Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd. v. Toronto (City), 2026 CanLII 7229

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: January 28, 2026

CASE NO.: OLT-25-000466

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision

Description: To permit a mixed-use development comprised of 405 residential units

Reference Number: 21 199583 STE 09 OZ

Property Address: 189-195 Old Weston Road

Municipality: City of Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000466

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000466

OLT Case Name: Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

BEFORE:

CARMINE TUCCI MEMBER

Wednesday, the 28th day of January, 2026

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that further to the Decision issued on October 17, 2025, the Procedural Order, as agreed to between the Parties and attached hereto as Schedule “A”, shall be in force and effect for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing, which is scheduled to commence on September 14, 2026. The Tribunal has set aside 10 days for the hearing.

“Matthew D.J. Bryan”

MATTHEW D.J. BRYAN REGISTRAR

Ontario Land Tribunal Website: 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.

PROCEDURAL ORDER

1Purpose of the Procedural Order:

Case management conferences are scheduled by the Tribunal to organize the hearing. This sample procedural order is provided to identify who may participate in the hearing, the issues in dispute, and the matters that are required to be carried out before the hearing. The attachment to this sample procedural order explains the meaning of a number of terms in the sample procedural order, such as a party or a participant.

The Tribunal recommends that the appellant, municipality, the applicant (if applicable), or those who wish to seek party status in this proceeding, meet, remotely if necessary, to discuss this sample procedural order before the date of the case management conference and try to identify the issues and process they want the Tribunal to order following the conference. The Tribunal will hear submissions on the content of this sample procedural order at the case management conference and issue a procedural order at a later date.

If you are not represented by a lawyer, you should prepare by reviewing the Tribunal’s Video Hearings Guide, and the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”), particularly Rule 20, which are available on the Tribunal’s website.

ISSUE DATE: January 28, 2026 CASE NO.: OLT-25-000466

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended.

Applicant and Appellant: Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision

Description: To permit a mixed-use development comprised of 405 residential units

Reference Number: 21 199583 STE 09 OZ

Property Address: 189-195 Old Weston Road

Municipality: City of Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000466

OLT Lead Case No: OLT-25-000466

OLT Case Name: Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.

Organization of the Hearing

The hearing will begin on September 14, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. by video hearing.

ON: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/656004293

Access Code: 656-004-293

The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 10 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible. The procedural order deadlines are found in Attachment 1.

The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 2 (see the sample procedural order for the meaning of these terms).

The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.

The order of evidence is set out in Attachment 4. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.

Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.

Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearings Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.

Requirements Before the Hearing

If the applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal, including any revised plans, reports, and studies, to the other parties on or before May 19, 2026. The Applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the plans or the introduction of any new or revised reports after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before June 16, 2026 and in accordance with paragraph 23 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ curriculum vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified. Any challenges to the witness, including qualifications of a witness to give opinion evidence in the area of expertise proposed shall be made by motion in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules and notice of same must be served on the other Parties on or before June 21, 2026.

Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before July 2, 2026 and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing with the Tribunal’s case coordinator on or before July 15, 2026.

An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in Section 14 below. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony.

Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in paragraph 14 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in paragraph 14 below. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the expert witness has prepared any report(s) that they intend to rely on at the hearing, and which did not form part of the submissions made to the City, such report(s) shall be provided to the other parties at the same as the delivery of expert witness statements, as in paragraph 14 below.

On or before July 30, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the Tribunal’s case coordinator in accordance with paragraph 23 below.

On or before July 30, 2026, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 23 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless permitted by the Tribunal.

On or before August 10, 2026, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

On or before August 14, 2026, parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case coordinator a written response to any written evidence in accordance with paragraph 23 below.

On or before September 4, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 23 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

The parties shall cooperate to prepare a Joint Document Book which shall be shared with the Tribunal’s case coordinator in accordance with paragraph 23 below on or before September 4, 2026.

A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before September 4, 2026, with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the preliminary hearing plan. Any and all witnesses shall be available on the identified date(s), unless otherwise directed by the Tribunal or on consent of parties. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the preliminary hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.

All filings shall be submitted electronically. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7. All documents to be filed with the Tribunal shall be organized, tabbed and digitally searchable.

No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

BEFORE:

Name of Member: Carmine Tucci

Date: January 28, 2026

MATTHEW D.J. BRYAN

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

2Meaning of Terms Used in the Procedural Order:

A party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. An unincorporated group cannot be a party and it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorisation from the party.

