Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: August 15, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000535
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Augend 189 Dundas West Village Properties Ltd. c/o Augend Investments Limited
Appellant: Mother Parker’s Tea & Coffee Inc.
Appellant: White Elm Investments Ltd.
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 142
Description: To permit changes to the Mississauga Official Plan related to Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) across the City.
Reference Number: OPA No. 142
Property Address: City Wide
Municipality/UT: Mississauga/Peel
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000535
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000535
OLT Case Name: Augend Investments Limited v. Mississauga (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Mother Parker’s Tea & Coffee Inc.
Appellant: Edenshaw Developments Limited
Appellant: Orlando Corporation
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 143
Description: To permit changes to the Mississauga Official Plan related to Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) across the City
Reference Number: OPA No. 143
Property Address: City Wide
Municipality/UT: Mississauga/Peel
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000536
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000535
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Augend 189 Dundas West Village Properties Ltd. c/o Augend Investments Limited
Appellant: Mother Parker’s Tea & Coffee Inc.
Appellant: Edenshaw Developments Limited
Appellant: GCTC Holdings Inc.
Appellant: White Elm Investments Ltd.
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 144
Description: To permit changes to the Mississauga Official Plan related to Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) across the City
Reference Number: OPA No. 144
Property Address: City Wide
Municipality/UT: Mississauga/Peel
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000537
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000535
Heard: July 30, 2024, by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Regional Municipality of Peel ("Region")
R. Godley
City of Mississauga ("City")
B. Luo L. Magi (in absentia) N. Gupta (Student-at-law)
Orlando Corporation ("Appellant #1")
L. Longo
Edenshaw Developments Limited ("Appellant #2")
G. O’Brien M. Flowers (in absentia)
GCTC Holdings Inc. ("Appellant #3")
D. Bronskill
Mother Parker’s Tea & Coffee Ltd. ("Appellant #4")
D. Tang J. White
Augend 189 Dundas West Village Properties c/o Augend Investments Limited ("Appellant #5")
A. Frank J. Park (in absentia)
White Elm Investments Ltd. ("Appellant #6")
G. O’Brien M. Flowers (in absentia)
Hensall Holdings c/o Cooksville Steel Ltd. ("Non-Appellant #1")
L. Longo
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) ("Non-Appellant #2")
M. Rutledge T. Duncan (in absentia)
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S.L. DIONNE AND M.A. Sills ON JULY 30, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1A first Case Management Conference ("CMC") was held on July 30, 2024, in respect of numerous appeals, pursuant to s. 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., c. P.13, as amended ("Act"), of the decision of the Council of the Regional Municipality of Peel to approve Amendments No. 142 ("OPA 142"), No. 143 ("OPA 143"), and No. 144 ("OPA 144") to the Official Plan of the City of Mississauga ("City"). The aforementioned Amendments are all in relation to a proposed planning policy framework for lands in the City within Major Transit Station Areas ("MTSAs").
2The Tribunal received the Affidavit of Service and marked it as Exhibit 1. The Panel is satisfied that it demonstrates that proper notice was given and that no further notice is required.
ROLE OF THE REGION
3Counsel for the Region advised the Panel that at the time of adoption of the Amendments, the Region was the approval authority. As a result of Bill 185 being operational as of July 1, 2024, the Region is no longer an approval authority and no longer approves the City’s official plan amendments. Additionally, as of July 1, 2024, the Region’s Official Plan ("ROP") is downloaded to the local municipality such that it is now the City’s responsibility to ensure that MTSAs conform to the ROP.
4The Region maintains an interest with respect to servicing and seeks to retain status in the matters before the Tribunal, however in the role of an Observing Party.
5Counsel for the City advised the Panel that OPA 142, OPA 143 and OPA 144 are the City’s planning instruments, and that the City takes responsibility and will take the lead to respond to the appeals.
6The Panel granted Observing Party status to the Region.
