Augend Investment Ltd. v. Toronto (City), 2024 CanLII 126826

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: December 23, 2024

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004346

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

Appellant: 1018429 Ontario Inc.

Appellant: 480 Steeles West Limited et al

Appellant: 6200 Yonge GP Inc.

Appellant: Augend Investment Ltd. and others

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment

Description: To guide future growth along the Yonge Street corridor in the area bounded by Steeles Avenue, Willowdale Avenue, Cummer and Drewry Avenues, and Lariviere Road

Reference Number: OPA 615

Property Address: Area bounded by Steeles Avenue, Willowdale Avenue, Cummer and Drewry Avenues, and Lariviere Road

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No: OLT-22-004346

OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004346

OLT Case Name: Augend Investment Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 9(1) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021, S.O. 2021, c. 4, Sched. 6

Request by: Morguard Investments Limited and Revenue Properties Company Ltd

Request for: Motion for Directions

Heard: October 23, 2024 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel/Representative
City of Toronto	R. Kallio, J. Braun
CAPREIT Apartments Inc.	C. Hunt, D. Bronskill (in absentia)
480 Steeles Avenue West Limited, 228 Steeles West Limited, 1163919 Ontario Limited, 188836 Ontario Limited & 1211612 Ontario Limited)	A. Heisey
Ghods Builders Inc. (5959 Yonge Street Limited)	I. Kagan
Yonge Steeles Landowners Group Inc.	I. Kagan
Connaught Yonge Square Limited & Enderby Developments Limited (Leonard Binder)	J. Park
6200 Yonge GP Inc.	J. Park
Delmar Development Corp. (18 – 28 Athabaska Avenue)	J. Park
Delmar Development Corp. (19 Abitibi Avenue)	J. Park
2078004 Ontario Inc. and 24590304 Ontario Ltd. (6125 Yonge Street/10 Centre Street)	J. Park
6150 Yonge GP, Yongwood Ltd.	J. Cole, C.Hu (Student at Law)
Revenue Properties Company Ltd. And Morguard Investments Limited	J. Shapiro
City of Vaughan	C. Dougherty
Toronto Catholic District School Board	J. Lesage

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY G.A. CROSER ON OCTOBER 23, 2024 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1The City of Toronto (“City”) initiated a study that resulted in the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (“Secondary Plan”) for the area surrounding Steeles Avenue to the north, Willowdale Avenue to the east, Cummer and Drewey Avenues to the south, and Lariviere Road to the West. In July 2022, the City adopted Official Plan Amendment 615 (“OPA 615”) which included the Secondary Plan.

2OPA 615 was subsequently appealed by 18 Parties with six more added by the Tribunal at Case Management Conferences (“CMC”). The Parties agreed on a protocol early in the Appeal process, allowing site-specific appeals to ‘hive off’ and move forward with their appeal separately from the group of appeals.

3On the eve of the hearing on the merits of this matter, an agreement was reached with some of the Parties. The Tribunal was then asked to consider and accept the proposed settlement; the remaining Parties will move forward with their own site-specific appeals.

EXHIBITS

4The following were marked as Exhibits:

• Ex. 1A City of Toronto Joint Document Book, Vol.1
• Ex. 1B City of Toronto Joint Document Book, Vol. 2
• Ex. 1C City of Toronto Joint Document Book, Vol. 3
• Ex. 2 City of Toronto Witness Statements
• Ex.3 ‘Hived Off’ Appeals List
• Ex.4 Summary of Appellant: Revenue Properties Company Ltd. And Morguard Investments Limited SASP Appeal
• Ex.5 Official Plan Amendment 615, October 23, 2024 Red Line Version
• Ex.6 Signed and executed Agreement between Revenue Properties Company Ltd. and Morguard Investments Limited, Capreit Apartments Inc., and the city of Toronto
• Ex.7 City of Toronto Visual Document Book

OVERVIEW

5OPA 615 is intended to guide future development in an area where future growth is anticipated. It involves varying levels of intensification along the main corridors and areas impacted by the extension of Line 1 of the subway and the new subway station at Yonge and Steeles Avenue. The Secondary Plan describes the Line 1 extension and associated bus infrastructure as the catalyst for growth and redevelopment of the Yonge North Area.

6The Secondary Plan includes low-rise auto-centric and commercial development along the Yonge corridor with low-rise residential to the east and west. The area includes the CentrePoint Mall, as well as mixed-use areas to the south and north. The Secondary Plan establishes five character areas (collectively the “Character Areas”) to guide growth in relation to proximity from higher transit infrastructure within the plan area. Each Character Area has a unique set of policies to guide growth, while collectively, the policies contribute to a complete community.

