Ray Kallio

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications to permit a mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 16-storey proposal.

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

The appeals were allowed in part, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of technical conditions.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's enactment of zoning by-law amendments containing holding provisions and section 37 requirements for a 41-storey mixed-use development.

At a settlement hearing, the parties presented an agreement to remove the holding provisions and modify the section 37 community benefits contribution to a $4.25 million payment.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised amendments consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan, allowing the appeal in part and approving the amendments in principle on an interim basis pending finalization of the section 37 agreement.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's non-decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal featuring two 15-storey towers and townhouses.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert evidence that the settlement plan represents good planning, conforms to applicable policies, and provides appropriate intensification.

The Tribunal rejected late condition requests from a residents' group as being matters for site plan approval.

The appeal was allowed in part on an interim basis, with the final order withheld pending satisfaction of pre-requisite conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 130-unit residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the applicant requested a hearing date, while the City requested a second CMC to obtain instructions from City Council.

The Tribunal directed the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a second CMC.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Jarvis & Earl Inc. and Jarvis & Earl 2 Inc. for a proposed 58-storey residential building in Toronto.

The Tribunal granted party status to Glen-Huntley Holdings Limited and APS Holdings Limited, and participant status to several individuals and organizations.

A second CMC was scheduled for October 20, 2023, and a 10-day hearing on the merits was scheduled for March 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicants from the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment application for the Centrepoint Mall property.

The Tribunal granted party status to several neighbouring landowners and the Toronto Catholic District School Board, and participant status to a local resident.

A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for January 22, 2024, to address procedural matters and a potential consolidation with a related appeal.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 615 (OPA 615).

The parties provided a status update and requested the scheduling of a 30-day merit hearing.

The Tribunal scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference for January 9, 2024, and a 30-day merit hearing commencing October 16, 2024.

A Procedural Order was appended to govern the proceedings.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Zoning By-law Amendments to permit the construction of 40 residential units, including 31 townhouses and 9 detached dwellings.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the Zoning By-law Amendments in principle, withholding its final order pending the satisfaction of technical conditions.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Menfor Dundas Developments Inc. against the City of Toronto's enactment of two zoning by-law amendments.

The parties reported ongoing private mediation regarding section 37 agreements and requested the scheduling of a hearing.

The Tribunal scheduled a second CMC and a three-day hearing on the merits, and issued a Procedural Order on consent to govern the proceedings.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 615 (Yonge Street North Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal granted party status to a new property owner, noted the withdrawal of one appeal, and scheduled a third Case Management Conference to allow the parties to finalize the draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicants appealed the City's failure to make a decision on their Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to facilitate a 14-storey mixed-use development.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference where the parties requested a second conference to allow for further discussions and the preparation of a Draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference and directed the parties to submit the draft order and issues list beforehand.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the Vaughan Official Plan and related site-specific zoning and subdivision applications.

The Tribunal scheduled a Phase 3 Hearing for the Yonge-Steeles Corridor Secondary Plan and approved a final Procedural Order.

A request by an adjacent landowner to join its appeals to the Phase 3 Hearing was denied due to the advanced stage of the proceedings and the need for proper notice.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Zonix Group Inc. against the City of Markham's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed 533-unit residential development.

The Tribunal granted party status to the City of Toronto and participant status to several local residents.

A five-day video hearing was scheduled for November 2023, and the parties were directed to finalize a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The Tribunal convened a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicants against the City of Toronto for failing to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The amendment seeks to permit a 16-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal scheduled a five-day merits hearing and approved the Procedural Order.

The appellants appealed the City of Toronto's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 560, which amends the Sheppard Willowdale Commercial Area Secondary Plan.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties requested the scheduling of a second CMC to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List, as well as a 10-day hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal scheduled the second CMC for February 28, 2023, and the 10-day hearing for July 24, 2023.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision, as well as the City's passage of a heritage designation by-law for the subject lands.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted participant status to a condominium corporation on consent.

The Tribunal deferred a neighbourhood association's request for party status on the heritage appeal to allow for further information to be provided.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled to address potential settlements, consolidation of the appeals, and procedural matters.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment 615 (Yonge Street North Secondary Plan).

The Tribunal granted party status to the City of Vaughan and several corporate entities, and participant status to two others.

A further Case Management Conference was scheduled for April 14, 2023, with directions for the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 43-storey mixed-use building.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal.

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, the City's Official Plan, and applicable secondary plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and approved the zoning by-law amendments in principle, withholding its final order until certain conditions are met.

A Case Management Conference was held regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and a site plan application, to permit a 25-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to two neighbouring property owners and participant status to five individuals.

A procedural order was approved and a 10-day hearing was scheduled to commence on June 12, 2023.

At a Case Management Conference for an appeal regarding a zoning by-law amendment, the Tribunal addressed procedural matters including the status of a party and the failure of added parties to submit witness lists.

The Tribunal changed Hastad Property Management Services Inc.'s status to Participant on consent.

The Tribunal extended the deadline for the added parties to submit their witness lists but struck several of their issues from the Issues List because they did not intend to call expert evidence to support those issues.

A revised Procedural Order was issued.