Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: December 10, 2021 CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001024
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1734140 Ontario Limited Appellant: Anishnawbe Health Toronto et al Appellant: OPT Management Ltd. et al Appellant: Devjo Holdings Limited; and others Subject: Official Plan Amendment No. 525 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT File No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT Case Name: Allied Properties REIT v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Devjo Holdings Limited Appellant: Li Limited Group of Companies Appellant: 1 Sumach Street Inc. Appellant: Parl Estates Limited; and others Subject: By-Law 391-2021 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT File No.: OLT-21-001039
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: OPT Management Ltd. et al Appellant: 2575867 Ontario Inc. Appellant: Lanterra Parliament Developments Appellant: 2547575 Ontario Inc., 33 Parliament GP Inc. & Graywood 33 Limited Partnership; and others Subject: By-Law 392-2021 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT File No.: OLT-21-001040
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1226845 Ontario Ltd. et al Appellant: Dream Impact Master LP Appellant: 126 PS Holdings Inc. & 128 PS Holdings Inc. Appellant: Queen Ontario GP Inc.; and others Subject: By-Law 393-2021 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT File No.: OLT-21-001041
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1734140 Ontario Limited Appellant: Anishnawbe Health Toronto et al Appellant: 1175484 Ontario Inc. et al Appellant: Trolley Urban Development; and others Subject: By-Law 394-2021 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT File No.: OLT-21-001042
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: 1888818 Ontario Limited Appellant: 1654199 Ontario Limited Appellant: KingSett Capital Inc. Subject: By-Law 395-2021 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001024 OLT File No.: OLT-21-001043
Heard: December 7, 2021 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties Counsel
City of Toronto L. Bisset J. Davidson
Appellants – See Attachment 1
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. JACOBS ON DECEMBER 7, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The City of Toronto (“City”) adopted a new secondary plan for the King-Parliament area through an official plan amendment (OPA 525) and associated zoning by-law amendments. As an update to the existing secondary plan, the new plan consists of five distinct policy areas: Corktown, the Distillery District, Jarvis Parliament, Queen Street, and West Don Lands. This new plan amends the area boundaries to include certain properties on the north side of Queen Street East, as well as Parliament Square Park. It also identifies two future public roads in the West Don Lands.
2There were 39 appeals of OPA 525 and its related zoning by-law amendments. The Tribunal convened this first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) to organize the appeals and establish the next steps in this proceeding.
WITHDRAWN, ASSUMED, and SPLIT APPEALS
3Since the time that the appeals were filed, the ownership of several properties that prompted appeals of the secondary plan has changed. As a result, the Tribunal received notification prior to the CMC that some appeals would be withdrawn, while others required the Tribunal’s approval to substitute new property owners to carry on the previous owners’ appeals, in accordance with Rule 8.2 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.
4Prior to the CMC, the Tribunal received correspondence from counsel for Roverella Developments Ltd. withdrawing its appeal. Accordingly, the Tribunal noted Appeal 34 as withdrawn and the same was reflected on the City’s Appellant List, which is included in Attachment 1.
5The Tribunal received a request from DASH (Q&S) Inc. to be substituted as the Appellant in Appeal 2, as it is the new owner 120-134 Sherbourne Street and 225-229 Queen Street East. There were no concerns with the request and the Tribunal allows the substitution.
6The Tribunal also received notification that a number of Appellants Mr. Tang represents wish to withdraw their appeals because they have sold the properties that prompted their appeals. These are contained in Appeals 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, and 24. Mr. Tang advised that Ms. Flynn-Guglietti’s clients seek to assume the appeals as new owners of the subject properties. To that end, he suggested that the Tribunal could hold his clients’ withdrawals in abeyance pending resolution of Ms. Flynn-Guglietti’s requests for substitution.
7Ms. Flynn-Guglietti had filed Appeal 38 on behalf of 1577377 Ontario Limited, which, at the time, owned the agreements of purchase and sale for 323, 331, 335-337, 339-345, 329 and 333 Queen Street East and 139, 141, Units 2A & 2B 323 and 135A Berkeley Street. These are properties formerly owned by Mr. Tang’s clients and for which they intend to withdraw their appeals. The Tribunal understands, based on correspondence from Ms. Flynn-Guglietti, that the ownership of the properties has been divided among three corporations. The request for substitution is for the new owner of each property to assume the originally filed appeal(s) pertaining to that property.