7The Tribunal was informed that the OPA 615 that was before the Tribunal differs from the version originally adopted by the City in July 2022. There were extensive discussions between the Parties including facilitator-led mediation, and in July 2024, the City endorsed modifications to OPA 615, which include the following:

• Prioritize the creation of an integrated, enhanced, expanded, vibrant, and attractive public realm, focused on the Yonge Street Promenade;
• Encourage a diverse mix of land uses;
• Support higher order transit and active transportation, the provision of community service facilities, and an improved overall quality of life;
• Provide a diverse range and mix of housing options; and
• Promote a high quality and compact built form.

8Ray Kaillo, Counsel for the City, explained to the Tribunal that Exhibit 5, the version of the OPA 615 before the Tribunal at the Settlement, is the City council-endorsed version approved on July 24, 2024 with tracked redline “small changes and road network changes”. It was noted that the maps that will be attached to OPA 615 were not included with Exhibit 5, as the final version of the maps were yet to be completed by the City’s graphics department. These have now been received by the Tribunal and this version of OPA 615 and maps is attached to this Decision as Attachment “1”.

9Kaillo requested that the Tribunal issue an Interim Order approving OPA 615, as amended, in principle, excluding the ‘Hived Off’ Appellants listed in Exhibit 3, and excluding the road network at the westerly edge of the Centrepoint Mall.

PLANNING EVIDENCE

10Diana DiGirolamo, a Senior Planner with the City of Toronto who was responsible for the project management of OPA 615, was duly qualified by the Tribunal to provide expert opinion evidence in the area of land use planning in support of the proposed settlement.

11DiGirolamo commented on several provision of s. 2 of the Planning Act which, in their view, was appropriate to the OPA. These include the orderly development of safe and healthy communities, provision of housing, provision of employment opportunities, and was an appropriate location for growth and development. In DiGirolamo’s opinion, OPA 615 had appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest, the OPA provided a framework which would increase permitted uses and scale of development which would be balanced with higher transit improvements scheduled for the area, the provision, and distribution of “soft” infrastructure as well as safe, accessible public spaces.

12With respect to the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS”), it was the Planner’s evidence that OPA 615 provided new permissions for residential development, height, density and built forms. DiGirolamo submitted that the policy framework would maintain existing non-residential uses while bringing in new retail and commercial uses for the area. The Planner testified that the water, sewer, and infrastructure to accommodate current and future needs would be met by balancing residential future requirements.

13The Planner detailed how the OPA 615 conformed with the City of Toronto Official Plan, noting that s.5.2.1 of the OP establishes that the purpose of a secondary plan is to permit local development policies within a defined area. DiGirolamo explained that the Secondary Plan created appropriate, localized policies for growth and development in the five Character Areas. The Planner explained that the extension of TTC Line 1 and expanding transit services were the catalysts for growth, and that the policies provided clarity with respect to the elements that create complete communities. DiGirolamo’s opinion was that the Secondary Plan supports higher transit and delivers complete communities with appropriate transitions to surrounding existing neighbourhoods.

14In summary, DiGirolamo’s view was that OPA 615 resulted in a framework for development that allowed varying levels of intensification; that the plan identified elements and characteristics of a complete community. It was noted that the greatest heights and intensifications were appropriately located along Yonge Street and in the Yonge/Steeles transit station area. This was balanced by the pedestrian-oriented scale of Yonge Street and that the height, scale, and form of transition to existing adjacent neighbourhoods was suitable and appropriate. In the Planner’s opinion, the Secondary Plan optimized land use potential by permitting a variety of uses in a compact form that was supportive of transit and represented good land use planning that was in the public interest.

PARTICIPANT STATEMENT

15The Tribunal asked DiGirolamo for their comments on the Participant Statement filed by A. Brookes. After the Tribunal stood down to allow DiGirolamo to thoroughly review the Statement, the Planner then provided their evidence. The Planner commented that a “few key themes emerged” from the Statement; the first being the delivery of transit infrastructure. The Planner explained that the expansion of TTC Line 1 was the catalyst for the Secondary Plan, but that the plan had a long-term horizon over a twenty-five-year period. DiGirolamo explained that change will be incremental, and that road capacity and servicing would be reviewed with each development proposal in the area. The Planner commented that if a development could not be accommodated based on current infrastructure capacity, City staff would recommend holding provisions.

