Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 22, 2024

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002343 (Formerly PL140860)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: 10 QEW Inc. Appellant: 100 Metropolitan Portfolio Inc. Appellant: 1095909 Ontario Limited (Wynn Group of Companies) Appellant: 1107051 Ontario Ltd.; and others Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 231 Municipality: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002343 Legacy Case No.: PL140860 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002343 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL140860 OLT Case Name: A. Mantella & Sons Limited v. Toronto (City)

Heard: February 15, 2024 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
City of Toronto	C. Kapelos A. DeBacker R. A. Biggart (in absentia) C. McKeich (in absentia) L. Bisset (in absentia)
Multiple Appellants	Refer to Schedule 1

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HARDY AND S. BRAUN ON FEBRUARY 15, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This Decision relates to a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) held by the Tribunal to obtain status updates regarding appeals brought pursuant to s. 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”) relating to Official Plan Amendment 231 (“OPA 231”) which was adopted by the City of Toronto (“City”) in December 2013.

2Subsequent to the adoption of OPA 231 by the City in December 2013, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (“MMAH”) approved OPA 231 with limited exceptions. Thereafter, a total of 178 appeals were filed, including appeals of the whole of OPA 231 and other appeals on site-specific bases. The appeals have had a long history with a number of prior hearing events held by Tribunal panels differently constituted. The 178 appeals have been case managed and grouped in specific Phases.

3At the most recent CMC held on August 17, 2023, the Tribunal scheduled a further CMC for the purposes of receiving updates on, and continuing the process of organizing, the remaining appeals in Phase 6G.

4Prior to the commencement of this CMC, the City provided a suggested agenda as follows:

• Seek hearing dates for Appeal #26 re: 4646 Dufferin Street and discuss timeline for finalizing draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and Issues List (“IL”);
• Provide updates to the Tribunal regarding: a. Motion to dismiss for lack of response to the City’s “triage forms” b. OPA 231 matters consolidated with OPA 271 (“Dupont appeals”) c. Remaining site-specific appeals; and
• Request direction regarding the future case management of these appeals.

APPEAL #26 RE: 4646 DUFFERIN STREET

5The City and Appellant, 2129152 Ontario Inc., brought forward a request to schedule a hearing for Appeal #26, which relates to the property at 4646 Dufferin Street. To that end, the Tribunal was provided with a draft PO and IL. Two non-appellant parties to Appeal #26, Canadian Fuels Association (“CFA”) and Toronto Research Chemicals Inc. (“TRCI”) appeared at the CMC to speak to the scheduling of the hearing and the finalization of the draft PO and IL.

6Counsel for CFA did not oppose the scheduling of a hearing but requested an Order from the Tribunal for substitution of Party Status. She explained that CFA is a national association with member companies across Canada. Those member companies include Shell Canada Products (3978 Keele Street); Imperial Oil (1150 Finch Avenue West) and Suncor Energy Products Partnership (1138 Finch Avenue West), all of which operate large fuel terminals in the vicinity of 4646 Dufferin St. It was further explained that Canadian Fuels Association is an industry representative for these companies and the requested substitution would merely recognize the actual entities who have an interest in this specific appeal and who intend to present one case to ensure an efficient hearing.

7None of the other Parties to the appeal objected to the request to substitute these three entities for CFA, and the Tribunal, having been satisfied that their presence at the hearing is necessary for the effective adjudication of the matter, granted the request under Rule 8.2 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.

8Counsel for TRCI indicated that he required some time to speak with his client to receive specific instructions, but did not oppose the scheduling of a hearing. He also expressed the view that some of TRCI’s issues may overlap with those of the three entities substituted for CFA and, as such, there could be opportunities for those Parties to coordinate some aspects of the presentation of their cases.

9At the request of the Parties, the Tribunal scheduled a 14-day video hearing, which will commence on February 10, 2025, at 10 a.m. Parties should note that the Tribunal will not sit on February 17, 2025.

10The Parties agreed that, on or before March 15, 2024, the Parties will provide the Tribunal with either a revised draft PO and IL or a written update through the assigned case coordinator outlining an expected timeline for the Tribunal’s receipt of same. The Parties further agreed to refine the IL to include specific policies and sub-policies at issue, so as to efficiently guide meetings of the experts, the preparation of witness statements and other documents for the future hearing.

11Parties 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:

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/719383509

Access code: 719-383-509

12Parties 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

13Persons 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 719-383-509

14Individuals 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.

MOTION TO DISMISS (TRIAGE FORM UPDATE)

15Counsel for the City reminded the Tribunal and other Parties that, because these appeals have been ongoing for more than a decade, it was necessary to determine whether all remaining Appellants maintain an interest in the proceedings and, if so, to determine how and when to bring those matters forward for hearings or if settlement of those matters might be possible. To that end, a “triage form” had been sent to outstanding Appellants, requesting responses to certain questions.

16The City’s intention was to bring forward a motion to dismiss any appeals for which a completed triage form was not received, an approach which was endorsed by the Tribunal at previous CMCs in this proceeding.

17By way of an update, counsel for the City noted that the majority of remaining Appellants had responded to the triage form and, as a result, a number of without-prejudice discussions were underway between those Appellants and the City. The City expressed optimism for future settlement proposals to come forward as a result of some of those discussions and, should such discussions not be successful, requests could be made to schedule hearings for those matters.

18For the very few remaining Appellants that have not responded to the triage form, the City intends to bring a written motion to dismiss those appeals in March of 2024. In the interim, the City will continue attempts to communicate with those Parties in the hopes of receiving the information which they require to avoid a motion and to move those Appeals forward. Should a motion to dismiss be necessary, the City is directed to contact the assigned case coordinator to secure a date for same.

