Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: August 20, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000355
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: European Bakery Supply Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: To permit two mixed-use residential development towers
Reference Number: 22 232811 STE 09 OZ
Property Address: 321-355 Symington Avenue and 350 Campbell Avenue
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000355
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000355
OLT Case Name: European Bakery Supply 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: European Bakery Supply Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit two mixed-use residential development towers
Reference Number: 23 104503 STE 09 OZ
Property Address: 321-355 Symington Avenue and 350 Campbell Avenue
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000356
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000355
Heard: July 4, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative*
European Bakery Supply Inc. Daniel Angelucci Michael Foderick (in absentia)
City of Toronto Cameron McKeich Adrienne DeBacker
Royce Dupont Investments Inc. and Irving Ungerman Limited and Karl Ungerman Limited Mark Flowers
Campont Developments Limited David Bronskill
Perth-Symington-Kingsley Residents' Association Mark Macdonald* Emily Shepard* (in absentia)
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BITA M. RAJAEE ON JULY 4, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This Hearing was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) before the Tribunal with respect to appeals under sections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act by European Bakery Supply Inc. (“Applicant”) resulting from the failure of the City of Toronto (“City”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframe on applications for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”). The OPA and ZBA relate to lands located at 321-355 Symington Avenue and 350 Campbell Avenue in the City (“Subject Property”). The purpose of the OPA and ZBA is to allow for the development of a two-tower (2-tower) mixed-use proposal.
2At the CMC, the Tribunal canvassed Counsel, who confirmed that there was no issue with the service of the Notice of CMC. The Tribunal is in receipt of the Affidavit of Service, sworn by Robert Daniel Edward Jefferson on June 18, 2024, which was marked as Exhibit 1, and confirms that Notice was adequately provided. As such, no further notice is required.
STATUS REQUESTS
3The Tribunal was tasked with adjudicating a number of status requests.
4Four Party status requests were received, from: Royce Dupont Investments Inc. and Irving Ungerman Limited and Karl Ungerman Limited (“Royce”); Campont Developments Limited (“Campont”); Perth-Symington-Kingsley Residents' Association (“PSKRA”); and Perth-Dupont Community Garden (“Garden”).
5Royce is the owner of lands located immediately south of the Subject Property. Royce’s interest in this matter is to ensure that any development approvals that may be granted by the Tribunal for the Subject Property will not have any adverse impacts on Royce’s own lands, both in their current condition and for future redevelopment. The other Parties did not raise any concerns with or object to this Party Status Request. The Tribunal found that Royce’s involvement in this proceeding will assist the Tribunal in understanding the potential impacts of the proposed development on immediately adjacent lands. The Tribunal granted Party status to Royce.
6Campont is the owner of lands located south of the Subject Property. Campont did not currently have concerns with the proposal, but wishes to participate in the proceedings in order to monitor them, to participate in a mediation (if any), to make submissions to the Tribunal if required, and to ensure that revisions are not made to the proposal that would cause concern to Campont. The other Parties did not object to this Party Status request. The Tribunal found that Campont had an interest in this matter and that the request was appropriate. The Tribunal granted Party status to Campont.
7PSKRA is an incorporated association comprised of a group of local residents. They raised a number of concerns with the proposal, including its density and the impact that this would have on infrastructure, the height of the proposal and its impact on shadow and wind, and lack of adequate affordable units and 2- and 3-bedroom units. The other Parties did not object to this Party status request. The Tribunal found that PSKRA has an interest in the matter and will assist the Tribunal in understanding the potential impacts of the OPA and ZBA on the local community. The Tribunal granted Party status to PSKRA.
8Garden is a group of people in the area who benefit from the use of the community garden located directly opposite to the proposed development. A number of the members are also members of PSKRA. However, Garden is not incorporated. The representative from Garden, Lisa Ridout, attended the CMC. The Tribunal explained to Ms. Ridout that an unincorporated association could not become a Party to the proceeding for various reasons, including the impact on the ability of the Parties to seek and receive costs. However, the Tribunal advised Ms. Ridout that Garden had a number of options: to become incorporated; for one individual to seek Party status and advance the concerns shared by Garden; to allow their concerns to be advanced through PSKRA; or, to be a Participant. Ms. Ridout explained that Garden did not have the funds to incorporate and, as such, preferred to be a Participant. The other Parties did not object to this Participant status request. The Tribunal found that Garden had an interest in the matter and will assist the Tribunal in understanding the potential impacts of the OPA and ZBA on the local community. The Tribunal granted Participant status to Garden.
PROCEDURAL ORDER AND ISSUES LIST
9A draft Procedural Order (“PO”) was provided prior to the CMC, but it did not contain an Issues List (“IL”). The Applicant’s Counsel explained that discussions are ongoing with respect to the issues. The City’s Counsel stated that a draft IL had been prepared and that the City was awaiting confirmation of all Parties involved, once status requests were addressed by the Tribunal at this CMC, before distributing that list. However, it was ready to be provided and the City’s Counsel was not awaiting further instructions from Council at this juncture. As such, the IL could be imminently prepared and provided to the Tribunal by the Parties.
10The Parties, including those added at the CMC, relayed verbally to the Tribunal the general issues that they anticipated would be at play here. On that basis, the Tribunal was satisfied that it could schedule a Hearing, with particulars provided in paragraphs [12] through [16] of this Decision. However, the Tribunal directed the Parties to provide the PO and IL by August 9, 2024, directing also that if the Parties failed to do so, and if no status update was provided, the Hearing dates could be vacated. The Parties have now provided the PO and IL, which is approved as attached to this Decision.
MEDIATION AND SETTLEMENT
11The Tribunal raised the issue of mediation and settlement discussions. The Applicant’s Counsel advised that they had had some preliminary discussions with the City and intended to engage in further discussions now that all Parties have been identified. The Parties were directed to advise the Tribunal in writing should they reach a settlement with respect to some or all of the issues prior to the Hearing, and should they wish to pursue Tribunal-assisted mediation, they may make a written request to the Tribunal through the Case Coordinator for those services.
HEARING DETAILS
12Given the number of Parties, potential issues, and potential witnesses, the Tribunal agreed that a 10-day Hearing would be sufficient. A Hearing has been scheduled to take place commencing at 10 a.m. on Monday, May 26, 2025 to and including Friday, June 6, 2025.
13On the applicable dates, the Parties are to use the following coordinates:
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/687587165
Access code: 687-587-165
14On those dates, the Parties and Participant are asked to log in to the Video Hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections. The Parties and Participant 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
15Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting Application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event 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.
16Individuals 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.
ORDER
17THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS as follows:
a. The following are now Parties in this proceeding:
i. Royce Dupont Investments Inc. and Irving Ungerman Limited and Karl Ungerman Limited;
ii. Campont Developments Limited; and
iii. Perth-Symington-Kingsley Residents' Association.
b. Perth-Dupont Community Garden is now a Participant in this proceeding.
c. The Hearing in this matter is scheduled to take place as described above in this Decision.
d. The Procedural Order and Issues List, attached as Schedule A, shall govern this proceeding.
18There will be no further notice.
19This Member is not seized but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise.
“Bita M. Rajaee”
BITA M. RAJAEE
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.