16DiGirolamo also addressed the public realm, and that the Secondary Plan took a “complete streets approach” that enhanced the pedestrian realm and prioritized pedestrian movement. With respect to the adequacy of community services, DiGirolamo stated that the Secondary Plan sought to achieve an appropriate balance between residents and facilities, and again stressed the incremental nature of change overtime.

17The Planner emphasized that protecting the existing surrounding neighbourhoods was a critical component of the Secondary Plan. That development would be focused primarily on the Yonge/Steeles corridor, and that the plan included policies to achieve transitions in intensities and scale within the planned areas to the surrounding neighbourhoods.

TRIBUNAL FINDINGS

18The Tribunal finds that OPA 615 provides an appropriate framework for the future development of the Yonge North Area. It will enable varying levels of intensification and optimize land uses surrounding planned higher order transit. The Tribunal notes that OPA 615 identifies elements and characteristics of a complete community and enables the delivery of these elements through permissions within the various Character Areas of the plan. It provides an appropriate level of intensification with consideration to matters including the height, scale, form, and transition to the adjacent low-rise neighbourhoods, while permitting variability in built form and use.

19The Tribunal is satisfied that OPA 615 has regard for matters of provincial interest, is consistent with the PPS, and confirms with the OP. It provides a framework for future development that promotes appropriate levels of intensification and a complete community around a future subway station. The Tribunal finds that OPA 615 is in the public interest and represents good land use planning.

Appeal of Revenue Properties Company Ltd. And Morguard Investments Limited

20Revenue Properties Company Ltd. And Morguard Investments Limited (“Morguard”) are the owners of the lands known municipally as 6122-6600 Yonge Street on which the CentrePoint Mall currently operates. Morguard appealed OPA 615 in its entirety.

21Morguard had made an application to amend the OP prior to the adoption of OPA 615 for a Site and Area Specific Policy (“SASP”) that applied to the CentrePoint Mall lands. This application was later appealed by the Appellant to the Tribunal (“SASP Appeal”). The Tribunal had previously ordered that the SASP Appeal be heard together with the Morguard OPA 615 Appeal. Morguard is not one of the ‘hived off’ Appeals listed at Exhibit 3 and was not opposed to the proposed Settlement. However, Counsel for Morguard explained that the Tribunal’s approval of the OPA 615 policies and maps is ‘without prejudice’ to its application to the CentrePoint Mall site, which will be addressed at the SASP hearing.

22CAPREIT Apartments Inc. (“CAPREIT”), another Appellant in this Appeal, owns the lands known municipally as 5 and 15 Tangreen Court (“Capreit Lands”), which are located adjacent to the CentrePoint Mall. CAPREIT is one of the ‘Hived off’ appeals.

23The issue to be determined at the SASP hearing is whether OPA 615 shall include a policy that requires that the width of the new westerly north-south road be shared between the Centerpoint Mall lands and Capreit Lands, and if so, to what extent. Counsel for Morguard requested dates from the Tribunal for the hearing of the SASP Appeal and confirmed that this will be incorporated into the procedural order (“PO”) for the SASP Appeal hearing.

24Counsel for the City and CAPREIT confirmed their support of this approach. Attached as Exhibit 6 to this Settlement, is the signed and executed Agreement between Morguard, the City, and CAPREIT with respect to the road sharing issue to be determined at the SASP Hearing. The Member shall remain seized of this matter to provide continuity with respect to the SASP Hearing.

SASP HEARING

25The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video on Monday, February 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. by video hearing.

26Parties and/or Participants and/or Observers are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/687587165

Access code: 687-587-165

27Parties and/or 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 GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

28Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 687-587-165.

29Individuals 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 event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.

INTERIM ORDER

30THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed save and except the appeals of the following Appellants in this matter:

• CAPREIT Apartments Inc.
• Sky Property Group Inc.
• Ghods Builders Inc. (5959 Yonge Street Limited)
• W Mandel Developments Limited and Mandross Holdings Inc.
• 6200 Yonge GP Inc.

31THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT Amendment No. 615 to the Official Plan of the City of Toronto as amended and attached to this Decision as ‘Attachment ‘1’ is approved in principle save and except for the Appeals of the Appellants listed in paragraph 29 and save and except for the road network at the westerly edge of the Centrepoint Mall Lands.

32The Final Order will be withheld until the SASP Hearing to be held beginning on February 3, 2025 is resolved.

33The Member shall remain seized for the issuance of the Final Order.

“G.A. Croser”

G.A. CROSER

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.

ATTACHMENT 1

s