Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: November 21, 2025

CASE NO(S).:

OLT-23-000091

OLT-22-004346

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant:

Revenue Properties Company Ltd. and Morguard Investments Limited

Subject:

Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description:

To establish a Site and Area Specific Policy to guide the future development of the Centrepoint Mall proposed mixed-use development

Reference Number:

21 246686 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address:

6212-6600 Yonge Street

Municipality/UT:

Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.:

OLT-23-000091

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-23-000091

OLT Case Name:

Revenue Properties Company Ltd v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant:

1018429 Ontario Inc.

Appellant:

480 Steeles West Limited et al.

Appellant:

6200 Yonge GP Inc.

Appellant:

Augend Investment Ltd. and others

Subject:

Proposed Official Plan Amendment

Description:

To guide future growth along the Yonge Street corridor in the area bounded by Steeles Avenue, Willowdale Avenue, Cummer and Drewry Avenues, and Lariviere Road

Reference Number:

OPA 615

Property Address:

Area bounded by Steeles Avenue, Willowdale Avenue, Cummer and Drewry Avenues, and Lariviere Road

Municipality/UT:

Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.:

OLT-22-004346

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-22-004346

OLT Case Name:

Augend Investment Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

Heard:

April 23, 2025 by Video Hearing and June 16, 2025 In Writing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel/Representative*

Revenue Properties Company Ltd. and Morguard Investments Limited

Johanna Shapira

City of Toronto

Jessica Braun Ray Kallio

Yonge Steeles Landowners Group Inc.

Sarah R. Kagan Ira Kagan (in absentia) Jason Park (in absentia)

Toronto Catholic District School Board

Julie Lesage Andrew Baker (in absentia)

Development Group (100 SAW) Inc.

Noami Mares (in absentia) Tom Halinski (in absentia) Sidonia Tomasella (in absentia)

1306497 Ontario Inc.

Matthew W. Rutledge Joel Farber (in absentia)

Longevity Properties Limited

Jonathan S. Cheng (in absentia) Calvin Lantz (in absentia)

City of Vaughan

Laurence Esposito* (Student-at-law) Colin Dougherty (in absentia) Bruce Engell (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BITA M. RAJAEE ON APRIL 23, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1This was a Hearing to consider a settlement proposal with respect to an appeal under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act (“Act”) by Revenue Properties Company Ltd. and Morguard Investments Limited (“Applicants”) from the failure of the City of Toronto (“City”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframes on an application for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) with respect to lands located at 6212-6600 Yonge Street, in the City (“Subject Site”). The purpose of the OPA application is to establish a Site and Area Specific Policy (“SASP”) to guide the future development of the Subject Site (“SASP Appeal”).

2Prior Case Management Conferences have taken place on this matter on June 29, 2023 (“First CMC”) and January 13, 2025 (“Second CMC”). At the First CMC, it was confirmed that Notice had been adequately served, and a number of Parties and one Participant (Medi Shams) were added. Since the First CMC, W Mandel Developments Limited and Mandross Holdings Inc., and Augend Investment Ltd. have withdrawn their Party status. At the Second CMC, the Procedural Order was ratified and a 10-day Merit Hearing was scheduled to commence on April 14, 2025.

3In advance of the Hearing, the Parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement agreement. This Hearing took place to consider the settlement proposal.

4Of note, this matter has been Ordered to be heard together with Tribunal file OLT-22-004346, which relates to the City-initiated Official Plan Amendment 615 (“OPA 615 Appeal”). This is discussed in greater detail below, specifically at paragraphs [11] to [15] of this Decision. However, it is notable at this stage to clarify that the settlement in the SASP Appeal constitutes the inclusion of the SASP in the currently approved OPA 615. In other words, if approved, the SASP will form part of the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (“Secondary Plan”). There is an outstanding issue in the OPA 615 Appeal that the Parties were not in a position to present to the Tribunal at this Hearing. The implications of this are also discussed at paragraphs [11] to [15] of this Decision. Thus, at this Hearing, the Tribunal only considered and decided on the SASP Appeal and adjourned the portion of the OPA 615 Appeal that relates to this matter. This Member remains seized for the purpose of reviewing the remaining issue in the OPA 615 Appeal.

