David Bronskill

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision approving a consent to sever lands owned by a railway company to facilitate a sale to the applicant for future redevelopment.

During the hearing, it was discovered that the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) had not received notice, leading to an adjournment and HDI being added as a party on consent.

Relying on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposed severance had appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest, satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, and was consistent with provincial policies.

The appeal was dismissed and the provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 29-storey mixed-use building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement for a revised 27-storey building.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan, and the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, withholding the final order pending the satisfaction of servicing and Section 37 agreement conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an application to amend the zoning by-law to permit a 15-storey residential apartment building.

Following a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent to govern the organization and conduct of the upcoming 5-day video hearing.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding an appeal of the City of Hamilton Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application for a mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Lakewood Beach Community Council and denied it to an absent individual.

The Tribunal scheduled a 5-day hearing on the merits and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 59-storey mixed-use development at 625 Church Street.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement for a revised 56-storey tower that retains the existing heritage building façade within the podium and introduces a new privately-owned publicly accessible space.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal represents good planning, is consistent with provincial policies, and conforms to the municipal official plan.

The Tribunal approved the development in principle, withholding its final order pending the execution of Section 37 and Heritage Easement agreements.

The Tribunal held a 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 application.

Metrolinx, the owner of the adjacent GO Station, requested and was granted party status on consent.

The Tribunal scheduled a Telephone Case Conference and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the City's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The parties advised that they had engaged in successful settlement discussions and requested a settlement hearing.

Counsel for neighbouring property owners indicated they would not seek party status as their concerns were resolved.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day settlement hearing for July 21, 2022.

The Tribunal held a first case management conference regarding an appeal by Tuxedo Court GP Ltd. against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 644-unit mixed-use development.

The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority was granted party status without objection.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a further case management conference.

The applicant appealed the municipality's failure to render a decision on applications for an official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment to permit a 40-storey mixed-use building.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal explored the possibility of mediation and settlement, which the parties indicated may be possible after a staff report is provided.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order and scheduled a 10-day video hearing to commence in April 2023.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed 80-storey mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to BentallGreenOak and participant status to two others on consent.

A 10-day hearing was scheduled for April 2023, and the parties were directed to submit a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant appealed the City's approval of an Official Plan Amendment that permitted redevelopment and increased heights, arguing it failed to provide sufficient affordable housing and violated the Charter and Human Rights Code.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appeal without a hearing under s. 17(45) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the appeal failed to disclose any legitimate land use planning grounds, as the City's Official Plan only encouraged a target for affordable housing and the City had not enacted inclusionary zoning.

The appellant also failed to provide evidence to support its Charter and Human Rights Code claims.

The Tribunal convened a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control applications for a proposed mixed-use development.

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

The Tribunal determined that the appeals will be heard together in a two-phase hearing, with the zoning appeal proceeding first.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to finalize the Procedural Order and set a hearing date.

The Appellant appealed the City of Burlington's failure to make decisions on applications for official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a 27-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal found that the proposed development conforms with the City's 2008 Official Plan, the Growth Plan, and the Provincial Policy Statement.

The Tribunal held that the proposed height, massing, and urban design were appropriate for the downtown context and provided adequate transition.

The Tribunal also found the proposed parking supply and shadow impacts to be acceptable.

The appeal was allowed in principle, subject to conditions including a holding symbol related to environmental site remediation.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan amendment and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a mixed-use development.

At the third Case Management Conference, the parties requested on consent to consolidate the Zoning By-law appeals with the Official Plan appeal.

The Tribunal ordered the consolidation of the appeals and scheduled a further Case Management Conference, which the parties intend to be a settlement hearing if City Council accepts a proposed settlement offer.

This was a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Burlington's new Official Plan, Official Plan Amendment 119, and Zoning By-law Amendment No. 2020-418.

The Tribunal approved a Master Procedural Order setting out a phased hearing plan and approved the Procedural Order for the Phase 1A hearing on agriculture issues, scheduling it for April 2023.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a residential tower development.

The parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal for 18 and 19-storey buildings connected by a 5-storey podium.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial policies and the Official Plan.

The appeal was allowed in part, with the draft Zoning By-law Amendments approved in principle, subject to the satisfaction of pre-requisite conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 59-storey mixed-use development.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties advised they were working toward a settlement and requested a settlement hearing date.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day video settlement hearing for June 20, 2022.

The Town of New Tecumseth brought a motion during a Case Management Conference to bring the unappealed portions of its Comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 2021-128 into force.

The appellants did not oppose the motion, subject to a minor clarification regarding a schedule.

The Tribunal granted the motion, deeming the unappealed portions of the by-law to have come into force on the date of passing.

The Tribunal also agreed to phase the hearings for the two appellants separately for efficiency.

This was the third Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 445.

The Tribunal granted party status to Queen Street Post Inc., noting they would shelter under the issues of other parties.

A 15-day hearing was scheduled for October and November 2023, and a Procedural Order was approved in principle.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision approving a consent application to sever lands owned by CN Rail.

During the hearing, evidence emerged that the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) opposed the development but had not been formally notified of the appeal.

The Tribunal determined it had a duty to ensure adequate notice was provided to affected Indigenous peoples pursuant to section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and provincial planning policies.

The Tribunal directed notice be given to HDI, which subsequently requested party status.

The hearing was adjourned on consent of all parties to allow for settlement negotiations and to address HDI's status request.