CORRECTION NOTICE

OLT CASE NO.:

OLT-22-001939

DECISION ISSUE DATE:

November 17, 2022

CORRECTION NOTICE ISSUE DATE:

December 15, 2022

RE: Lee v. Toronto (City)

Correction to: the Appearances List Section, on page 2 of the Decision

Originally:

Corrected to:

APPEARANCES:

Parties Representative

The Governing Signe Leisk (in Council of the absentia) University of Toronto

APPEARANCES:

Parties Counsel

The Governing Christie Gibson Council of the Signe Leisk (in University of absentia) Toronto

“Euken Lui”

EUKEN LUI 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.

ISSUE DATE:

November 17, 2022

CASE NO(S).:

OLT-22-001939

(Formerly PL131355)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Appellant:

1734234 Ontario Ltd.

Appellant:

Aragon (Wellesley) Developments (Ontario) Corp.

Appellant:

Building Industry and land Development Association

Appellant:

Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto; and others

Subject:

Proposed Official Plan Amendment

Description:

Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. OPA 183

Reference Number:

OPA 183

Property Address/Description:

All properties located in North Downtown Yonge Site Area Specific Policy Area – OPA No. 183

Municipality/UT:

Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.:

OLT-22-001939

Legacy Case No.:

PL131355

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-22-001939

Legacy Lead Case No.:

PL131355

OLT Case Name:

Lee v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(4) of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O. 21.

Subject:

Heritage Conservation District

Description:

To designate Historic Yonge Street Heritage Conservation District and Historic Yonge Street Heritage Conservation District Plan

Reference Number:

By-law No. 235-2016

Property Address:

All lands located in By-law No. 235-2016

Municipality/UT:

Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.:

OLT-22-001941

Legacy Case No.:

MM160035

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-22-001939

Legacy Lead Case No.:

PL131355

Heard:

October 5, 2022 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel/Representative*

City of Toronto

Chris Barnett Laura Bisset

Cresford (Rosedale) Developments Inc. Lanterra 501 Yonge Developments Ltd. Lanterra Developments (Bay Wellesley) Ltd.

Eileen Costello Meaghan Barrett Jane Pepino (in absentia)

KingSett Capital Inc. Building Industry and Land Development Association

Eileen Costello Meaghan Barrett

2019284 Ontario Inc.

Eileen Costello Meaghan Barrett

6 Wellesley Street West

Jing Mei Lui* (not represented)

516 Yonge Street

David Feinman* (not represented)

The Governing Council of the University of Toronto

Signe Leisk (in absentia)

Weiner Associates

Adrian Frank Patrick Devine (in absentia)

RML 9 Isabella Street Limited

Adrian Frank

RML 625 Yonge Street

Patrick Devine (in absentia)

RML 619 Yonge Street Limited

Mayling Holdings Inc.

Adam Brown (in absentia)

Lifetime St. Mary Street Inc. (assumed by JV Heritage Ltd.)

Mary Flynn-Guglietti Kailey Sutton

Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc.

K. Sliwa (in absentia) K. Vergis-Mayo

675 Yonge Street

David Bronskill (in absentia)

Oberon Development Corporation

Kyle Gossen Susan Rosenthal (in absentia) Samantha Lampert (in absentia)

Prattas, G.H.A.K.S. & A.

Loukritia Balkos*

Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association Bay Cloverhill Community Association

Ian Flett

1209623 Ontario Limited The Brass Rail Tavern (Toronto) Limited

Andrew Porter

Graywood CM GP Inc.

Joe Hoffman (present by agent)

The Estate of Robert Meixner

Nicole Meixner* Andre Meixner* (in absentia)

1734141 Ontario Limited

Michael Domovich*

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BRYAN W. TUCKEY ON OCTOBER 5, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1This Case Management Conference (“CMC”) is convened to establish a go forward strategy for the further adjudication of two outstanding and related Tribunal matters in the City of Toronto (“City”) being:

a. OLT-22-001939 (Formerly Case No. PL131355) the remaining appeals under the Planning Act related to the Phase 2 hearing of Official Plan Amendment No. 183 (“OPA 183”) approved by the City in 2013, being a Site and Area Specific Policy for the area commonly known as North Downtown Yonge; and,

b. OLT-22-001941 (Formerly Case No. MM160035) being appeals under the Ontario Heritage Act to the City’s designation in 2016 of the above-noted area as a Heritage Conservation District and the adoption of a Plan

(“together, the “HCD”).

BACKGROUND

2This matter has a long and rather complex history. The Tribunal took considerable time to ensure all Parties are properly recorded (as found in the appearances above) and aligned to the correct matter (or both matters) before the Tribunal. Laura Bisset is responsible for the preparation of the Procedural Order (“PO”). She with the assistance of the Case Coordinator will finalize the listing and attempt to ensure all contact information is correct to assist the Tribunal in future proceedings.

