Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: April 04, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004682
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: DIG Developments Inc.
Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description: To permit the construction of a 53-unit, three-storey townhouse development
Reference Number: 11 120956 NNY 34 SB
Property Address: 78 Tisdale Avenue
Municipality: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004682
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004682
OLT Case Name: DIG Developments Inc. v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, S.O. 2006, c. 11, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: DIG Developments Inc.
Subject: Site Plan – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision
Description: To permit the construction of a 53-unit, three-storey townhouse development
Reference Number: 10 320052 NNY 34 SA
Property Address: 78 Tisdale Avenue
Municipality: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004683
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004682
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: DIG Developments Inc.
Subject: Minor Variance – Approval Authority Refusal of Application
Description: To permit the construction of a 53-unit, Three-storey townhouse development
Reference Number: A0205/22NY
Property Address: 78 Tisdale Avenue
Municipality: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004684
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004682
Heard: March 17, 2023 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| DIG Developments Inc. (“Applicant”) | Raj Kehar |
| City of Toronto (“City”) | Cameron McKeich |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY JEAN-PIERRE BLAIS AND T.F. NG ON MARCH 17, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Applicant wishes to develop a site at 78 Tisdale Avenue, in the City (“Subject Property”). A former owner of the Subject Property had applied for rezoning to construct a development of townhouses comprised of 35 three-storey units, in six blocks, on a new public street. This rezoning application was filed on December 24, 2010, and ultimately, received the approval of the City on January 31, 2017. The former owner had also made related Applications for Site Plan approval and Draft Plan of Subdivision approval. The proposed development pursuant to the new By-law No. 261-2017 was never constructed.
2Following the receivership of the former owner, the Applicant, now the beneficial owner of the Subject Property, proposes a development of 53 back-to-back townhouses, as well as to increase the height of the townhouses and to make other configuration changes. To this end, the Applicant applied for a series of Minor Variances with the City. On June 9, 2022, the City’s Committee of Adjustment denied the application.
3The Applicant has appealed the Minor Variances decision, as well as the purported non-decision with respect to the Site Plan application and the Draft Plan of Subdivision application. The appeals are brought pursuant to sections 45(12) and 51(34) of the Planning Act and section 114(5) of the City of Toronto Act.
4On March 17, 2023, the Tribunal held its first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) to organize the appeals, address status requests and establish next steps in this proceeding.
5There were no issues raised with service of Notice of the CMC and as such, no further notice is required. The Tribunal was in receipt of the Affidavit of Service of Notice of the CMC, which was marked as Exhibit 1 to this CMC.
STATUS REQUESTS
6The Tribunal received no request for Party Status.
7The Tribunal considered four requests for Participant status. Prior to the CMC, the Tribunal was in receipt of Participant requests from Ilir Kurizo and Grant Thornton Limited. The latter request, from the receivers in respect of the Subject Property, was received by the Tribunal well past the end of the business day on the eve of the CMC. Orally, Yasmin Shariff and Parviz Musa also sought Participant status at the CMC, but they had not provided the Tribunal with a Participant Request Form. Counsel for the Applicant had not had the opportunity to fully consider these requests, but he proposed that all four participants be given Participant status on a provisional basis. Counsel for the City did not object.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT
8Counsel for the Parties concur that there is the prospect for resolution of some or all the issues and indicated that they will be exploring potential Tribunal assisted mediation.
NEXT STEPS
9On the eve of the CMC, a draft Procedural Order and Issues Lists were provided to the Tribunal. The Tribunal notes that these required substantial refinement prior to being reviewed and approved by the Tribunal.
10Accordingly, and notwithstanding Counsel for the Applicant’s request to set hearing dates, the Tribunal finds that setting a second CMC reasonable in the circumstances and as such, directed that a second CMC be scheduled for Tuesday, June 6, 2023. The Tribunal directed the Parties to work cooperatively to refine the Issues Lists and directed them to provide the Tribunal with a draft Procedural Order and consolidated Issues List on or before Tuesday, May 23, 2023. At the second CMC, the Parties are expected to be prepared to: finalize the Procedural Order and all related matters thereto; update the Tribunal on the outcome of any settlement efforts; and update Tribunal on the status of the three appeals (in particular, the appeal with respect to the Draft Plan of Subdivision).
11The Tribunal notes that Counsel for the City took the position that the Draft Plan of Subdivision was approved on May 23, 2017, and that no appeal could be brought since, he argued, more than five years had lapsed since the approval. The Tribunal did not rule on this issue at this stage.
12The Tribunal will also re-visit the provisional Participant status at the second CMC.
ORDER
13The Tribunal orders that Ilir Kurizo, Grant Thornton Limited, Yasmin Shariff and Parviz Musa are granted provisional Participant status in this proceeding.
14The Tribunal orders that a second Case Management Conference in this matter will be held by video hearing on Tuesday, June 6, 2023, commencing at 10 a.m.
15Parties and Participants 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. The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/719383509
Access code: 719-383-509
16Parties 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
17Persons 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 as indicated above.
18Individuals 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.
19The Tribunal directs the Parties to submit a final draft Procedural Order with consolidated Issues List to the Tribunal on or before Tuesday, May 23, 2023.
20The Members of the Panel are not seized, however, will remain available for case management subject to the Tribunal’s calendar.
21No further notice will be given.
“Jean-Pierre Blais”
Jean-Pierre blais
MEMBER
“T.F. Ng”
T.F. NG
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.