REQUESTS FOR STATUS
7Two requests for Non-Appellant Party status were considered by the Panel. In accordance with Rule 8.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, a Non-Appellant Party, in respect of an appeal under s. 17(36) of the Act, may only participate in the appeals by sheltering under an issue raised in an appeal(s) by an Appellant Party, and may participate fully in the proceeding to the extent that the issue remains in dispute, but has no independent status to continue an appeal in the event that the appeal(s) is withdrawn by the Appellant Party.
8Hensall Holdings c/o Cooksville Steel Ltd. is seeking Non-Appellant Party status and was represented by Counsel. Counsel for the City advised that the requestor has a valid interest in OPA 142, and the City had no objection to the status request.
9Toronto and Region Conservation Authority ("TRCA") was seeking Non-Appellant Party status and was represented by Counsel. The City advised that they understand that TRCA’s interest relates to OPA 142 and specific policies regarding flood related works, and that the City supports upholding these policies.
10The Panel granted Non-Appellant Party status to each of Hensall Holdings c/o Cooksville Steel Ltd. and TRCA in respect of OPA 142.
11There was also a request for Participant status by Trillium Health Partners ("THP") in respect of their interest in its hospital site at 100 Queensway West. The Panel is in receipt of a Participant Statement from THP and the City clarified that the references therein are in relation to OPA 144. The Panel granted Participant status to THP.
MOTION TO CONFIRM SCOPE OF APPEALS AND UNAPPEALED PORTIONS OF CITY’S MTSA POLICIES
12In advance of the CMC, the City served a Motion on the Appellants #1-6 (all inclusive) with the intent and purpose of being able to confirm the scope of their various appeals. Responses and Reply Motion materials were prepared and filed with the Tribunal.
13Counsel for the City provided the Panel with a status update on the motion. The City would like for the unappealed portions of OPA 142, OPA 143, and OPA 144 to come into effect and to do so the City is seeking, firstly for the Tribunal to confirm the scope of appeals as site specific or as related to certain policies of the respective OPAs or combination of thereof, and then secondly that the Tribunal bring the unappealed portions of the OPAs into effect.
14The City had prepared a Draft Order that it was seeking the Tribunal to consider, along with a revised Compendium of the OPAs, proposed to be appended thereto, that had been filed with the Tribunal the morning of the CMC.
15The Panel expressed some reservation in dealing with the Motion as it had not been afforded an opportunity to review the tremendous amount of documentation previously submitted, and was not in receipt of the most recent Compendium of OPAs. While the Tribunal would not have a problem issuing an Order for the unappealed portions subject to concurrence of the Appellant Parties, the Panel would have to rely on Counsel to advise if there were any areas of concern or cause for the Tribunal to not give approval.
16Upon canvassing the Appellant Parties, it became apparent that although there was an understanding of the approach being taken by the City, not all Parties were able to consent at the CMC as further time for review of the documents would be necessary.
17The Panel directed the City to circulate the revised Draft Order and Compendium of OPAs to the Parties for their review and further directed the Appellant Parties to notify the Tribunal in writing of their concurrence.
SCHEDULING A SECOND CMC
18The City is seeking the scheduling of a second CMC, at which time it may seek to advance settlements or to bring forward a contested motion to scope the appeals, such as for any appeal(s) of MTSA policies that may not be appealable under the Act.
OTHER MATTERS
19The Panel directed the City to prepare a summary in chart form setting out the Appellant, the OPA subject of their respective appeal, the specific portions/provisions of the OPA that is/are the subject of appeal, and the status of the appeal(s) that will be of assistance to the Tribunal for further case management. This chart is to be circulated to all Parties and upon concurrence of all Appellant Parties, be filed with the Tribunal.
NEXT STEPS
20A second CMC is scheduled to proceed by video conference on Thursday, November 28, 2024, at 10 a.m.
21Parties 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:
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/638422541
Access Code: 638-422-541
22Parties and Participants are asked to access and setup the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html.
23Persons 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: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889. The Access Code is: 638-422-541.
24Individuals 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 Video Hearing 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.
25The Tribunal orders the above directives.
26No further notice is required.
27This Panel is not seized, but may be spoken to if issues arise in these matters.
"S.L. Dionne"
S.L. Dionne
MEMBER
"M.A. Sills"
M.A. SILLS
VICE-CHAIR
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.