The listing will be in a form that will eventually become an attachment to the PO.

3The Tribunal identified his previous involvement with the Building Industry and Land Development Association (“BILD”), which remains as an appellant with respect to OPA 183 and the HCD. All Parties were in agreement that there is no conflict in this regard with respect to this proceeding.

4Chris Barnett, Counsel for the City, provided background information with respect to the two matters for the benefit of the Tribunal, Parties and all present. The majority of OPA 183 has been approved previously by the then Ontario Municipal Board. The City is seeking to bring the remaining outstanding policies of OPA 183 into force.

5There has been development within the area of OPA 183 since its construct in 2013, which has resulted in potential changes to the areas heritage fabric. Therefore, the City has reviewed and have made changes to the HCD plan to be more responsive to existing conditions. Also, there have been other HCD plans approved in the City, and they have been reviewed to ensure consistent policy and best practices found in these approved plans that have been incorporated into the North Downtown Yonge HCD. Parties that have outstanding appeals with respect to the HCD have submitted, without prejudice, Issues Lists to the City intended to form the basis of further discussions with the Parties and Appellants.

6The City plans to reach out to Parties and Appellants in December 2022, to determine areas of potential refinement or agreement with the revised HCD plan as there is confidence that there is opportunity for the Issues List to be further scoped with the potential resolution of some of the underlying issues. After these discussions, a HCD plan that the City staff is comfortable with will then be submitted to City Council when Council meeting dates have been established in early 2023 and a public plan will be provided to all Parties.

7The Tribunal notes that it was directed in the decision issued on July 8, 2021, that OPA 183 - Phase 2 and the HCD appeals are to be heard together.

SCHEDULING REQUESTS

8Mr. Barnett advised the Tribunal that in consideration of current workloads and scheduling of City Council meetings, a final revised HCD plan is expected to be tabled with Council in late April or early May. At that time, on the record, Issues Lists will be provided by all Parties within six weeks of the Council’s consideration. With this in mind, Mr. Barnett requested that the Tribunal schedule a:

a. further CMC in July/August 2023. This will give the City and all Parties the time required to continue discussions to scope issues and find settlement if possible. A final draft PO to guide a merits hearing will be submitted to the Tribunal for its review and approval; and,

b. a six- to eight- week merits hearing in April/May 2024.

9All Parties consented to the scheduling of a further CMC in the time frame requested by the City and submitted that the strategy proposed by the City is appropriate. The Tribunal agrees.

10There is no consent amongst the Parties with respect to the scheduling of a merits hearing in April/May 2024. Reasons include: it is premature to determine the length of a merits hearing at this time, issues may be scoped, and settlements found that would significantly reduce the necessary hearing time; and it is not appropriate to hold up to eight weeks in all Party’s counsel’s, potential witnesses, and the Tribunal’s calendar prior to knowing the extent of the issues and having a PO approved that will guide the adjudication of OPA 183 and the HCD plan matters. The Tribunal agrees.

11Many of the Parties expressed their frustration with respect to the time it has taken to finalize matters. They are asking the City to expedite the review of the HCD, accelerate discussions with Parties, review policies against recent changes to Provincial legislation and finalization of resulting updated Plans and finalize an Issues List suitable to all. The Tribunal noted that the shorter the hearing required, the earlier it may be scheduled, thereby allowing the policies of OPA 183 and the HCD plan to come into force as soon as practical.

12The Parties are made aware of the availability of Tribunal-led mediation. Parties are of the opinion it is too early in the process but understand they may request this mediation at their convenience.

REQUEST TO MAINTAIN APPELLANT STATUS

13Ms. Flynn-Guglietti requested that her client be allowed to maintain the Appellant status with respect to the original appeal against OPA 183 – Phase 2 by Lifetime Developments Ltd. (“Lifetime”) located at 10 Mary Street. The property has changed hands a number of times during the course of Tribunal proceedings. While subsequent property owners were of the opinion that Appellant status remained, Lifetime had advised the Tribunal that it was in a position to withdraw its appeal.

14A brief chronology of property ownership is as follows:

a. Lifetime originally filed an appeal against OPA 183.

b. RFT Holdings Corp. (“RFT”) purchased the property. Counsel for RFT filed a transition letter with the then Ontario Municipal Board, were not notified of Lifetime’s appeal withdrawal, assumed that Appellant rights against OPA 183 were maintained and attended previous Tribunal CMC’s.

c. JV Heritage Ltd. (“JV”) purchased the property from RFT. When counsel for JV advised Parties, that they were maintaining the original appeal rights of Lifetime, they were then advised by the City that the appeal had been withdrawn and therefore, the appeal could not be assumed.