HEARING

5In support of the settlement proposal, the Parties presented written and oral testimony from Antonio Volpentesta. The Curriculum Vitae and signed Acknowledgement of Expert Duty form for Mr. Volpentesta were provided, confirming his expertise in the area of Land Use Planning, and Mr. Volpentesta was qualified by the Tribunal, without objection, to provide expert opinion evidence in that field.

Subject Site

6Mr. Volpentesta described that the Subject Site is located at the southwest corner of Yonge Street and Steeles Avenue West and is bounded by four major arterial roads. It is approximately 14.6 hectares in size and has two primary frontages of 374 metres (“m”) and 384 m along Steeles Avenue West and Yonge Street, respectively, a depth from Yonge Street of approximately 345 m, and a depth from Steeles Avenue West of approximately 400 m. The Subject Site is currently developed with a shopping centre known as Centerpoint Mall that contains a large area of surface parking with 2,200 parking spaces.

7Regarding the area context, Mr. Volpentesta explained that the Subject Site is located within the Newtonbrook West Neighbourhood of the City. The interior of the Newtonbrook Neighbourhood is comprised predominantly of detached residential dwellings, schools, and parks, while the boundary roads contain a mix of residential, commercial, and institutional uses in a variety of built forms, scales, and densities. A cluster of high-rise development is located along Yonge Street at the north end of the North York Centre Secondary Plan and the existing terminus of the Yonge-University-Spadina Line 1 subway. There is significant development along the remaining perimeter arterial roads of Steeles Avenue, Bayview Avenue, and Bathurst Street. Moreover, there are several approved and proposed high-density development applications within the area around the Subject Site and along Yonge Street and Steeles Avenue corridors in each of Toronto, Vaughan, and Markham. This is largely due to the planned extension of the subway along Yonge Street to Richmond Hill.

8Mr. Volpentesta further explained that a significant aspect of the area around the Subject Site is the multijurisdictional context, particularly at the intersection of Yonge Street and Steeles Avenue. Steeles Avenue separates the City of Toronto from the Region of York. Furthermore, Yonge Street separates the City of Vaughan on the west side of Yonge Street and the City of Markham on the east side of Yonge Street. This makes the Yonge Street and Steeles Avenue intersection (“Yonge-Steeles Intersection”) a tripoint between the Cities of Toronto, Vaughan, and Markham.

9With respect to the transportation context, Mr. Volpentesta explained that Yonge Street runs in a north-south direction and is identified as a Major Street with a nonuniform width, as per the City’s Official Plan (“OP”). Steeles Avenue runs in an east-west direction and is also identified as a Major Street in the OP. From a transit perspective, the Subject Site is well served by existing surface transit routes that generally operate every 10 minutes or better, in both directions, throughout the day and into the evening. Furthermore, Finch Subway Station, the current terminus of Line 1, is located about 1.5 kilometres south of the Subject Site, on Yonge Street. A significant transit network expansion is underway to the Toronto Transit Commission Line 1 subway (“Line 1”). Metrolinx is planning the Yonge North Subway Extension of the Line 1 from Finch Station to the Richmond Hill Centre, located north of Highway 7 on the east side of Yonge Street. The extension is planned to include five additional subway stops, including a station at the intersection of Yonge Street and Steeles Avenue. The expansion will bring rapid transit to the Yonge Street Corridor in the Cities of Vaughan, Markham, and Richmond Hill.

The Official Plan Amendment – SASP

10Mr. Volpentesta testified that, on December 2, 2021, the Applicants filed the SASP application to implement a master plan for the future redevelopment of the Subject Site, which contemplates demolition of the existing mall over several years. If the SASP is implemented into the OP, it would guide the future redevelopment of the Subject Site through the introduction of new structural elements including a new public street network, a large centralized public park, and resulting block layout that would contain a mix of uses including residential, retail, and office uses, as well as community service uses. The SASP would also establish the built form for the Subject Site, including a variety of low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise buildings ranging in height from 4- to 55- storeys, peaking at the Yonge-Steels Intersection.

