C. Gibson

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law amendment and site plan control applications for a 33-storey mixed-use building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to Metrolinx and denied participant status to an absent individual.

The Tribunal scheduled a ten-day hearing for May 2025 and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical error in its previous decision dated March 20, 2024.

Pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure, the decision was amended to replace Andrea Wilson-Peebles with Steven Ross in the appearances section.

In all other respects, the original decision remains unchanged.

The Liquor Control Board of Ontario appealed a Zoning By-law Amendment passed by the City of Brampton that permitted a 42-storey and 37-storey mixed-use development on an abutting property.

The parties reached a settlement that revised the amendment to increase building setbacks and provide greater regulatory controls over massing and design to protect the appellant's property for future redevelopment.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendment represented good planning, allowed the appeal in part, and approved the revised Zoning By-law.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for the municipality's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a 24-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to eight entities, including two hospitals who raised concerns about emergency air ambulance helicopter operations.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled, and the parties were directed to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal convened a settlement hearing regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's approval of Official Plan Amendment No. 582, which established the University of Toronto St. George Campus Secondary Plan.

The remaining appellant, the Toronto Catholic District School Board, reached a settlement with the City involving modifications to policies regarding view studies and built form transitions.

Based on uncontroverted planning evidence, the Tribunal found the modifications had regard for provincial interests, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the modified Secondary Plan.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Mattamy (Eglinton) Limited against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a proposed Plan of Subdivision.

The Tribunal granted party status to Canadian Tire Real Estate Limited, IPEX Inc., and Metro Ontario Real Estate Limited, noting they satisfied the legislative tests and were already parties to related Official Plan and Zoning By-law appeals.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for October 3, 2023.

The applicant appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit the redevelopment of a waterfront property with a new four-storey dwelling, fire egress tower, and accessory building with increased heights.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development, which includes site-specific restrictions on lot coverage, setbacks, and natural area maintenance, is consistent with provincial policy and conforms to the official plans.

The appeal was allowed in part and the amending by-law was approved.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Pickering's Official Plan Amendment No. 38, which aims to enable redevelopment and intensification of the Kingston Road Corridor.

The parties discussed a phased hearing approach, with a Phase 1 area-wide hearing followed by site-specific hearings.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit a Draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a third Case Management Conference to finalize the procedural order and schedule the merit hearing.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Pickering's Official Plan Amendment No. 38, which aims to enable redevelopment and intensification of the Kingston Road Corridor.

The Tribunal granted party status to 705 Kingston Road Ltd. and Pickering Ridge Lands Inc. on consent.

The parties were directed to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and a second Case Management Conference was scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the Liquor Control Board of Ontario against the City of Brampton's decision to grant a zoning by-law amendment for a mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted Party status on consent to the Canadian National Railway Company and Metrolinx.

A 10-day hearing was scheduled for February 2024, and a Procedural Order was approved to govern the proceeding.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of Official Plan Amendment 582 (University of Toronto Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal approved a settlement between the City of Toronto and the appellants Basilian Fathers of Toronto and Daniels HR Corporation concerning the property at 95 St. Joseph Street.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the site-specific modification to OPA 582 consistent with provincial policies and good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement, while the remainder of OPA 582 remains unapproved pending resolution of the other appeals.

The City of Toronto requested a Case Management Conference to schedule a five-day hearing on the merits regarding outstanding appeals against Official Plan Amendment No. 365.

The Tribunal treated the event as a Status Hearing.

After hearing from the parties that several rezoning applications had been approved by the City and others were progressing through municipal processes, the Tribunal found that setting a hearing date would be premature.

The Tribunal declined to schedule the hearing and directed the City to request a further status update in nine months if no material progress occurs.