15Ms. Flynn-Guglietti advised the Tribunal that to the best of her knowledge the previous owner was not alerted by either the City or the Tribunal of Lifetime’s withdrawal and continued to participate in hearing events as if it continued to be a full party. JV has also continued to attend hearing events. She noted that there has not been a formal Issues List prepared, nor a PO issued, and JV has a very narrow interest in the OPA 183 appeal that it believed it was assuming. Therefore, the assumption by JV of Lifetimes original appeal would not create any delay in the hearing process, nor would unduly lengthen the hearing.

16Ms. Flynn-Guglietti stated that she used a ‘Party Status Request Form' to make this request because that is the only Tribunal form that is available to make her clients wishes known. The ‘Party Status Request Form’ was submitted to the Tribunal on September 29, 2022. Ms. Flynn-Guglietti clarified verbally that JV’s request is to assume the original Lifetime appeal status against OPA 183.

17Ms. Bisset, in her submission, maintained that JV’s request may only be considered under Rule 8.3 of the Ontario Land Tribunal – Rules of Practice and Procedures (‘Rules”) as Non-Appellant Party and they must shelter under an issue raised by an Appellant Party. She submitted that the City must be able to rely on withdrawals and the only way to reactivate an appeal is through a Motion under Rule 10 of the Rules.

18The only other Party that expressed interest in JV’s assumption of Appellant status was Ian Flett, on behalf of the Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association and the Bay Cloverhill Community Association.

TRIBUNAL DISPOSITION

19The Tribunal is prepared to schedule a full day CMC commencing on Monday, July 24, 2023 at 10 a.m. At this CMC, the Tribunal will expect to have a draft PO, for its review and consideration, a scoped Issues List, an indication of any of the appeals that may be settled, consideration of Tribunal-led mediation and a required hearing length so the time needed to facilitate the scheduling of a merits hearing may be known.

20The Tribunal finds it is premature to schedule a merits hearing at this CMC. All Parties are encouraged to scope and reduce issues and find settlement where appropriate.

21The Tribunal is prepared to schedule a full day Motion Hearing commencing on

Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10 a.m.

22With respect to Ms. Flynn-Guglietti’s request to maintain Appellant status for JV, the Tribunal does not have sufficient information nor has the City had an appropriate time to review material and prepare a submission. Therefore, it is appropriate to initiate a written motion in keeping with Rule 10 of the Rules in order to make a determination on whether JV may maintain the appeal rights of Lifetime. With respect to this motion, the moving Party is JV, and the responding Parties are the City and the Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association and the Bay Cloverhill Community Association, if required.

23Subsequent to the completion of this CMC, the City and JV by email jointly requested that the Motion be cancelled and the date for that Motion be removed from the Tribunal’s calendar. The City and JV had “an opportunity to discuss and are thereby making a joint request to the Tribunal to vacate the motion date, without prejudice to the positions the City and JV may take on the merits of the motion…In the event that a Tribunal determination on JV’s status is required in the future, the Parties will be prepared to argue a motion at the next scheduled CMC in July 2023, or on another date to be requested”.

24The Tribunal will remove the December 12, 2022 Motion date from its calendar. In the event the Parties determine it is necessary to again bring a Motion before the Tribunal it should not be returnable at the next scheduled CMC in July 2023 without the prior approval and direction of the Tribunal as a special date may be required. It may be more appropriate to have the issue determined before the next CMC, so the issue of the status of JV Heritage Limited has been pre-determined.

25Ms. Bisset will manage the preparation of the PO, determine with the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator the contact information of all Parties, and prepare a comprehensive listing of the Parties (and Participants if any) in keeping with the form of an attachment to the PO. This listing will define appeal status of each Party with respect to OPA 183 or HCD matters (or both). This listing will be circulated to the Tribunal and all Parties (and Participants if any). Prior to the issuance of this Memorandum of Oral Decision in this matter, the Tribunal received from Ms. Bisset a complete and up to date list in keeping with its request.

26The Tribunal encourages the City to expedite the review of the HCD, accelerate discussions with Parties, review policies against recent changes to Provincial legislation and resulting updated Plans and finalize an Issues List suitable to all as quickly as possible. The City may canvas the Tribunal at any time to assist in advancing either of the remaining matters under adjudication to assist those property owners that have been waiting many years for these planning instruments to be approved.

CMC TECHNICAL DETAILS.

27A full-day CMC will convene on Monday, July 24, 2023, by video hearing at 10 a.m.

28Parties are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/709-076-365 Access code: 709-076-365

29Parties and Participants 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 GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

30Persons 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: (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373 . The access code is 709-076-365.

31Individuals 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 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.

ORDER

32Accordingly, the Tribunal Orders:

a. THAT a one-day Case Management Conference is to convene on Monday, July 24, 2023.

b. The Member may be spoken to with respect to the implementation of this Order.

c. No further notice will be given.

33The Member is not seized.

34It is so Ordered.

“Bryan W. Tuckey”

BRYAN W. TUCKEY

MEMBER

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.