David Huynh

The Appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 56-storey mixed-use tower at 2350-2352 Yonge Street.

The City opposed the development, arguing the site was only suitable for a midrise building and raised concerns about back-to-back towers, blank walls, combined tower floor plate size, and impacts on the public realm.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the Appellant's experts, finding that the proposed tower separation, blank wall treatment, and combined floor plate size were acceptable and had appropriate regard for the Tall Building Design Guidelines.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, subject to the Appellant increasing the ground floor retail depth to 15 metres and satisfying other technical pre-requisites.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building and 15 townhouse units.

Following a settlement hearing, the Tribunal accepted uncontested land use planning evidence that the proposal represents appropriate infill development.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the redevelopment in principle, but withheld its final order pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including the securing of affordable rental units and necessary infrastructure upgrades.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 29-storey residential building.

Following a successful Tribunal-led mediation, the parties presented a settlement.

Based on uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed intensification appropriate for the transit-accessible location and consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part on an interim basis, withholding its final order pending the submission of finalized instruments and updated technical studies.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to increase the permitted height of a mixed-use building from 85 to 94 storeys.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement to permit a 91-storey building.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan, noting it would provide additional housing and serve as a landmark without creating unacceptable adverse impacts.

The appeal was allowed in part and the amendments were approved in principle.

The applicants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 58-storey residential building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the settlement proposal represents good planning, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the Growth Plan and City Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the amendments in principle subject to the fulfillment of conditions, and adjourned the site plan appeal sine die.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a mixed-use development with four buildings.

The parties reached a settlement proposing 1,029 residential units, retail space, and new public streets adjacent to the Guildwood GO Transit Station.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and Official Plan, and in the public interest.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the draft Zoning By-law Amendment was approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 13-storey hotel development.

The parties reached a settlement involving revisions to the built form, including increased setbacks and reshaped mechanical penthouses.

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

The appeals were allowed in part, and the amendments were approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the submission of final instruments and servicing reports.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision application for a multi-tower residential development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal comprising 870 units, including rental replacement units, a new public road, and a public park, while incorporating existing heritage facades.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with provincial policies and conforms to the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several preconditions.

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 appellants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications for a multi-building mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontradicted expert planning and transportation evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and representing good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 54-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

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

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, withholding its final order until the City confirms all conditions, including a Section 37 agreement, are satisfied.

Multiple appellants appealed the City of Toronto's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 478 (OPA 478), which provides area-wide policies for lands near the Main Street TTC Station and Danforth GO Station.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal considered proposed modifications to OPA 478 that clarify the provision of new streets, parks, built form standards, and municipal services.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the modified OPA 478 is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan, and represents good land use planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the modified OPA 478.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a high-density mixed-use development at 6 Dawes Road.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal consisting of two buildings with four residential towers.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposed settlement is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of various conditions by the City.

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

Following an initial settlement in 2019, the parties consented to a revised proposal for 25 stacked back-to-back townhouse units.

Based on the uncontested planning affidavit submitted on behalf of the applicant, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the revised proposal in principle, withholding its final order until the City Solicitor confirms that the zoning by-law amendments are in a satisfactory form and the applicant has submitted revised engineering reports.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 13-storey mixed-use building.

The subject site is located at the corner of Davenport Road and Bedford Road, with portions designated as Mixed Use Areas and Neighbourhoods.

The Tribunal found that the revised proposal, characterized as a 'tall mid-rise' or 'hybrid' building, represents good planning and urban design.

It is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan, and conforms to the City's Official Plan and Downtown Plan.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts, concluding that the proposal provides an appropriate transition to the adjacent low-rise neighbourhood and optimizes the use of lands near transit.

The appeal was allowed in part, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of City conditions.