OPA 615 Appeal

11Mr. Volpentesta explained that, in 2011, the City initiated the Yonge Street North Planning Study with a view to implementing a new secondary plan for the planned Line 1 extension along Yonge Street, from Finch Avenue in the south to Steeles Avenue in the north. The Yonge Street North Planning Study and related Transportation Master Plan take into consideration the planned Line 1 extension, including a new station stop at the Yonge-Steeles Intersection. The Subject Site is the single largest landholding within the study area (approximately 14.6 hectares), and was planned to accommodate a significant portion of the new infrastructure for the area, including most of the new street network and a large, centralized park. At its meeting from July 19-22, 2022, City Council adopted OPA 615 (By-law No. 1016-2022) that includes the Secondary Plan. The Secondary Plan establishes much of the new infrastructure on the Subject Site.

12OPA 615 was appealed by a number of Parties, including the Applicants. By Tribunal Order dated January 15, 2024, and as mentioned above, the subject SASP Appeal was ordered to be heard together with the OPA 615 Appeal.

13In response to mediation efforts, the City brought forward a modified version of the Secondary Plan that was endorsed by City Council in July 2024. Updated policies in the Secondary Plan relate to the public realm, transportation, community services and facilities, built form, and the range and mix of housing. The greatest heights and development intensities are planned to be concentrated along Yonge Street and in the Yonge-Steeles Transit Station Area. A hearing to consider a settlement proposal for OPA 615 was held by the Tribunal, and by way of Order dated December 23, 2024, the Tribunal approved the modified Secondary Plan in principle, except as it relates to ongoing appeals by five appellants, which will be addressed on a site-specific basis.

14The Applicants settled their appeal of OPA 615 and its associated maps, as it relates to the Subject Site, save for one issue. At the Hearing, the Parties advised that, while OPA 615 had been approved in principle, there is an outstanding road issue that needed to be determined. The Parties asked that, while both appeals were to be heard together at the Hearing, the OPA 615 portion be adjourned so that the City could bring this matter to City Council and amend the westerly boundary of OPA 615.

15The Tribunal asked Mr. Volpentesta whether this outstanding matter would impact its ability to make a decision on the SASP before it, and specifically, whether this outstanding matter impacted Mr. Volpentesta’s opinions regarding the SASP. He testified that his opinion was not impacted and the Tribunal would be able to make a decision on the SASP, independent of the OPA 615 outstanding road issue. Of note, at the Hearing, the Tribunal was not provided with evidence regarding the road sharing issue. Subsequent to the Hearing, the City advised that an agreement has been reached on this issue between the Parties and evidence is to be provided to the Tribunal by way of an Affidavit to explain this issue and the agreement.

Settlement Agreement

16The SASP, arrived at by way of settlement agreement, and attached to this Decision as Schedule A (“Revised SASP”), contains certain modifications, which Mr. Volpentesta described in his written and oral testimony. The Revised SASP provides additional guidance (along with OPA 615) regarding the future redevelopment of the Subject Site, which is the largest landholding within the Secondary Plan area. Specifically, the Revised SASP provides guidance on matters that are established in the Secondary Plan, such as the new road network on site and the large, centralized park. The Revised SASP also provides more specificity beyond the policies of the Secondary Plan, which will help guide the redevelopment of the Subject Site in accordance with the Applicants’ vision, as demonstrated through the Master Concept Plan prepared by Turner Fleischer Architects (“Concept Plan”). This includes elements related to built form, street design, Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible Spaces (“POPS”), public art, and pedestrian connectivity.

