Zachary Fleisher

The City of Toronto brought a request for directions before the Ontario Land Tribunal.

The Tribunal issued an amending decision pursuant to Rule 24.4 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure to correct a technical or typographical error in the Appearances section of its previous decision issued on April 18, 2024.

The decision was amended to accurately reflect the counsel who appeared for the parties.

The City of Toronto brought a motion to adjourn sine die the site-specific appeal of Del Boca Vista Properties Inc. regarding Official Plan Amendment No. 573.

The appellant consented to the adjournment on the proposed terms, which would allow its site-specific development application process to unfold and avoid a multiplicity of proceedings.

The Tribunal granted the motion and adjourned the appeal sine die subject to the agreed terms.

The applicant appealed the City of Brampton Committee of Adjustment's refusal of applications for provisional consent and minor variances to effect a lot line adjustment and access easement for lands containing a heritage-designated Hindu temple.

The Shree Jagannath Temple Canada, which occupies the temple, opposed the application, arguing it would negatively impact parking and future expansion.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the proposed lot size would provide adequate parking and allow the temple to continue its current operations.

The Tribunal concluded that the consent satisfied the criteria under s. 51(24) of the Planning Act and the variances met the four tests under s. 45(1).

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Calloway Real Estate Investment Trust Inc. and SmartCentres REIT against the Town of Aurora's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law and site plan applications.

The applications propose a redevelopment with five mid-rise buildings and townhouses.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a community group, scheduled a five-day merit hearing, and issued a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 13-storey and a 4-storey apartment building on a site with an existing 15-storey building.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on the uncontested expert 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 the final order until certain conditions are met.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 52-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 44-storey building.

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

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of several conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Airfield Developments Inc. and Airfield II Developments Inc. for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment due to the Town of Caledon's failure to make a decision within statutory timeframes.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Region of Peel and participant status to two individuals.

The parties agreed to explore mediation, and a second Case Management Conference was scheduled via telephone to discuss a draft Procedural Order and potential hearing dates.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent application to sever a 4.3-hectare parcel from an existing retirement community for future redevelopment.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the consent application, subject to agreed-upon conditions, had regard to provincial interests, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and Official Plan, and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed in part and provisional consent was granted.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by First Capital Realty Inc. for the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications.

The applications seek to facilitate a 24-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted party status to a local coalition without objection.

A nine-day hearing was scheduled, and directions were given for finalizing the procedural order and issues list.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 24-storey residential apartment building.

At the hearing, the parties presented a settlement proposal that included 425 residential units, rental replacement units, and affordable housing contributions.

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

The appeal was allowed in part, and the development 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 applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit a residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties advised they intend to engage in settlement discussions.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference, which may be converted into a settlement hearing, and directed the parties to file a draft procedural order if a settlement is not reached.

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

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal for 42 townhouse units.

Based on the uncontroverted 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 Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the planning instruments to implement the settlement.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant from the City's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and The Regional Municipality of Peel on consent.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the City time to receive instructions from City Council and for the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues Lists.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Toronto's By-law No. 595-2022, which regulates development in the Yonge Eglinton Secondary Plan Area.

The Tribunal directed parties to file motions for settlement approval and to bring unappealed provisions of the by-law into effect.

A five-day hearing was scheduled for October 2024 to adjudicate the remaining site-specific appeals.

The applicant sought minor variances to construct a rear two-storey addition, a third-storey addition, and a detached garage.

The Committee of Adjustment approved the variances, and the neighbouring property owners appealed to the Toronto Local Appeal Body.

The tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish the prevailing building type in the immediate context and did not demonstrate how the proposal, particularly the requested floor space index, respected and reinforced the existing physical character of the neighbourhood.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were refused.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing variances to permit the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of a new two-storey residential dwelling.

Prior to the hearing, the appellant reached a settlement with adjacent neighbours, resulting in revised variances for building length, depth, and floor space index.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal respected the physical character of the neighbourhood, mitigated tree impacts, and met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed in part to authorize the revised variances subject to conditions.

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

At the third Case Management Conference, the parties advised the Tribunal that productive settlement negotiations were underway and a settlement report might be presented to City Council.

The Tribunal scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference to proceed either as a settlement hearing or a hearing on the merits.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of appeals brought by the applicants under section 34(11) of the Planning Act.

The appeals relate to the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on zoning by-law amendment applications to permit 38-storey and 12-storey residential buildings.

The order sets out the issues list, order of evidence, and procedural dates leading up to a 12-day video hearing scheduled to commence on August 8, 2023.

The appellant appealed the City of Oshawa's failure to make a decision on its zoning by-law amendment and plan of subdivision applications within the statutory timeframes.

The applications proposed the development of 42 townhouse units.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the Region of Durham and participant status to two individuals.

The parties advised that a settlement was likely and requested a two-day hearing.

The Tribunal scheduled a video hearing for July 4-5, 2023, to either consider the settlement or proceed on the merits.

The applicant appealed the municipal committee of adjustment's denial of a minor variance to permit a maximum building height of 10.4 metres for 11 proposed single detached dwellings.

The municipality did not appear at the hearing.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the variance met the four tests under the Planning Act, as it was consistent with provincial policies, conformed to the official plans, and was minor and desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

The appeal was allowed and the variance was authorized.