the small size of the site.

The new owner of a subject property brought a motion to be substituted as the appellant in appeals originally filed by a now-bankrupt developer regarding Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments.

The municipality and conservation authority brought a joint motion to dismiss the appeals due to delay.

The Tribunal found that the original appellant did not have a valid appeal of the new Official Plan because it failed to make the required statutory submissions.

The Tribunal denied the substitution motion, finding that allowing the new owner to carry on the delayed appeals under an outdated planning policy framework would cause prejudice to the parties and the public interest that could not be compensated by costs or an adjournment.

The Tribunal granted the joint motion to dismiss the appeals on the basis of delay.