17Mr. Volpentesta explained that the Concept Plan depicts a master planned mixed-use development that includes seven development blocks, a central park, and a new network of public and private streets connecting to Steeles Avenue West, Yonge Street, and the lands to the west. It also plans for the integration of the public transit improvements underway in the area and within the Subject Site, to the extent possible. The Concept Plan includes multiple high-rise buildings (up to 55 storeys) at the Yonge-Steeles Intersection, generally stepping down in height towards the south along Yonge Street and towards the west along Steeles Avenue. A large public park is central to the Concept Plan and separates the high-rise built form to the north from the mid- and low-rise buildings to the south of the park.

18The Revised SASP, Mr. Volpentesta opined, was formulated in collaboration with City staff and implements the direction of the approved-in-principle OPA 615. The Revised SASP was updated based on the modifications to OPA 615 and was designed to address key issues identified by the City through mediation related to, among others, non-residential uses, road network, pedestrian connections, and phasing. The Revised SASP is structured in multiple sections. The first three sections provide overarching policies related to the interpretation of the SASP in relation to the Secondary Plan and the OP, the vision and major objectives of the redevelopment of the Subject Site, and policies outlining the structural components of the plan. The remaining sections of the Revised SASP provide site-specific policies related to the transportation network, public realm, built form, parks, housing, non-residential uses, phasing, and implementation to guide development of the Subject Site.

19Due to the nature and relationship between the Revised SASP and the parent plans, matters such as building height and other built form considerations that were part of the originally proposed SASP were removed and are now guided by the Secondary Plan. The general location and type of building is identified on Map – 3 of the Revised SASP, but the specific design criteria are to be enforced by the applicable parent plans (i.e., the Secondary Plan). Overall, the Revised SASP will implement the policies of the Secondary Plan, except where greater specificity is provided related to the Subject Site through the Revised SASP.

20Mr. Volpentesta explained that the Revised SASP will be incorporated into Chapter 6, Section 49 (the Secondary Plan) of the OP. This approach ensures that the SASP and the Secondary Plan would read as one document, and that the ultimate redevelopment of the Subject Site would implement the policies of the Secondary Plan and the SASP. The SASP, or amendments thereto, could be made within Chapter 7 in the future, or transitioned into Chapter 6, if appropriate. In short, the Revised SASP will be incorporated into the Secondary Plan as a site and area specific policy applicable to the Subject Site. Therefore, the Secondary Plan ultimately will be the policy document that guides the redevelopment of the Subject Site.

Planning Policy

21Mr. Volpentesta explained that the planning documents affecting this matter include:

a. The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended;

b. The Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS”);

c. The City of Toronto Official Plan, including the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615) and Official Plan Amendment 570; and

d. The City of Toronto Plans and Guidelines, including:

i. The Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan;

ii. The Tall Building Design Guidelines;

iii. The Mall Redevelopment Guide (draft);

iv. The Pet-Friendly Design Guidelines for High Density Communities; and

v. The Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities Guidelines.

22Citing numerous policies in his comprehensive Affidavit and oral testimony, Mr. Volpentesta opined that the Revised SASP meets the legislative requirements outlined in the policy documents. He testified that the Revised SASP has regard for matters of provincial interest indicated in the Act, is consistent with the PPS, conforms with the OP, and represents good planning. Moreover, it is supportive of policy directions set out in the documents noted above, as all promote: a range of housing options, a mix of uses, and the optimization and efficient use of land and infrastructure within built-up areas, particularly in areas that are well served by municipal infrastructure, including higher-order public transit and existing mall sites. For example, he opined as follows:

a. The Revised SASP will support the orderly development of a complete community that efficiently uses existing and planned infrastructure in the Secondary Plan area. Furthermore, the Revised SASP will deliver a mix of uses to support a range of new housing, employment opportunities, and community infrastructure. The Subject Site is an appropriate location for growth and development and will help to optimize the use of land and investment in planned infrastructure, particularly public transit. The Revised SASP has regard for the relevant matters of provincial interest identified in section 2 of the Act.

