Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 10, 2026
CASE NO(S).: OLT-26-000199
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: 1000331725 Ontario Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit a development of three blocks of four-storey stacked townhouses with 125 residential dwelling units
Reference Number: 25 189182 WET 07 OZ
Property Address: 3100 Weston Road
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-26-000199
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-26-000199
OLT Case Name: 1000331725 Ontario Inc. v. Toronto (City)
Heard: May 21, 2026, by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
1000331725 Ontario Inc.
Daniel Angelucci Jason Park (in absentia)
City of Toronto
Jessica Amey Rachel Godley
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Matthew Rutledge Tim Duncan (in absentia)
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY YASNA FAGHANI ON MAY 21, 2026 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This is the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) for the above-noted matter. The Applicant, 1000331725 Ontario Inc., filed an appeal against the City of Toronto ‘s (“City”) failure to make a decision with the statutory timelines regarding an application pursuant to s. 34(11), Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”), of the Planning Act (“Act”). The Application relates to the proposed development of three blocks of four-storey stacked townhouses with 125 residential dwelling units at 3100 Weston Road, in the City (“Subject Property”).
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
2The Tribunal received the Affidavit of Service sworn by Christopher Drew dated May 7, 2026, and marked as Exhibit 1. There were no issues with the service of the Notice for the CMC and, as such, no further Notice is required.
PARTY AND PARTICIPANT STATUS REQUESTS
3Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (“TRCA”) requested Party Status. Counsel for the TRCA advised that his client is requesting Party status with respect to natural hazard matters since the Subject Property includes hazardous lands of a valley corridor associated with Humber River, which contains steep slopes and a flood hazard. Neither counsel for the Applicant nor the City opposed the Party Status request. After hearing submissions, the Tribunal granted Party Status to the TRCA.
4Eva Pusnik requested Participant Status. She lives in proximity to the Subject Property and expressed concerns regarding compatibility of the development with the surrounding low-density neighborhood, including impacts related to density, traffic, activity levels, and parking. Neither Applicant counsel nor counsel for the City opposed the Participant Status request. Upon hearing the submissions of Counsels, the Tribunal granted Participant Status request to Eva Pusnik.
5Fabio Oettini, on behalf of the Pearson Accountability Alliance, sent a Participant Status request. He did not appear at the CMC. The Participant Statement stated that the Pearson Accountability Alliance is an independent, publicly accessible evidence record documenting aircraft-noise exposure and related environmental-health conditions in communities surrounding the Toronto Pearson International Airport. As noted in the Participant Statement, the purpose of the Participant Status request is for the organization to “to assist the Tribunal by ensuring that current, evidence-based environmental conditions are part of the public record and available for consideration in assessing long-term residential suitability”. Further, it is noted that “the Alliance does not opposed development in principle but seeks to ensure that decisions are made with full awareness of current and projected exposure conditions”.
6Counsel for the Applicant opposed the Participant Status request. He advised that the Greater Toronto Airport Authority (“GTAA”) is primarily responsible for handling aircraft noise issues and determines whether there are appropriate conditions on lands for future development. The Applicant has been in touch with this commenting agency as part of the planning process and will be abiding by the conditions imposed by the GTAA. The Applicant’s planner will be discussing these conditions as part of the evidentiary record. Further, GTAA has not requested Party Status. Counsel for the City did not have a position with respect to the request.
7Upon inquiry from the Tribunal regarding the issue of noise, Counsel for the City advised that it is not a concern for the City and the Applicant again noted that noise has been addressed with the GTAA and the conditions imposed, and which will be addressed by its planner.
8Having heard submissions from both Counsel and noting that no representative from Pearson Accountability Alliance attended the CMC to respond to Counsel for the Applicant’s position, the Tribunal denied the Participant Status request.
NEXT STEPS
9Counsel for the Applicant requested scheduling hearing dates in December 2026 or December 2027. Of note, a draft Procedural Order was submitted by the Applicant prior to the CMC; however, it did not contain any issues. The Applicant’s alternative request was to schedule a second CMC with a timeline to file the final draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and at the second CMC, scheduling hearing dates would occur. Counsel for the City advised that there are no instructions with respect to issues because there will be a Council meeting close to the end of June which will likely determine the issues, witnesses, and a better understanding of the number of dates for the Hearing. At this juncture, all Parties (including TRCA) advised that there would be a potential of three to four witnesses for each Party regarding this matter.
10After hearing and considering the submissions of the Parties, the Tribunal agreed to schedule a second CMC on Monday, July 13, 2026, at 10 a.m. The Tribunal directed the Parties to work with each other and circulate a final draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and Issues List (“IL”) and for the Applicant to file the draft with the Tribunal by Wednesday, July 8, 2026.
11Parties are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/638422541
Access Code: 638-422-541
12Parties are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoTo Meeting, or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
13Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application, or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373. The Access Code is as indicated above.
14Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the Hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
15As of March 30, 2026, all Hearing events are governed by the Tribunal’s Artificial Intelligence Practice Direction. This Practice Direction requires a party, participant, or witness to include a declaration within each submitted document if generative AI was used to create or generate content.
ORDER
16The Tribunal Orders that:
a. Party Status is granted to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority;
b. Participant Status is granted to Eva Pusnik;
c. The draft Procedural Order and Issues List is to be filed by the Applicant by Wednesday, July 8, 2026;
d. The second Case Management Conference is scheduled to commence by Video Hearing on Monday, July 13, 2026, at 10 a.m.;
e. The Tribunal may be spoken to in the event of any issue arising from this Order.
17There will be no further Notice, and the Member is not seized.
“Yasna Faghani”
Yasna Faghani
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.