Sheppard Lamont Limited Partnership v. Toronto (City), 2025 CanLII 60363

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement

du territoire

ISSUE DATE:

June 19, 2025

CASE NO.:

OLT-24-000678

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant:

Sheppard Lamont Limited Partnership

Subject:

Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description:

To permit a 46-storey building

Reference Number:

23 228704 ESC 22 OZ

Property Address:

4151 - 4155 Sheppard Ave East

Municipality/UT:

Toronto

OLT Case No.:

OLT-24-000678

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-24-000678

OLT Case Name:

Sheppard Lamont Limited Partnership 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:

Sheppard Lamont Limited Partnership

Subject:

Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision

Description:

To permit a 46-storey building

Reference Number:

23 228704 ESC 22 OZ

Property Address:

4151 - 4155 Sheppard Ave East

Municipality/UT:

Toronto

OLT Case No.:

OLT-24-000679

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-24-000678

BEFORE:

N. EISAZADEH

Thursday, the 19^th day of

MEMBER

June, 2025

THESE MATTERS involving appeals under subsections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act, R. S. O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, regarding the refusal by the City of Toronto to approve applications for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and Zoning By-Law Amendment (“ZBA”) to facilitate the redevelopment of its initial plans for a forty-six-storey mixed-use building comprising 726 residential units on the land municipally known as 4151-4155 Sheppard Avenue East, in the City of Toronto (“Subject Lands”);

AND THESE MATTERS having come before the Tribunal on September 26, 2024, for a first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) wherein Participant status was granted to two individuals being Navdeep Singh and Royce Co, respectively;

AND THESE MATTERS having been set down for a seven-day Merit Hearing at the first CMC, subsequent to which the Hearing dates were vacated on account of a tentative settlement reached between the Parties;

AND THESE MATTERS having come before the Tribunal on April 28, 2025, for a second CMC wherein the Parties advised that the tentative settlement had been formalized by way of a resolution passed by City Council at its meeting of April 23 and 24, 2025, approving the settlement, and thereby requested a one-day Merit Hearing for the purposes of considering the merits of settlement reached;

AND THESE MATTERS having come before the Tribunal for a Written Hearing to consider the settlement proposal proffered on consent of the Parties on Wednesday, June 18, 2025;

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having received and considered the written Participant Statements of Navdeep Singh and Royce Co, respectively, in rendering its decision;

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having received and considered the terms of settlement within the settlement offer of the Applicant containing revised plans, and the Minutes of the City of Toronto’s Council Meeting held on April 23 and 24, 2025, wherein Council resolved to endorse support for the revised settlement plans (the “Settlement”);

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having received and considered the visual and written materials filed on consent of the Parties, including the affidavit and exhibits sworn and dated June 13, 2025, of Michael S. Goldberg, a Registered Professional Planner and member of the Canadian Institute of Planners;

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having accepted and qualified Michael S. Goldberg’s evidence as expert opinion in the area of land use planning for the purposes of this Written Hearing;

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having reviewed and considered the uncontroverted affidavit evidence of Michael S. Goldberg on the nature and scope of the discussions between the City’s and the Applicant’s teams which resulted in the revised plans prepared by Sweeny and Co Architects dated April 7, 2025, and the nature and scope of the proposed Settlement, including (but not limited to):

1. The proposal to demolish the existing buildings on the Subject Lands to facilitate the redevelopment of a mixed-use building with:

a. A reduced building height from the initially proposed 46-storeys (152.9 meters or “m”, including mechanical penthouse or “MPH”) to 39-storeys (127.6 m including MPH), equating to a difference of -7 storeys (-25.3m);

b. A reduced residential gross floor area (“GFA”) from the initially proposed 43,946.39 square meters (“sq.m”) to 37,502.75 sq.m, equating to a difference of -6,443.64 sq.m;

c. An increased non-residential GFA from the initially proposed 520.66 sq.m to 520.99 sq.m, equating to a difference of +0.33 sq.m;

d. A reduced total proposed GFA from the initially proposed 44,467.05 sq.m to 38,023.73 sq.m, equating to a difference of -6,443.32 sq.m;

e. A reduction in the total floor space index (“FSI”) from the initially proposed 11.72 to 10.2, equating to a difference of -1.07;

f. A reduced tower floor plate from the initially proposed 900.13 sq.m to 795 sq.m, equating to a difference of -105.13 sq.m;

g. A change in dwelling unit count from the initially proposed 726 total units to 631 total units, comprised of the following changes to the unit mix:

i. From 40 studio units (7.1%) to 48 units (8%);

ii. From 489 one-bedroom units (64.3%) to 425 units (67%);

iii. From 123 two-bedroom units (17%) to 93 units (15%);

