M. Longo

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's By-Law No. 1218-2022, which designated the Parkdale Main Street Heritage Conservation District.

The Tribunal granted party status to three neighbouring property owners and participant status to two community organizations on consent.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled to allow the parties to scope issues and submit a draft Procedural Order.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding 81 appeals against the City of Toronto's By-law No. 1111-2017, which designated the King-Spadina Heritage Conservation District.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and scheduled a 25-day hearing on the merits to commence on January 15, 2024.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled for September 13, 2023, to provide a status update.

This was the third Case Management Conference for appeals regarding the City of Toronto's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 9-storey mixed-use building.

The appellant withdrew its related Ontario Heritage Act appeal to facilitate settlement discussions.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day merit hearing for April 2023 and approved the parties' draft Procedural Order.

The Tribunal held a Telephone Conference Call to address the Sheppard Avenue East Community Group's failure to respond to the City of Toronto's request to finalize a Procedural Order.

The parties subsequently requested a settlement hearing instead of the previously scheduled ten-day hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal scheduled the settlement hearing for December 15, 2022, and directed that a supporting affidavit be filed by December 12, 2022.

The City of Toronto brought a motion to dismiss the Claimants' Notice of Arbitration for delay.

The Claimants sought compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from a 1997 expropriation.

The City argued the 21-year delay prejudiced its ability to respond.

The Tribunal found the delay was not solely the fault of the Claimants, noting periods of self-representation and the City's own delays in producing documents.

The Tribunal concluded the circumstances did not justify the extraordinary remedy of outright dismissal, which would deprive the Claimants of their right to seek compensation.

The motion was dismissed with no costs.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's appeal of a site-specific zoning by-law amendment that permitted a 4-storey residential apartment building.

The appellant requested an adjournment at the hearing to retain experts, which the Tribunal denied as untimely.

The Tribunal granted the motion to dismiss, finding that the appeal failed to disclose any apparent land use planning grounds, lacked expert evidence, and had no reasonable prospect of success given the proposal's consistency with provincial and municipal intensification policies.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a 30-storey mixed-use building at 335 Yonge Street.

Following Tribunal-led mediation, the parties reached a settlement for a revised 16-storey mid-rise building with a 5-storey podium.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with provincial policies and represents good planning, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the amendments in principle, withholding its final order pending the satisfaction of conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit a 39-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement and presented a revised proposal for a 40-storey building.

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

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, and withheld its final order pending the satisfaction of conditions, including a Section 37 agreement for community benefits.

A case management conference was held regarding an expropriation claim.

The respondent requested a date to hear a motion to dismiss the claim due to the claimants' delay in advancing it.

The Tribunal scheduled the motion to dismiss for May 30, 2022, and directed the claimants to serve and file their affidavit of documents by April 15, 2022.

This was a case management conference for appeals regarding an official plan amendment, a zoning by-law amendment, and a heritage designation under the Ontario Heritage Act for properties on Queen Street West and Brock Avenue.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two community groups on consent.

The parties requested additional time to explore settlement opportunities and discuss consolidating the appeals.

The Tribunal scheduled a further case management conference for April 28, 2022.

This was a Case Management Conference to determine dates for mediation and a hearing on the merits regarding appeals of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed 22-storey residential development at 680-688 Sheppard Ave East in Toronto.

The Tribunal granted party status to the Sheppard Avenue East Community Group and participant status to several individuals.

A ten-day hearing was scheduled for March 2023.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 17-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal, which integrates heritage attributes and provides large family-sized units, represents good planning and is consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

The appeal was allowed in part and the development was approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the fulfillment of several conditions.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's adoption of the Garden District Heritage Conservation District designation and Plan.

Based on uncontroverted expert evidence in heritage planning, urban design, and land use planning, the Tribunal found the revised Plan consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and City Official Plan, and appropriate under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The appeals were allowed in part to replace the original Plan with the revised settlement version.

The Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct a technical error in its previous decision dated June 22, 2021.

The amendment revised paragraphs 18 and 20 to clarify that Minutes of Settlement between the appellant and Ed Mirvish Enterprises Ltd. would shortly be executed, and that the Final Order would be withheld until those Minutes were signed and other conditions were addressed.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment for a proposed 9-storey mixed-use building.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to several community groups and individuals without objection.

The parties noted potential forthcoming appeals regarding heritage designation of the subject properties and agreed to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List for the next CMC, scheduled for October 2021, to explore settlement opportunities.

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 building.

Following negotiations, the parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal that addressed heritage conservation, height, and built form issues.

Based on the uncontradicted expert planning evidence that the revised proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conformed to the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plan policies, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the settlement in principle, withholding its final order until outstanding conditions were satisfied.