b. The Revised SASP is consistent with the PPS, in particular, the policies promoting the creation of complete communities and optimizing the use of land and infrastructure. It provides the necessary structure needed for a future complete community that will include tall buildings, community infrastructure, and non-residential uses, all within short walking distance to higher-order transit. Furthermore:

i. Mixed-use intensification on the Subject Site is supported by policy directions articulated in the PPS, which promotes intensification on sites that are well served by municipal infrastructure. In particular, the Subject Site is a shopping mall, which the PPS identifies as an example of an underutilized site.

ii. The Subject Site forms part of a strategic growth area (“SGA”) and a major transit station area (“MTSA”) on a higher order transit corridor, as defined by the PPS, given that MTSAs are defined as the area within an approximate 500- to 800-m radius of a transit station (the future Yonge-Steeles subway station). The PPS directs that boundaries of MTSAs are to be delineated to maximize the number of potential transit users that are within walking distance of the station. In fact, MTSAs on higher order transit corridors that are served by subways are to be planned with a minimum of 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare.

iii. The Revised SASP is consistent with the intensification policies of the PPS, which includes policies that support a mix of uses and increased residential and employment densities to support the viability of existing and planned service levels, with a focus on strategic growth areas, including MTSAs. Residential and mixed-use intensification on the Subject Site will efficiently use land and infrastructure by providing new housing and employment in transit supportive built forms.

iv. The optimization of land and infrastructure on the Subject Site is consistent with both good planning practice and overarching provincial and municipal policy direction, subject to achieving appropriate built form relationships. Residential intensification will contribute to accommodating the growth being experienced by the region and it will also promote the ongoing revitalization of the Yonge-Steeles area.

c. The Revised SASP appropriately plans for the future transit improvements within the Subject Site, as contemplated by the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan.

d. The redevelopment of the Subject Site with an intensified, mixed-use form of development, that includes a mix of residential, commercial, office, community, and parks space, is part of a desirable revitalization and reinvestment process, which is anticipated and supported by the OP. The proposed mixed-use intensification on the Subject Site would support increased transit ridership that would contribute to the achievement of population and job forecasts in the OP and would also allow residents to take advantage of the wide array of shops, services, restaurants, and other facilities onsite and in the surrounding area.

e. The Revised SASP will ensure a mix of uses are provided that achieve the objectives of the OP’s ‘Mixed Use Areas’ designation. Retail uses at grade will contribute to the urbanization of the Yonge-Steeles area and animation of the streetscape. Residential intensification will add population density which will help to support transit ridership and commercial uses.

f. From a built form perspective, the Subject Site is appropriate for a mix of tall, mid-rise, and low-rise buildings, and the proposed height and massing are appropriate and compatible with the surrounding context, based on a number of contextual and urban design considerations.

g. From an urban design perspective, the Revised SASP is appropriate and desirable in that it conforms with the applicable built form and urban design policies of the OP. The Revised SASP will guide the redevelopment of a substantial block of underused land, taking advantage of the adjacent planned high-order transit station and increasing the connectivity and porosity of the Subject Site. New public and private streets, an enhanced public realm, and pedestrian connections will be established throughout the entire block structure, as indicated in the policies and maps of the Revised SASP and the Secondary Plan.

h. The Subject Site is the largest consolidated land holding in proximity to the proposed Yonge-Steeles subway station that will become a transit hub that serves the central Greater Toronto Area.

i. With respect to the Subject Site, Policy 2.7 of OPA 615 states that its redevelopment will deliver the Secondary Plan's largest proportion of non-residential uses, including office and large-format retail uses within the tall and mid-rise buildings. Furthermore, a street network will support connectivity and the creation of smaller sized development blocks. To further support connectivity and the creation of a vibrant public realm, opportunities for POPS, mid-block, and below-grade connections to the subway will be secured. Development will be appropriately designed and massed to frame a large centralized public park and minimize shadow and wind impacts on the park and public realm.

