Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
January 12, 2022
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-21-001193
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1997, c. P. 13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant:
Talus (Bathurst) Limited
Subject:
Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 1694-2019 and 101-2014 – Failure of the City of Toronto to make a decision
Existing Zoning:
Industrial Commercial – ‘IC D2’ – Northern Portion; Mixed Use Commercial Residential – ‘MCR’ – Southern Portion
Proposed Zoning:
Site specific – to be determined
Purpose:
To permit a 9-storey mid-rise building at a height of 32.3 m
Property Address/Description:
1109 Bathurst Street and 246-248 Albany Avenue
Municipality:
City of Toronto
Municipality File No.:
20 159922 STE 11 OZ
OLT Lead Case No.:
21-001193
OLT Case No.:
21-001193
OLT Case Name:
Talus (Bathurst) Limited v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1997, c. P. 13, as amended
Subject:
Site Plan
Referred by:
Talus (Bathurst) Limited
Property Address/Description:
1109 Bathurst Street and 246-248 Albany Avenue
Municipality:
City of Toronto
OLT Lead Case No.:
21-001193
OLT Case No.:
21-001194
Heard:
November 25, 2021 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel*/Representative
Talus (Bathurst) Limited
Jonathan Cheng*
City of Toronto
Gabe Szobel* and Cameron McKeich*
Annex Residents’ Corporation
Henry Wiercinski
Casa Loma Residents’ Association
Robert Levy
Inc.
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY HUGH S. WILKINS ON NOVEMBER 25, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This Decision arises from a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) regarding the appeal brought by Talus (Bathurst) Limited (“Appellant”) of the failure of the City of Toronto (“City”) to pass a zoning by-law amendment to facilitate a proposed development at 1109 Bathurst Street and 246-248 Albany Avenue.
2At the CMC, the Tribunal addressed requests for Party and Participant status, the identification of issues to be addressed at the hearing, the preparation of a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, the identification of opportunities for settlement discussions, and the scheduling of a further CMC.
Requests for Party Status
3The Annex Residents’ Corporation and the Casa Loma Residents’ Association Inc. each requested Party status. The Annex Residents’ Corporation stated that it is a local neighbourhood association whose members would be impacted by the proposed development. It raised concerns regarding the height, massing and other issues related to the proposed development. The City and the Appellant did not oppose the Corporation’s request for status. The Tribunal found that the Corporation has a genuine and direct interest in the proceeding, it will be impacted by the Tribunal’s decision, and it will assist the Tribunal in making its decision. The Tribunal found that there are reasonable grounds to add the Annex Residents’ Corporation as a Party and granted it Party status, as requested.
4The Casa Loma Residents’ Association Inc. stated that it is a local neighbourhood association for the area to the north of the subject property. It stated that its members would be impacted by the proposed development. It raised concerns regarding height and noise issues related to the proposed development and regarding its impacts on future residential development in the area. The City and the Appellant did not oppose the Association’s request for status. The Tribunal found that the Casa Loma Residents’ Association Inc. has a genuine and direct interest in the proceeding, it will be impacted by the Tribunal’s decision, and it will assist the Tribunal in making its decision. The Tribunal found that there are reasonable grounds to add the Casa Loma Residents’ Association Inc. as a Party and granted it Party status, as requested.
5Yadvinder Singh also expressed an interest in seeking status. He agreed to postpone his status request to a subsequent CMC to allow time for him to consult with counsel and identify issues. The Tribunal asked Mr. Singh to consult and provide details of his request for status to the Parties prior to the next CMC.
Requests for Participant Status
6Alex Taylor and Christina Markham, each of whom lives in the vicinity of the subject property, as well as the Tarragon Village Community Association, which is a local neighbourhood association, and Fink and Bornstein PC, which owns property near the subject property, each requested Participant status. They raised safety, traffic, access, noise, light, height, massing, and other issues. None of the Parties opposed these requests and the Tribunal granted them each Participant status, as requested.
Identification of Issues and the draft Procedural Order
7The City stated that its planning staff is reviewing the Appellant’s current proposed zoning by-law amendments and will report to City Council in March 2022 after which time the City will be in a position to properly identify issues. The Parties requested that a further CMC be scheduled for the Spring 2022 at which time a draft Procedural Order and Issues List will be finalized. The Tribunal scheduled a further CMC for April 2022. The Tribunal requests that the Parties file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List for the Tribunal’s review prior to the next CMC.
Identification of Opportunities for Settlement Discussions
8The Parties stated that they are interested in pursuing settlement discussions. They stated that they will have a better idea regarding the possibilities for mediation after the issues have been identified at the next CMC. The Tribunal encouraged the Parties to pursue settlement discussions and to request Tribunal-assisted mediation in due course, if needed.
ORDER
9The Tribunal orders that the Annex Residents’ Corporation and the Casa Loma Residents’ Association Inc. are Parties in this proceeding.
10The Tribunal orders that Alex Taylor, Christina Markham, the Tarragon Village Community Association, and Fink and Bornstein PC are Participants in this proceeding.
11The Tribunal orders that a further CMC in this matter will be held by video hearing on Friday, April 29, 2022 commencing at 10 a.m. The Tribunal requests that the Parties file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List for the Tribunal’s review prior to the next CMC.
12Parties are asked to log into the CMC at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/719383509 Access Code: 719-383-509
13Parties are asked to set up the video hearing 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.
14Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll Free) 1 888 299 1889. The Access Code is indicated as above.
15Individuals 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.
16There will be no further notice.
17This Member is not seized.
“Hugh S. Wilkins”
hugh s. wilkins
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.