Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 23 2026
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002852
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant Berkley Carlyle (Junction) Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: to allow for residential uses in a built form that is appropriate and compatible with adjacent properties
Reference Number: 13 278533 WET 11 OZ
Property Address: 6 Lloyd Avenue. et al
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No: OLT-22-002852
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-002852
Legacy Case No: PL180400
OLT Case Name: Berkley Carlyle (Junction) Inc. v Toronto (City)
Heard: January 27, 2026 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties Counsel
Berkley Carlyle (Junction) Inc. Daniel Artenosi Rowan Barron
City of Toronto Gabriel Szobel
DECISION DELIVERED BY f. Lavoie AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This Decision and Order arises from a case management conference converted to a settlement hearing, regarding an appeal filed by Berkley Carlyle (Junction) Inc. (the “Appellant”) pursuant to subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, RSO 1990, c P.13, regarding the lack of decision by the City of Toronto (the “City”) on the Appellant’s Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) application. The application seeks to allow residential uses on part of the property municipally known as 6 Lloyd Avenue and 159, 161-181 Mulock Avenue (“Subject Property”).
2The Appellant and the City reached a proposed settlement on November 12, 2025, which they now seek to have approved by the Tribunal. The settlement seeks to allow residential uses throughout the Subject Property, other than the new public park, whereas the Official Plan (“OP”) currently requires commercial or office space in the southern third of the Subject Property. The settlement also proposes policies for affordable housing as an alternative to commercial/office space, and a new daycare use with a minimum gross floor area (“GFA”) of 500 square metres.
BACKGROUND
3The proposed development was previously appealed and subject to settlements of an OPA appeal and a Zoning By-law amendment (“ZBA”) appeal before the Tribunal and its predecessors, differently constituted.1 For the ZBA appeal, the Tribunal has withheld its final order pending the Appellant’s completion of pre-approval conditions. A final order has not yet been issued. Counsel for the Appellant advises that the implementation of this settlement can be achieved through the completion of the ZBA appeal’s pre-approval conditions.
4With the passage of time, the City undertook an Office Space Needs Study (“Study”) to evaluate office space conversion into new housing. The Study led to a revised office replacement policy which reduces office replacement from 100% to a minimum of 25% or 0%, depending on the location in the City. This explains the Appellant and City’s recent proposal to adapt the Subject Property’s office replacement requirements to this evolving policy direction.
CONVERSION TO SETTLEMENT HEARING
5The Tribunal received from the Appellant an affidavit of service sworn by Rowan Barron, attesting service of the notice package was served in accordance with the Tribunal’s directions. The Tribunal finds the required notice of the hearing was provided.
6There were no Party or Participant Status Requests for the hearing. The Appellant requested the conversion of the case management conference to a settlement hearing. The Tribunal granted the request and proceeded to conduct the settlement hearing.
THE OPA SETTLEMENT
7Ms. McWilliam is a Registered Professional Planner retained by the Appellant, whom the Tribunal qualified to provide expert opinion evidence in land use planning. The following findings of the Tribunal are based on Ms. McWilliam’s uncontroverted evidence, which the Tribunal accepts.
8The Subject Property is approximately 1.06 hectares and irregularly shaped, bounded by St. Clair Avenue West to the north, Mulock Avenue to the west, Lloyd Avenue to the south, and the Canadian National Railways corridor to the east.
9Ms. McWilliam testified that the draft OPA continues to contemplate the redevelopment of the Subject Property with a transit-oriented mixed-use development adding housing options within the Keele-St. Clair neighbourhood. She said there are no proposed changes to the built form as approved in principle in the ZBA Appeal: a 35-storey building, a 28-storey building, an 8-storey mixed-use building, and a public