j. The Revised SASP conforms with the Secondary Plan and provides appropriate site-specific policies to guide the future redevelopment of the Subject Site. The Revised SASP outlines built form areas (Map 3) in a manner that conforms with the building types and heights identified on the Subject Site in the Secondary Plan. In particular, the Revised SASP provides a variety of built forms such as low-, mid-, and high-rise buildings, locating the most intense heights and densities at the Yonge-Steeles Intersection, gradually transitioning in height and density towards the peripheral areas of the plan area. The Revised SASP also requires a minimum amount of gross floor area for non-residential uses, in appropriate locations throughout the Subject Site, with regard for the prime pedestrian areas (identified in the Secondary Plan) and the interface with the proposed central public park. The Revised SASP will create a street network that will support connectivity throughout the Subject Site and create an extension of the existing surrounding urban fabric in a manner consistent with the Secondary Plan. A pedestrian network will also be created to promote a vibrant public realm, with consideration for destinations such as the central public park, proposed POPS, and the planned subway station entrance.

23Mr. Volpentesta stated that the Revised SASP requires the preparation of a phasing strategy and implementation plan which, among other matters, will address and identify the physical infrastructure needed to support each phase of development. Additionally, any amendments to the City’s zoning by-law will have a holding symbol to ensure that physical infrastructure are appropriately phased and conveyed with the development or redevelopment of the Subject Site (Policy 54, Revised SASP).

24Mr. Volpentesta went through the issues raised by the added Parties, as well, and confirmed that they were addressed by the Revised SASP.

25The Revised SASP, Mr. Volpentesta concluded, has regard for matters of provincial interest as set out in section 2 of the Act, is consistent with the PPS, conforms with the OP, conforms to the, approved in principle, Secondary Plan, and has regard for relevant City guidelines. For the foregoing reasons, he recommended that the Tribunal should allow the Applicants’ appeal, in part, and approve the Revised SASP.

FINDINGS

26The Tribunal accepted the uncontested opinion evidence of Mr. Volpentesta and found that the Revised SASP, as modified by the settlement agreement, meets the required legislative tests. Specifically, the Tribunal was persuaded by the evidence of Mr. Volpentesta that the Revised SASP is appropriate and would promote the policies of the OP by establishing an appropriate mix of residential and commercial uses and height and density to meet the overarching provincial policy directives. Furthermore, it conforms with the OP policies, and specifically policies which apply to lands designated ‘Mixed Use Areas’ and along ‘Avenues’. The Revised SASP also conforms to the Secondary Plan policies. It is consistent with the PPS and has regard for matters outlined in section 2 of the Act. Thus, the Tribunal found that the SASP, as revised by the settlement agreement, warrants approval.

27As discussed, with respect to the OPA 615 Appeal, the Tribunal adjourned that matter to allow the Parties to finalize their settlement agreement regarding the road issue. The Tribunal directs that the Parties provide the Tribunal with evidence in support of the settlement agreement in writing, in order to allow the Tribunal to make a Final Order in that matter, if warranted. This Member remains seized for the purpose of reviewing that evidence, and if satisfied, issuing the Final Order for the outstanding portion of the OPA 615 Appeal. The Tribunal directs that the Parties provide this evidence, or a status update to the Tribunal by Tuesday, March 31, 2026.

ORDER

28THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:

a. The appeal by Revenue Properties Company Ltd. and Morguard Investments Limited pursuant to subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. c. P.13, as amended, is hereby allowed in part; and

b. Chapter 7 of the City of Toronto Official Plan is hereby modified in accordance with Schedule A to this Order, such modifications comprising of the addition of a site and area-specific policy for the lands municipally known as 6212-6600 Yonge Street in the City of Toronto (“SASP”), and that the SASP is hereby in full force and effect.

29The TRIBUNAL FURTHER ORDERS that, in accordance with Rule 24.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, this Order is effective as of April 23, 2025.

30The outstanding portion of the OPA 615 Appeal, namely Tribunal file number OLT-22-004346, is adjourned. This Tribunal Member remains seized for the purpose of addressing the outstanding issue in the OPA 615 Appeal. The Parties are directed to provide the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator with information required to allow the Tribunal to consider making a Final Order, or a status update, by Tuesday, March 31, 2026.

“Bita M. Rajaee”

BITA M. RAJAEE

MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: www.olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.