NOTE that a person who wishes to become a party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the case management conference (CMC), must ask the Tribunal to permit this.

A participant is an individual or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a party may do so). Section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A participant may also be asked questions by the parties should the Tribunal direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.

A participant must be identified and be accorded participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a participant does not have the rights of a party to make such requests of the Tribunal.

Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.

Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing.

A witness statement is a short written outline of the person’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss ; and a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing.

An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness’ opinions on those issues and the complete reasons supporting their opinions and conclusions and (5) a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of expert’s duty.

A participant statement is a short written outline of the person’s or group’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a statement of the participant’s position on the appeal; a list of the issues which the participant wishes to address and the submissions of the participant on those issues; and a list of reports or materials, if any, which the participant wishes to refer to in their statement.

3Additional Information:

A summons may compel the appearance of a person before the Tribunal who has not agreed to appear as a witness. A party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons through a request. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) The request should indicate how the witness’ evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the information provided in the request that the evidence is relevant, necessary or admissible, the party requesting the summons may provide a further request with more detail or bring a motion in accordance with the Rules.

The order of examination of witnesses is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:

• direct examination by the party presenting the witness;
• direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;
• cross-examination by parties of opposite interest;
• re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or
• another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Tribunal.

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE	EVENT
May 19, 2026	Last date to provide copies of revised proposal, including all revised plans, reports, and studies (if any)
June 16, 2026	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
July 2, 2026	Experts meeting prior to this date
July 15, 2026	Statement of agreed facts filed with the Tribunal
July 30, 2026	Exchange of witness statements, summoned witness outlines, expert reports and participant statements
August 10, 2026	Parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required
August 14, 2026	Exchange of reply witness statements (if any)
September 4, 2026	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
September 4, 2026	Hearing plan filed with the Tribunal
September 4, 2026	Joint document book filed with the Tribunal
September 14, 2026	Hearing commences

LIST OF PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

4PARTIES:

Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd.

Michael Foderick and Jamie Cole McCarthy Tétrault LLP Suite 5300, TD Bank Tower Box 48, 66 Wellington Street West Toronto, ON M5K 1E6 Email: mfoderick@mccarthy.ca and jpcole@mccarthy.ca Tel: (416) 601-8300

City of Toronto

Gabe Szobel and Horatio Waller Metro Hall 55 John Street, 26th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 Email: gabe.szobel@toronto.ca and horatio.waller@toronto.ca Tel: (416) 392-8047

PARTICIPANTS:

None.

LIST OF ISSUES

Note: The identification of an issue on this Issues List is intended to provide notice to all parties that a party will lead evidence and/or argument on the matter. This identification does not serve as an acknowledgement of relevancy to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

A party may revise their Issues List until June 2, 2026 in response to any revised proposal submitted pursuant paragraph 9 of this Procedural Order.

5CITY OF TORONTO:

Planning Act

1. Does the proposed development for the Zoning By-law Amendment have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest identified under Section 2 of the Planning Act, including but not limited to Sections 2 (h), (j), (k), (q), and (r).

Provincial Planning Statement

1. Is the proposed development for the Zoning By-law Amendment, consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, including but not limited to Sections 2.2, 2.4, 2.8, 2.9, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.9, 6.1?

City of Toronto Official Plan

1. Does the proposed development for the Zoning By-law Amendment conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to, sections 2.2.3, 2.3.1.3, 3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.3, 3.5.1, 3.6, 4.5, 4.6, 5.2?

2. Does the proposed development for the Zoning By-law Amendment conform to the Council adopted and Provincially approved Keele-St. Clair Secondary Plan (OPA 537), including but not limited to Sections 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 3.1, 3.4, 3.6, 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9,4.12, 6, 7, 8.1, 8.2, 8.5, 8.16, 9.1, 9.2?

City of Toronto Guidelines

1. Does the proposal respond appropriately to and meet the intent and purpose of:
   1. The Tall Building Design Guidelines;
   2. Mid-Rise Building Design Guidelines;
   3. Growing Up Urban Design Guidelines: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities;
   4. Pet Friendly Design Guidelines; and
   5. Pedestrian Level Wind Terms of Reference

Toronto Green Standard

1. Does the proposed developed meet the requirements of the Toronto Green Standard?

Site Specific Issues

1. Has a multi-use trail been appropriately considered and designed on the subject site in accordance with section 4 of OPA 537 and Map 4?