iv. From 74 three-bedroom units (10%) to 65 units (10%);

h. An increase in vehicle parking spaces from the initially proposed 232 spaces (including 38 visitor spaces) to 284 spaces (including 38 visitor spaces), equating to a difference of +52 parking spaces;

i. A reduced number of bicycle parking spaces from the initially proposed 495 long-term residential spaces and 55 short-term visitor spaces to 430 long-term residential and 50 short-term visitor spaces, equating to a difference of -65 long-term residential spaces and -5 short-term visitor spaces;

j. An increase in total indoor amenity space from the initially proposed 1,226.63 sq.m (1.69 sq.m/per unit) to 1,112.43 sq.m (1.76 sq.m/per unit), equating to a difference of +0.07 sq.m/per unit;

k. An increase in total outdoor amenity space from the initially proposed 951.48 sq.m (1.31 sq.m/per unit) to 1,411.73 sq.m (2.24 sq.m/per unit), equating to a difference of +0.93 sq.m/per unit;

l. An increase in total amenity space from the initially proposed 2,178.11 sq.m (3.0 sq.m/per unit) to 2,524.16 sq.m (4.0 sq.m/per unit), equating to a difference of +1.0 sq.m/unit;

2. A request to amend the City’s Official Plan (“OP”) to permit:

a. Redesignation of the southern portion of the Subject Lands from Neighbourhoods to Mixed Use Areas; and,

b. An increase to the maximum GFA as outlined in the Agincourt Secondary Plan;

3. A request to amend the City’s Zoning By-Law No. 569-2013 (“ZBL”) in order to permit the proposed development by way of:

a. increased building height;

b. increased density; and,

c. the addition of zoning regulations.

4. The Subject Lands being suitable for the proposed redevelopment and intensification for reasons that include:

a. Its location within a Strategic Growth Area and along the Sheppard Street East corridor identified as Transit Expansion Corridors and Transit Priority Segments per Maps 4 and 5 within the City’s OP;

b. Its location along an Avenue as defined within the City’s OP, its designation as within the Urban Structure on Map 2 within the City’s OP, as well as its designation as Mixed-Use Areas on Map 19 within the City’s OP;

c. Its location within a Major Transit Station Area as defined in the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS”) and in close proximity to nearby higher order transit including the Agincourt GO Station;

d. Its location being flanked by various other built-forms and designations including the CP Rail line to the south, a Mixed-Use Area to the east, Core Employment Lands to the west, and Mixed-Use Areas to the north;

e. Its location being surrounded by approved and proposed tall buildings ranging in height from 28-storeys at the intersection of Glen Watford Drive and Sheppard Avenue East to 43-storeys as part of the Agincourt Mall redevelopment;

5. The location of the proposed development being north of the lower density housing forms to the south, thereby mitigating any shadow cast to that area;

6. The massing, orientation and articulation of the proposed development having been designed to respect the low-rise character and scale of the lower density housing forms to the south, with an 8-storey podium that is scaled and setback from the south lot line, and the tower element set back 20.0m from the south lot line, providing appropriate transition and separation from the lower density dwellings as well as an appropriate edge to the interior relationship of the proposed building;

7. The tower element proposed to be set back 12.5 m from the north lot line, 29 m from the east lot line (exceeding the 12.5 m guideline standard) and 6 m from the west lot line providing an orientation that is appropriate for building-to-building separation distances and from adjacent properties, and ensuring adequate light, views, and privacy between existing and potential buildings;

8. Implementation of grade-related units and improved landscaping along Lamont Avenue in further keeping with the lower density housing forms to the south;

9. Implementation of tree landscaping proposed along the rear properly line providing a green screening and buffer at the rear of the proposed development;

10. Vehicular parking located underground, with all loading, servicing and utilities internalized within enclosed areas accessed from the driveway at Lamont Avenue such that they are not visible from the street thereby mitigating neighbouring visual impacts;

11. The employment of built-from standards and architectural details designed to adequately limit new shadows, to maintain comfortable wind conditions, and to ensure adequate light, view and privacy of neighbouring streets, properties and open spaces;

12. The proposed development contributing to the variation of built forms, providing a mix of unit types and increasing the residential housing stock in the area;

13. The proposed development fitting within the existing and evolving character of the area and benefiting existing residents and businesses by fulfilling the planned function of the corridor by adding housing, vitality and enhanced street-life to Sheppard Avenue East in otherwise need of rejuvenation and reinvestment;

14. The retail space being located on the ground floor enhancing and animating the street and contributing to the vitality of the Sheppard Avenue East corridor;

15. The location of the building intended to frame the corner of Sheppard Avenue East and Lamont Avenue creating an enhanced pedestrian scaled environment on street level;

