Cameron McKeich

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 778, which updates the Avenues Policy Framework.

The Tribunal granted party status to 430 Royal York GP Inc. to scope the appeals concerning its property.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to consider a participant status request, receive status updates, and potentially hear scoping motions.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit a mixed-use development with 1,818 residential units and a new public park.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Toronto Region Conservation Authority and participant status to a local resident.

A 10-day merit hearing was scheduled for February 2026, and the parties were directed to submit a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a revised Procedural Order for an appeal by Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. concerning the City of Toronto's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment.

The appeal relates to a proposed development of two midrise mixed-use buildings at 65-81 McCormack Street.

The revised Procedural Order replaces the previous order issued on November 28, 2024, and sets out the revised dates and procedures leading up to the video hearing scheduled to commence on November 18, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a revised Procedural Order to govern the hearing of appeals by Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. concerning the City of Toronto's failure to adopt a requested Official Plan Amendment and make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment for the property at 65-81 McCormack Street.

The hearing is scheduled to commence on June 16, 2025.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application to permit an increase from 35 to 52 townhouse units, along with increased lot coverage and building height.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, finding that the requested variances met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal preferred the appellant's planning evidence that the proposal represented appropriate residential intensification near a major transit station area and that the City's concerns were more appropriately addressed at the site plan and subdivision stages.

The Tribunal convened a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant under section 34(11) of the Planning Act, following the municipality's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application for a 12-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and scheduled a seven-day merits hearing to commence by video on January 28, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by European Bakery Supply Inc. against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a two-tower mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to three entities (Royce, Campont, and PSKRA) and participant status to one unincorporated community group (Garden).

A 10-day hearing was scheduled for May 2025, and the parties were directed to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings for an appeal by Greenline Renovations Plus Ltd. against the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments.

The proposed development involves two midrise mixed-use buildings at 65-81 McCormack Street.

The order sets out the hearing dates, procedural deadlines, and the final Issues List.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant under s. 34(11) of the Planning Act due to the municipality's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment Application for a 12-storey mixed-use building.

The parties requested scheduling of a second CMC and a Merit Hearing to allow for ongoing settlement discussions.

The Tribunal ordered a second CMC for September 11, 2024, and a seven-day Merit Hearing commencing January 28, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical error in its previous decision dated November 16, 2023.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the decision was amended to include the missing case number OLT-22-002999 in the title of proceedings.

In all other respects, the original decision remains the same.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appellant residents association's appeals of official plan and zoning by-law amendments permitting an 8-storey residential building.

The appellant argued the development would block protected scenic views of Casa Loma and the downtown skyline, violate mid-rise building performance standards, and negatively impact a building with heritage value.

The Tribunal found that the specific views the appellant sought to protect were not identified in the applicable Official Plan schedule, the mid-rise guidelines were not zoning by-laws, and the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to compel heritage designation.

Concluding the appeals lacked valid land use planning grounds and had no reasonable prospect of success, the Tribunal granted the motion and dismissed the appeals without a hearing.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the respondent for failing to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications within the statutory timeframes.

The applications seek to facilitate a 29-storey mixed-use building.

The parties submitted a draft Procedural Order and Issues List on consent.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and Issues List to govern the upcoming merit hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Pleasant Condos GP Inc. against the City of Toronto concerning site plan approval and minor variances to permit an increase in the height of a residential tower from 35 to 40 storeys.

The Tribunal granted participant status to the Avoca Vale Residents' Association and party status to 40 Rosehill Avenue (MTCC No. 773) for the minor variance appeal.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for March 15, 2024, to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on its Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised development consisting of townhouses and apartment buildings.

The Tribunal approved the settlement in principle, finding that the revised development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and the Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval to permit a 31-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement agreement, which was supported by uncontested expert planning evidence.

The Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan, and allowed the appeals in part on an interim basis, withholding the final order until specified conditions are met.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a 29-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to three local residents and scheduled a second Case Management Conference and a five-day hearing on the merits.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the City's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Application for a 25-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status on consent to two adjacent property owners.

The parties indicated ongoing settlement discussions, and a second Case Management Conference was scheduled to provide a status update on the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant brought a motion requesting the Tribunal deem the pre-conditions to its Interim Order satisfied, allowing its appeals for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to proceed.

The City opposed, arguing that conditions relating to functional servicing and municipal infrastructure upgrades were not met due to concerns over the F-5-5 Guideline and combined sewer capacity.

The Tribunal found that the F-5-5 Guideline did not apply to the subject site and accepted the applicant's expert evidence that the existing municipal infrastructure had sufficient capacity to accommodate the development.

The motion was granted, and the pre-conditions were deemed satisfied.

The applicants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit an office tower redevelopment.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties requested additional time to finalize the draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for November 1, 2023, and directed the parties to submit the draft documents in advance.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a mixed-use development at 45 The Esplanade.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal consisting of a 39-storey tower with retail, hotel, and residential uses.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and representative of good planning.

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