2. Have appropriate mid-block connections been provided in accordance with Map 4 of OPA 537 that are well designed?

3. Has a parkland dedication of an appropriate size, location, and configuration been proposed?

4. Has the development proposal demonstrated an appropriate phasing plan?

5. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard to the Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations?

6. Is the site organization and built form of the proposed development appropriate, including:

   1. Is the proposed building heights, massing, including streetwall and base building massing, appropriate?
   2. Does the site organization create inviting spaces for pedestrians by providing generous building setbacks, public sidewalks with tree planting and limiting vehicular driveway to provide safe and comfortable pedestrian connections and active uses on the ground?
   3. Does the proposal provide appropriate separation distance between the buildings?
   4. Does the proposal limit negative impact on planned and existing pedestrian movement?
   5. Are the shadow impacts from the proposed development appropriate?
   6. Are the wind impacts from the proposed development acceptable?

7. Does the proposal represent good and appropriate land use planning, having regard for:

a. appropriate provision of new parks and open spaces;

b. appropriate implementation of the St. Clair Avenue West Area TMP;

c. timing of the delivery of the St. Clair-Old Weston SmartTrack Station;

d. adequate municipal servicing infrastructure;

e. appropriate provision of affordable housing;

f. appropriate provision of non-residential uses;

g. appropriate setback from the adjacent rail corridor and derailment protection?

1. Has the proposed development provided an adequate number and type of loading spaces to support the development?

2. Is the proposed vehicular parking supply, including accessible parking supply, appropriate?

3. Is the proposed bicycle parking supply and facilities adequate to support the development?

4. Does the Transportation Impact Study demonstrate an appropriate TDM plan, site circulation, site access, parking, loading and related concerns in accordance with the City of Toronto by-laws and guidelines?

5. Is the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment good planning and in the public interest?

Implementation

1. If the requested Zoning By-law Amendments are approved by the Tribunal, in whole or in part, should the Tribunal’s final order be withheld until it has been advised by the City Solicitor that:
   1. the final form and content of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment is to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review and the City Solicitor;
   2. the owner has at their sole cost and expense:

i. submitted a revised Functional Servicing, Stormwater Management, and Hydrogeological Reports for review and acceptance to the satisfaction of the Director, Engineering Review, Development Review in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water. The reports will determine whether the municipal water and fire flow, sanitary and storm sewer capacity can support the proposed development and whether upgrades or improvements of the existing municipal infrastructure are required;

ii. entered into a financially secured agreement for the construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure, to the satisfaction of the City, should it be determined that upgrades and road improvements are required to support the development, according to the Transportation Impact Study accepted by the Executive Director, Development Review, in consultation with the General Manager, Transportation Services, and the Functional Servicing Report accepted by the Director, Engineering Review, Development Review, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;

3. submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study, including Transportation Demand Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review, in consultation with the Geneal Manger, Transportation Services;
4. submitted a Rail Safety and Risk Mitigation Report, revised if necessary, that has been peer reviewed by a third-party consultant, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
5. submitted a revised Noise and Vibration Study including peer review by a third-party consultant, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
6. submitted a phasing plan to demonstrate the order in which the various elements of development would be delivered, in conjunction with planned improvements from the St Clair Avenue West Area TMP to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review, in consultation with the Geneal Manger, Transportation Services;
7. made revisions to meet the Toronto Green Standard requirements to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
8. submitted a revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner, City Planning and Executive Director, Development Review;
9. submitted a revised Arborist Report, Soil Volume Plan, and Tree Preservation Plan to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Environment, Climate and Forestry and,

1. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the Tribunal receives confirmation from the City Solicitor that a Holding provision (H) has been included in the final form of the site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment, not to be lifted until such time as the following conditions are satisfied:
   1. The construction of the St. Clair- Old Weston Station be substantially completed prior to the residential occupancy of new buildings to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
   2. Should it be determined that infrastructure upgrades are required to support the development according to the accepted Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report and/or the Transportation Impact Study, or until such time as the planned improvements identified in the St. Clair Avenue West Area Transportation Master Plan are delivered, a Holding Provision be included in the final form of the site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment; and the Holding Provision not be lifted until such a time as the owner has made satisfactory arrangements, including entering into appropriate agreement(s) with the City for the design and construction of any improvements to municipal infrastructure and the provision of financial securities to the satisfaction of the Director, Engineering Review, Development Review, and the General Manager, Transportation Services.

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

6IN CHIEF:

Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd.

City of Toronto

[7]

8REPLY:

Weston Road Properties Development Ltd. and Westport Properties Development Ltd.