Kate Cooper

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's decision to amend its zoning by-law to permit a 10-storey mixed-use building, seeking instead approval for a 16-storey building.

The Tribunal found that the 16-storey proposal constitutes an appropriate 'tall mid-rise' building given the site's proximity to a major transit station area.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence that the proposal fits the existing and planned context, adequately limits shadow impacts on the public realm, and provides acceptable transition to adjacent neighbourhoods.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the proposed zoning by-law amendment for the 16-storey building was approved in principle.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 20-storey building.

The parties reached a full, uncontested settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposal promotes efficient infill development, provides diverse housing options including three-bedroom units, and aligns with provincial and municipal planning policies.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the zoning by-law amendment was approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including infrastructure agreements and heritage conservation plans.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 35-storey residential building with 365 dwelling units, including 33 replacement rental units.

The parties reached a full, uncontested settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert land use planning evidence that the proposal promotes efficient infill development and aligns with provincial policy.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the zoning by-law amendment was approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including rental housing replacement and heritage impact assessments.

Following a settlement hearing and an interim order, the Tribunal was advised that the precondition for the final order had been satisfied.

The Tribunal issued a final order dismissing the appeal regarding Official Plan Amendment No. 99 and allowing the appeals regarding the Zoning By-law Amendments in part, approving the draft amendments to permit a high-rise mixed-use building.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a 10-storey mixed-use building and a 33-storey residential tower.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The appeals were allowed on an interim basis, with final approval withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions, including infrastructure upgrades, wind studies, and rental housing replacement.

The applicant appealed the City of Markham's failure to make a decision on a proposed draft plan of subdivision for a high-rise mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed subdivision had regard for provincial interests, conformed with applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the draft plan of subdivision subject to conditions, delegating final approval to the City.

The appellant appealed the City of Vaughan's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendments that would permit a multi-phased high-rise mixed-use development.

Following a successful Tribunal-assisted mediation, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised applications are consistent with provincial policies and represent good land use planning.

The Tribunal approved the amendments in principle, withholding its final order until the City amends its noise by-law to provide a site-specific exemption for the appellant's nearby distribution facility.

The appellant appealed the City of Markham's Zoning By-law 2023-85 regarding a high-rise mixed-use development.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement that increased the maximum permitted units to 2,930, increased affordable housing units to 50, removed the requirement for a Community Benefit Charges Agreement, and provided for off-site parkland dedication.

Based on uncontradicted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with provincial policies and good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part and the zoning by-laws were amended accordingly.

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 five-building mixed-use community.

The Ontario Land Tribunal considered a proposed settlement between the parties in writing.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendments in principle, subject to the satisfaction of several conditions including the finalization of engineering reports and the provision of financial securities for municipal infrastructure upgrades.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit a six-storey mixed-use building on a site containing heritage buildings.

The parties reached a settlement that revised the proposal from a seniors-oriented institutional building to a mixed-use residential/commercial building with increased step-backs and heritage retention.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the instruments were approved in principle on an interim basis.