8In reviewing the request from Ms. Flynn-Guglietti, Ms. Bisset, counsel for the City, noted a number of discrepancies in the related property addresses. After some discussion, counsel indicated that they would continue their discussions with a view to resolving these discrepancies.
9It is generally a routine matter for the Tribunal to substitute a new property owner to carry on appeals filed by the previous owner in relation to City-initiated planning instruments. In this case, all that is required is a clear understanding as to which properties Ms. Flynn-Guglietti’s clients now own for which an appeal has been filed.
10In the interest of fairness and efficiency, the Tribunal provisionally allowed the requests for substitution so that Ms. Flynn-Guglietti’s clients may carry on any existing appeals for the properties they now own. However, the Tribunal will hold the withdrawals of Appeals 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, and 24 in abeyance until Ms. Flynn-Guglietti and Ms. Bisset advise the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator as to which appeals are being assumed, based on the originally filed appeals and the new ownership of each property. Should they require the assistance of the Tribunal in resolving this matter, they may request a telephone conference call with the Tribunal. They shall provide a written status update to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator in either circumstance on or before Monday, December 20, 2021.
11As an administrative matter, Ms. Bisset advised that the City and OTP Management Ltd., Ribbon East Corp., and Ribbon West Corp. have agreed to an administrative split of Appeal 3. The Tribunal accordingly notes that Appeal 3 is now split into a site-specific appeal respecting 31A Parliament Street (Appeal 3.1) and a general appeal (Appeal 3.2).
12Counsel for the City undertook to amend the Appellant List included in Attachment 1 to reflect the Tribunal’s dispositions during the CMC, and to circulate the revised list to the parties and the Tribunal at their earliest opportunity.
PARTY STATUS REQUESTS
13The Tribunal received two requests for party status, both on behalf of landowners in the King-Parliament Area: Terrier Properties Inc. and 2714544 Ontario Inc. The City consented to the requests, subject to both parties identifying under which appeals they intend to shelter. Given the obvious interest of both landowners in the secondary plan, the Tribunal grants their respective requests for party status and directs each party to identify the appeals under which they will shelter in accordance with Tribunal Rule 8.3.
NEXT STEPS AND SECOND CMC
14There are several site-specific development applications within the King-Parliament secondary plan area that involve Appellants in this proceeding. Based on the list the City provided prior to this CMC, and updates from counsel during the CMC, it appears that there are 20 Appellants who have site-specific development applications at various stages of review and approval. Ms. Bisset emphasized the City’s interest in avoiding duplication in this proceeding and advised the Tribunal that the City and the Appellants are in ongoing, without prejudice discussions regarding how to move forward to an efficient proceeding.
15The Tribunal also understands that while the City and many Appellants are open to mediation, the City would benefit from several of the Appellants identifying, at a high level, the issues raised by their respective appeals. The City proposed that certain Appellants could provide this list of issues to the City by the end of December, in order to be ready for a second CMC after April 7, 2022 (to align with the City’s Council schedule).
16Ms. Costello and several counsel for various appellants expressed concern with the City’s timeline. In order to produce thoughtful issues for the purpose of mediation, they agreed that the end of January would be a more appropriate deadline, with a second CMC in May or June of 2022.
17Given the large number of Appellants and the two added parties to this proceeding, a second CMC is necessary to establish a Procedural Order, including an issues list. In order to allow the parties time to engage in meaningful discussion around the issues, mediation, and settlement, the Tribunal has scheduled the CMC for May 19, 2022 at 10 a.m. by video hearing:
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/765631861
Audio-only telephone line: Toll-Free 1-888-455-1389 or +1 (647) 497-9391
Access Code: 765-631-861
18Parties and Participants are asked to log into the CMC hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections.
19Parties and Participants are asked to set up the video hearing application well in advance of the events to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html.
20Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line. The Access Code is as indicated above.
21Individuals 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 CMC hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
22No further notice of the CMC is required.