DUPONT APPEALS (PREVIOUSLY CONSOLIDATED WITH OPA 271)

19At the previous CMC, in the interest of maintaining an accurate record of outstanding matters, the City noted that a number of appeals (referred to as the “Dupont Appeals”) had previously been consolidated with the hearing of appeals of OPA 271 (PL141134) by an Order of the Ontario Municipal Board dated June 2, 2015. The City contacted those Appellants to request written confirmation of their understanding that their appeals would be dealt with as part of the OPA 271 appeals, so as to remove them from the list of appeals in the remaining phase of this proceeding.

20By way of an update in that regard, counsel for the City indicated that there were very few Dupont Appellants who had not responded to the above request. It was agreed that, if necessary, following an update from the City with respect to any remaining non-responsive Dupont Appellants, the Tribunal would, in a future disposition (whether coupled with the “triage form” motion to dismiss, or as part of a future CMC), confirm that any remaining Dupont Appeals have been consolidated with OPA 271 and can be removed from the list of outstanding appeals for OPA 231.

REMAINING SITE-SPECIFIC APPEALS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE HEARING EVENTS

21At the previous CMC, the remaining Appeals in Phase 6G were further separated into two groups:

1. those without outstanding conversion requests pursuant to the City’s Municipal Comprehensive Review (“MCR”) and who wished to bring forward their matters for hearing (“Go Now” Appeals); and
2. those with outstanding conversion requests pursuant to the MCR, which were deferred pending the outcome of the MCR (“Go Later” Appeals).

22Counsel for the City noted that a number of remaining site-specific Appellants in both categories (Go Now and Go Later) are engaged in ongoing, without-prejudice discussions with the City and expressed optimism that some of these discussions will result in settlement proposals coming forward for the future consideration of the Tribunal. To that end, it was agreed that, in general, any future settlement proposals could be heard in writing with the Parties requesting dates and directions for same through the case coordinator as and when necessary. In the event that a Party wishes to have a settlement proceed by way of video hearing, they may write to the case coordinator outlining their preference and reasons for same and the Tribunal will make a determination on the hearing format at that time.

23It was also agreed, for the sake of efficiency, that further CMCs would be scheduled by way of video hearing at the request of the Parties only as and when necessary – for example, in instances where the Parties require setting of hearing dates. Counsel for the City undertook to provide a written update on all outstanding site-specific appeals, including an updated status chart, every six months beginning on August 1, 2024.

24In the interests of progressing all remaining appeals in a timely fashion, any Party with an outstanding appeal who has not made a conversion request pursuant to the MCR and who has not already communicated with the City is directed by the Tribunal to do so as soon as possible and no later than July 2, 2024, in order to aid the City in providing a fulsome update by August 1, 2024.

25There will be no further notice and this Panel will remain seized of all future hearing events and the continued case management of these appeals.

Order

26The Tribunal so orders and provides the foregoing directives for the purposes of the case management of these appeals.

“C. Hardy”

C. HARDY MEMBER

“S. Braun”

S. BRAUN 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.

SCHEDULE 1

	Appellant	Counsel
1	PAG Realty 2. Inc. (Appeal No. 18) Weins Canada Inc. (Appeal No. 135) Toronto Research Chemicals Inc. (Appeal No. 26 – non-appellant party)	M. Flowers
2	Amexon Property Management Inc. (Appeal No. 56) 1109345 Ontario Ltd. (Appeal No. 5)	M. Flynn-Guglietti P. Pinho (in absentia) K. Sutton (in absentia)
3	100 Metropolitan Road (Appeal No. 2) Deltera Inc. (Appeal No. 113) Sobeys Capital Incorporated (Appeal No. 163) Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (Appeal No. 167)	A. Frank
4	The Governing Council for the Salvation Army in Canada (Appeal No. 154)	M. Reedijk J. Debono (in absentia)
5	Rareland Development Inc. (Appeal No. 159)	A. Lusty J. Alati (in absentia)
6	2224484 Ontario Inc. (Champagne Centre Ltd.) (Appeal No. 31)	J. Evola S. Leisk (in absentia)
7	Samuel Sarick Limited and Midland Corporate Centre Ltd. (Appeal No. 155)	K. Sliwa M. James
8	Revenue Properties Company Limited and Morguard Investments Limited (Appeal No. 146)	D. Wood appearing for J. Shapira (in absentia)
9	2129152 Ontario Inc. (Appeal No. 26)	D. Wood
10	Dream Asset Management Corporation (Appeal No. 79) Westin Prince Toronto (Appeal No. 178)	M. Lakatos-Hayward D. Bronskill (in absentia)
11	2634698 Ontario Inc. (East Urban Properties) (Appeal No. 36)	C. Jordan I. Andres (in absentia)
12	Loblaw Properties Limited (Appeal No. 119)	D. Neligan E. Costello (in absentia)
13	39 Wynford Inc. and Brookfield Real Property Solutions Inc. (Appeal No. 38)	A. Suriano
14	Redpath Sugar (Appeal No. 144)	J. Cheng C. Lantz (in absentia)
15	Pinnacle Lakeside Development Limited Partnership (Appeal No. 7)	A. Jeanrie
16	Shell Canada Products, Imperial Oil, Suncor Energy Products Partnership (formerly Canadian Fuels Association (Appeal No.26 – non-appellant party)	L. Dean
17	M & S Investments (Appeal No. 121)	P. Harrington