Matthew Longo

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's refusal of official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a 48-storey mixed-use development.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal issued an amended Procedural Order to govern the procedures leading up to a 9-day video hearing commencing on June 16, 2026.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for the City's failure to make decisions on Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan applications for a 49-storey residential tower.

The Tribunal granted party status to an adjacent landowner, Oulahen Team Realty Inc., but denied a party status request from two other individuals who failed to attend the hearing.

The Tribunal also consolidated the appeals and scheduled a 12-day hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings leading up to a 12-day hearing scheduled to commence on July 15, 2026.

The hearing concerns appeals by The Address Inc. under subsections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act regarding the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a proposed 37-storey and 35-storey residential development.

The Order sets out the procedural dates, issues list, and order of evidence.

The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal under sections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act due to the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a high-rise residential development.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party and participant status to interested individuals on consent.

A 12-day merit hearing was scheduled to commence in July 2026, and the parties were directed to submit a final Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding applications for consent, minor variances, and site plan approval to support a multi-phased, mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

The Tribunal authorized the minor variances, finding they met the four tests under the Planning Act, and granted provisional consent subject to conditions.

The site plan appeal was adjourned sine die.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Montrin Richview GP Inc. against the City of Toronto's Committee of Adjustment.

The appeals relate to a minor variance refusal, and failures to make decisions on consent and site plan applications for a proposed multi-building, mixed-use development.

The Tribunal scheduled a two-day merit hearing and conferred participant status to the Richmond Gardens Residents and Ratepayer’s Association.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Application to permit a 4-tower high-rise residential development on a portion of a former golf course, with the remainder dedicated as public open space.

The City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority opposed the development, arguing it was located in a hazardous area (erosion hazard) and would negatively impact the natural heritage system.

The Tribunal found that the development site, located on a stable paleo terrace, was safe from natural hazards and that the proposed mitigation and restoration measures would result in no net negative impact on the natural heritage system.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the OPA and ZBA in principle, while adjourning the Site Plan Application to allow the parties to resolve outstanding technical issues.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto's refusal of official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications.

The applications seek to permit a 48-storey mixed-use development at 506-516 Church Street.

The order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, a summary of dates, the list of parties and participants, the issues list, and the order of evidence.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City's refusal of official plan and zoning by-law amendments for a 48-storey mixed-use development.

The Tribunal granted party status to a neighbouring property owner and a neighbourhood association, and participant status to a condominium corporation.

A 9-day hearing was scheduled for March 2026.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal to issue a demolition permit for two semi-detached cottages designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The appellant argued that the properties had lost their heritage integrity due to extensive alterations over time and were in poor condition, making demolition and replacement appropriate.

The City maintained that the properties retained their heritage attributes and that demolition was inconsistent with heritage conservation policies.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the original designation was supportable and that the alternatives of rehabilitation and preservation had not been fully explored, concluding that demolition is a means of last resort.

The appellant objected to the City of Toronto's designation of the property at 15 Elm Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.

The appellant argued the property, a heavily altered vernacular building, did not meet the criteria for cultural heritage value under O. Reg. 9/06.

The City contended the property was a rare surviving Confederation-era house-form building that contributed to the understanding of the historic immigrant neighbourhood known as The Ward.

The Tribunal found the property met three of the four criteria, concluding it was a rare example of vernacular Georgian architecture, yielded information about working-class immigrant residents, and supported the character of the area.

The appeal was allowed in part only to the extent that the property did not meet the criterion of being historically linked to its surroundings, and the City was ordered to amend the designation by-law accordingly.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 633 (Jane Finch Secondary Plan), the appellants confirmed their appeals would proceed on a site-specific basis.

The Tribunal ordered that the unappealed portions of OPA 633 are in force and effect.

The parties requested and were granted an adjournment sine die to allow the appellants to file site-specific applications, with a status update required in six months.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a site plan application for a nine-storey residential building within the statutory timeframe.

At a Case Management Conference, the parties advised that they had made progress but a dispute remained regarding road widening.

The Tribunal initially scheduled a three-day merit hearing, but at the parties' request, converted it to a one-day telephone case conference to allow for further settlement discussions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a site plan control application for Phase 2 of a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement that revised the proposal to include a 38-storey and a 21-storey tower, a privately owned publicly accessible space, and reduced vehicular parking.

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

The Tribunal approved the site plan drawings in principle, subject to pre-clearance conditions.

The appellant appealed a City of Toronto by-law designating the Cabbagetown Southwest Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act.

The parties reached a settlement to change the status of the appellant's property from 'contributing' to 'non-contributing' due to previous alterations that diminished its heritage integrity.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence and allowed the appeal in part to implement the settlement and approve the revised Heritage Conservation District Plan.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval to permit a 35-storey addition to an existing 16-storey heritage building.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 37-storey addition that retains the heritage building and includes affordable rental units.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good land use planning and allowed the appeals in part on an interim basis, withholding its final order pending the satisfaction of several conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the proceedings for an appeal by the applicant regarding a zoning by-law amendment to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building in the City of Toronto.

The order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, the issues list, and the order of evidence.

The hearing is scheduled to commence on March 24, 2025, for a duration of five days.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by landowners against the City of Toronto's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 633 concerning the Jane Finch Secondary Plan.

The appellants seek higher proposed heights on their lands.

The Tribunal directed the appellants to provide an issues list and confirm if their appeals can proceed on a site-specific basis, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference for February 2025.

At a Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding a zoning by-law amendment to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted party status to the Swansea Area Ratepayers' Group.

The Tribunal also scheduled a five-day merit hearing and directed the parties to submit a final Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's decision to pass a designation by-law for a property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties indicated they were engaging in private settlement discussions and that a separate development application was being considered concurrently.

The parties jointly requested a second Case Management Conference to allow time for resolution or to identify pertinent issues.

The Tribunal granted the request, scheduled a second Case Management Conference, and directed the parties to provide a draft Procedural Order or status update prior to the next hearing.