Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 29, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004703
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Danforth Eusten Holdings Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit a 10-storey building consisting of rental and retail space
Property Address: 975 Danforth Avenue
Municipality: City of Toronto
Reference Number: 22 146296 STE 14 OZ
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004703
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004703
OLT Case Name: Danforth Eusten Holdings Inc. v. City of Toronto
Heard: March 8, 2023, via video conference
APPEARANCES:
Parties Danforth Euston Holdings Inc. (“Applicant/Appellant”) City of Toronto
Counsel/Representative Michael Foderick (in absentia) Daniel Angelucci Mark Crawford Adam Ward
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY N. EISAZADEH AND jATINDER bHULLAR ON March 8, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This is the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) respecting an appeal filed by Danforth Euston Holdings Inc. (“Applicant”) of the failure by the City of Toronto (“City”) to make a decision within the legislative time frame pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Planning Act (“Act”), on an application to amend the Zoning By-law (“ZBL”) pertaining to the property municipally known as 975 Danforth Ave., Toronto. The application seeks to permit a 10-storey mixed-use building with 57 new rental residential apartment units with step-backs starting above the fourth floor totalling 4,506.33 m2 in gross floor area.
2The Tribunal received an Affidavit of Service sworn by Robert Daniel Edward Jefferson and dated February 17, 2023, which was determined to have properly provided Notice of this CMC. The Affidavit of Service was marked as Exhibit 1.
3The Tribunal and statutory Parties received no requests for granting of Party or Participant status within 10 days of the CMC, as required by the Notice of CMC.
4The Tribunal, after the conclusion of the CMC, was informed that a request for Participant status has now been made by Mr. Milne. Mr. Milne advised that he was present during the CMC, however acknowledged the late submission of his request which he attributed to an onerous and confusing process and documentation.
5The Tribunal notes that it canvassed the question of Party and Participant status multiple times during the CMC, and expressly requested that observers speak up to advise whether they would be seeking status. The Tribunal was not so advised, despite Mr. Milne acknowledging that he was present during the proceeding.
6One of the purposes of the CMC is to specifically canvas the submissions of the relevant parties to a proceeding regarding granting additional party or participant status requests. The Tribunal may also seek out clarification in making its ultimate decision for status requests. To allow individuals to attend a CMC and wait until after its conclusion to submit a status request thwarts this purpose. A further CMC would be required to reopen the same issues, which unnecessarily puts strain on the resources of the statutory and other status parties, as well as the Tribunal, particularly when the individual seeking status was present at the first CMC.
7The Tribunal further notes that considering Mr. Milne’s status request at the commencement of the next scheduled hearing event in this matter, being a scheduled merit hearing governed by a Procedural Order (“PO”), is neither proper nor appropriate in the circumstances of this case. It is prejudicial to the creation of appropriate evidentiary documents as well as for the preparation of witnesses that is often undertaken typically weeks, if not months, in advance of the commencement of a hearing.
8While the Tribunal welcomes and values the participation of community members, in this instance it must deny the Participant status request of Mr. Milne. However, it does not prevent Mr. Milne from sharing his comments/concerns directly with the parties; including the City; for their consideration if they deem it appropriate and valuable.
9The Parties advised that they were receptive to Tribunal led mediation. They informed the Tribunal that they are party to Tribunal led mediation, which is scheduled on March 24, 2023, respecting appeals of a related Official Plan Amendment, in which both the Applicant and City are also Parties. The Parties indicated that the subject matter of the current appeal would also be addressed at that time. The Tribunal was advised that the Parties are open to seeking out further Tribunal-led mediation for reaching a settlement or work on reducing the number and scope of issues.
10It was estimated by the Parties that, collectively, there would be a total of up to four witnesses called at the Merit Hearing.
11Having reviewed the possible number of witnesses and the possible scope of issues described by the Parties, the Tribunal Ordered and set a five-day Hearing by video commencing on Monday, February 26, 2024, at 10 a.m.
12Parties and anyone seeking Party or Participant status 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/692665589
Access code: 692-665-589
13Parties 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
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 into an audio-only telephone line: (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1(647) 497-9373. The access code is 692-665-589.
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.
16Mr. Crawford advised that while the Parties were collaborating on a final draft PO and Issues List, that he required instructions from his client following its Council meeting which would take place between March 29-31, 2023. The parties agreed to provide the final draft of the PO on consent to the Tribunal by Friday, April 7, 2023. The Tribunal would issue the approved PO thereafter.
17There will be no further notice.
18This Panel is not seized but remains available through the Case Coordinator should the need arise.
“N. Eisazadeh”
N. Eisazadeh MEMBER
“Jatinder Bhullar”
JATINDER bhullar MEMBER
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.