Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: April 12, 2024
CASE NO.: OLT-22-001974 (Formerly PL210154)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: 2004085 Ontario Inc. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of City of Toronto to adopt the requested amendment Existing Designation: Employment and Mixed Use Proposed Designated: Mixed Use with Site Specific Area Policy (SASP) Purpose: To permit a five-building mixed use community with parkland Property Address/Description: 1891 Eglinton Ave. E. Municipality: City of Toronto Approval Authority File No.: 20158264 ESC 20 OZ OLT Case No.: OLT-22-001974 Legacy Case No.: PL210254 OLT File No.: OLT-22-001974 LPAT Case Name: 2004085 Ontario Inc. v. Toronto (City.)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: 2004085 Ontario Inc. Subject: Application to amend former City of Scarborough Zoning By-law No. 24982 - Refusal or neglect of City of Toronto to make a decision Existing Zoning: Mixed Employment Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined) Purpose: To permit a five-building mixed use community with parkland Property Address/Description: 1891 Eglinton Ave. E. Municipality: City of Toronto Municipality File No.: 20 224755 ESC 20 OZ OLT Case No.: OLT-22-001974 OLT File No.: OLT-22-001986 Legacy File No.: PL210255
BEFORE:
A. MASON Wednesday, the 27th MEMBER day of March, 2024
WHEREAS THE TRIBUNAL has considered, in writing, a proposed settlement between 2004095 Ontario Inc., assumed by Mattamy (Eglinton) Limited (“Owner”), and the City of Toronto (“City”) concerning appeals filed under ss. 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act with respect to the lands known municipally as 1891 Eglinton Avenue East (“Subject Lands”). Materials filed for the consideration of the Tribunal includes the sworn affidavit of Kate Cooper, MCIP, RPP, dated March 22, 2024, setting out the planning merit of the proposed settlement and confirms for the Tribunal that the proposal, as revised, promotes the achievement of policy directives which support intensification and residential mixed-use built form, is within walking distance of major transit, provides for a future public park and public infrastructure on the Subject Property and meets the required legislative tests to warrant approval in principle subject to the conditions agreed to by the Parties;
NOW THEREFORE:
THE TRIBUNAL MAKES AN INTERIM ORDER that the appeal by the Owner pursuant to s. 22(7) of the Planning Act (“Act”) is allowed, in part, and the revised Official Plan Amendment attached to this Interim Order as Attachment 1 (“Official Plan Amendment”), is hereby approved, in principle, contingent upon receipt of confirmation of satisfaction of those pre-requisite conditions set out in paragraph [1] of this Interim Order;
THE TRIBUNAL MAKES A FURTHER INTERIM ORDER that the appeal by the Owner pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Act is allowed, in part, and the Zoning By-law Amendment attached to this Interim Order as Attachment 2 (“Zoning By-Law Amendment”), is hereby approved, in principle, excluding the “Future Potential Development Area” shown in Area E on Map 1 in the Official Plan Amendment attached hereto (except for any temporary uses for a temporary sales centre), generally in accordance with the plans and drawings prepared by Architecture Unfolded (dated January 30, 2024), contingent upon receipt of confirmation of satisfaction of those pre-requisite conditions set out in paragraph [2] and [3] of this Interim Order;
THE TRIBUNAL MAKES A FURTHER INTERIM ORDER that the Tribunal’s Final Order in respect of the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-Law Amendment for the Subject Lands shall be withheld until such time as the Tribunal receives confirmation from the Parties that the following conditions are satisfied:
the final form and content of the Official Plan Amendment is satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the City Solicitor.
the final form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment is satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the City Solicitor; and,
with respect to the Zoning By-Law Amendment, the Owner has, at its sole cost and expense:
(a) submitted a revised Functional Servicing Report and Stormwater Management Report, Hydrogeological Review, including the Foundation Drainage Report ("Engineering Reports") to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;
(b) has secured the design and the provision of financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure identified in the accepted Engineering Reports, to support the development, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Toronto Water, should it be determined that improvements or upgrades are required to support the development, according to the accepted Engineering Reports, accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Toronto Water;
(c) ensured the implementation of the accepted Engineering Reports does not require changes to the proposed amending By-laws or any such required changes have been made to the proposed amending By-laws, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor, including the use of a Holding ("H") By-law symbol regarding any new or upgrades to existing municipal servicing infrastructure as may be required; and,
(d) provided a final form of a Phasing Plan on the Development Site be provided to the City in a form and content acceptable to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the General Manager, Transportation Services, the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation, the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services.
THE TRIBUNAL MAKES A FURTHER ORDER that the appeal pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Act with respect to the portion of the lands identified as the "Future Potential Development Area" shown in Area E on Map 1 in Official Plan Amendment attached hereto is adjourned sine die. The Member is not seized of the remainder of the Zoning By-law Amendment appeal for the Future Potential Development Area and the Tribunal retains jurisdiction to make a decision in the future under s. 34(26) of the Planning Act on the Future Potential Development Area should it be adjudicated or otherwise advanced before the Tribunal. Notice shall be given by the Owner in accordance with the direction of the Tribunal prior to the scheduling of any proceeding before the Tribunal with respect to the Future Potential Development Area.
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Applicant is to provide a status update in writing to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator by Friday, May 31, 2024 and that the Member may be spoken to with respect to the implementation of this Interim Order and in the event that there are difficulties in satisfying the above conditions for the issuance of the Tribunal’s Final Order in respect of the above appeals.
“Euken Lui”
EUKEN LUI ACTING REGISTRAR
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.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2