16. A Shadow Study submitted as part of the revised plans illustrating the incremental shadows arising from the proposed building are slender, move quickly through the landscape and do not remain stagnant in one spot for any undue period of time;

17. A Pedestrian Level Wind Study and Addendum prepared on the initial application which concluded acceptable future wind conditions over most grade-level pedestrian wind-sensitive areas and surrounding study site for the intended uses on a seasonal basis as well as acceptable wind conditions for outdoor amenity spaces during summer months with no areas over the study site found to experience unsafe wind conditions; and,

18. A Functional Servicing Report and Stormwater Management Report indicating adequate municipal servicing and sanitary infrastructure is available or planned to accommodate the proposed development with no adverse affect to flow conditions or sanitary infrastructure;

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having accepted the uncontested evidence of Michael S. Goldberg finds that the proposed Settlement and revised instruments giving effect thereto:

1. have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest under s. 2 of the Planning Act, through promoting a scale, height and density of development that optimizes the use of existing land and infrastructure, including nearby higher order transit, thereby contributing to sustainability and safe and healthy communities within a Strategic Growth Area;

2. are consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, by supporting intensification on an underutilized site in a Strategic Growth Area that is well served by municipal infrastructure including higher-order transit, as well as by contributing to the supply and diversity of housing types, and in particular, the range and mix of housing options in the area;

3. are in conformity with the overarching policies within the City of Toronto’s Official Plan, with the pending amendments to the Agincourt Secondary Plan related to height and density, as they would facilitate the redesignation of the southern portion of the Subject Lands to Mixed Use Area and increase the maximum gross floor area allowable under the Secondary Plan at a location appropriate for high density housing and use in a way that has regard for, and is compatible with, its surrounding neighbourhood and development context, while implementing and satisfying the key policies related to Healthy Neighbourhoods, Mixed Use Areas, Public Realm, Built Form, and Housing;

4. have sufficient regard for the Tall Building Guidelines, May 2013, as the site has height context in the immediate and broader areas with other existing and approved tall buildings ranging from 24-48 storeys, and is designed at a height and scale with built-form standards and architectural detail that respect an appropriate transition and articulation for compatibility with neighbouring lower scaled buildings in a way that protects access to wind conditions, sunlight and skyviews from the street, parks and private open spaces;

5. have sufficient regard for the Growing Up Guidelines: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities, as the redevelopment proposes a unit mix comprised of 15% two-bedroom and 10% three-bedroom units, exceeding the guideline standards;

6. represent good planning and are in the public interest by implementing a high-quality transit-oriented mixed-use proposal that would result in the introduction of additional housing, including diversifying the range and mix of housing types, within the area, as well as a providing rejuvenation and vitality to an enhanced street-life on Sheppard Avenue East with both ground retail and residential units.

NOW THEREFORE:

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeals are allowed in part, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraphs (i) to (vii) below, and the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment set out in Attachment 1 and 2 respectively to this Interim Order, are hereby approved in principle.

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the issuance of its Final Order shall be withheld contingent upon confirmation from the City Solicitor, of satisfaction of the following pre-requisite matters:

(i) The final form and content of the Official Plan Amendment to the City of Toronto’s Official Plan are to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Executive Director of Development Review;

(ii) The final form and content of the Zoning By-Law Amendment are to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Executive Director of Development Review;

(iii) The owner of the Subject Lands has submitted a revised Landscape and Planting Plan, including a soil volume plan to meet Toronto Green Standard version 4 requirements, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Development Review;

(iv) The owner of the Subject Lands has submitted a revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study, including a revised wind tunnel study with the identification of any required mitigation measures to be secured in the Zoning By-Law amendment and through the Site Plan Control process, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Environmental and Climate and the Executive Director of Development Review;

(v) The owner of the Subject Lands has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Engineering and Construction Services and Transportation Services as they relate to the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment application as set out in their memorandum dated January 3, 2024, or as may be updated in response to further submission(s) filed by the Applicant, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

(vi) The owner of the Subject Lands has submitted a Functional Servicing Report and Stormwater Management Report, and Hydrogeological Review, including the Foundation Drainage Report or addendums ("Engineering Reports") to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water; and,

(vii) The owner of the Subject Lands has secured the design and provision of financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure identified in the Engineering Reports, 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.

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that Counsel for the Applicant is to advise the Tribunal within 120 days of the issuance of this Order as to the Status of the final instruments, should they not yet be finalized.

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the final draft Zoning By-Law Amendment and Official Plan Amendment is to be forwarded to the Tribunal for approval prior to the issuance of the final Order.

AND THE TRIBUNAL may be spoken to in the event of any issue arising in the implementation of this Order.

“Matthew D.J. Bryan”

MATTHEW D.J. BRYAN

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