23The Tribunal provided the following directions to the parties as items to be completed prior to the second CMC:
Appellants 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 17-24, 29-33, 35-38 are to provide the City with high level issues on or before January 28, 2022, based on concerns raised in their respective appeals to assist with mediation, which may be provided on a without prejudice and confidential basis;
Appellants 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 17-24, 29-33, 35-38 are to provide the City with draft issues lists on or before April 4, 2022, to be incorporated into the draft Procedural Order;
The parties shall file any settlement materials, including land use planning Affidavits and draft Orders, on or before May 5, 2022; and
The parties shall provide to the Tribunal a draft Procedural Order, including issues list, on or before May 9, 2022.
24In addition to establishing the Procedural Order and presenting any settlements during the next CMC, the Tribunal expects that the parties will be prepared to discuss scheduling of the hearing, including appropriate phasing, and confirming both the un-appealed portions of OPA 525 and the scope of its appealed portions. The City anticipates that any motions it may bring during the CMC will be on consent and confirmed that such motions will adhere to the requirements of Tribunal Rule 10.
ORDER
25The directions in this Decision are so ordered.
26This Member is not seized.
“S. Jacobs”
s. jacobs
VICE-CHAIR
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.
OLT-21-001024 – Attachment 1
List of Appellants – OPA 525 and Zoning By-laws
| Appellant | Counsel / Representative* |
|---|---|
| 1. 1734140 Ontario Limited | M. Domovich* |
| 2. Anishnawbe Health Toronto, 2290557 Ontario Limited, Yaorland Developments Ltd. and Bloorston Farms Ltd. | S. Leisk J. Evola |
| 3. OTP Management Ltd., Ribbon East Corp., and Ribbon West Corp. | J. Hoffman |
| 4. Devjo Holdings Limited | T. Piurko |
| 5. 1175484 Ontario Inc., 1606077 Ontario Inc., James Gault Holdings Inc. | A. Heisey |
| 6. 1266845 Ontario Limited | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 7. Li Limited Group of Companies | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 8. 1 Sumach Street Inc. | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 9. Trolleybus Urban Development | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 10. Dream Impact Master LP | J. Hoffman |
| 11. 126 PS Holdings Inc. and 128 PS Holdings Inc. | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 12. Queen Ontario GP Inc. | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 13. King Street I GP Inc. | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 14. 2575867 Ontario Inc. | M. Flowers |
| 15. Lanterra Parliament Developments | M. Flowers |
| 16. BJL Properties Inc. and Lamb Development Corp. | M. Flowers |
| 17. Canary Block 13 Developments LP | J. Hoffman |
| 18. 2569144 Ontario Inc. | D. Tang |
| 19. ME to WE Asset Holdings Inc. | D. Tang |
| 20. WE Charity | D. Tang |
| 21. ME to WE Foundation of Canada | D. Tang |
| 22. Parl Estates Limited | D. Tang C. Weekes |
| 23. ME to WE Foundation | D. Tang |
| 24. Wellbeing Foundation | D. Tang |
| 25. Alterra Finer-Corktown Ltd. | C. Lantz J. Cheng |
| 26. Richmond Residential Limited Partnership QP Residential GP Inc. | T. Halinski L. Dean |
| 27. Richmond-George Limited | C. MacDougall D. Angelucci |
| 28. 33 Parliament GP and Grawywood 33 Limited Partnership | C. MacDougall D. Angelucci |
| 29. CentreCourt Properties | D. Bronskill J. Hoffman |
| 30. 25555572 Ontario Limited | A. Heisey |
| 31. 18888818 Ontario Limited | A. Heisey |
| 32. 1654199 Ontario Limited | A. Heisey |
| 33. Transworld Fine Cars | A. Heisey |
| 35. KingSett Capital Inc. | E. Costello S. Tomasella J. Pappas |
| 36. Allied Properties REIT | E. Costello S. Tomasella J. Pappas |
| 37. Lamb Development Corp. | E. Costello S. Tomasella J. Pappas |
| 38. 1577377 Ontario Limited | M. Flynn-Guglietti |
| 39. First Gulf King Street Inc. | R. Houser J. Hoffman |