Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
August 25, 2025
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-25-000267
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(4) of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18, as amended
Appellant:
1625445 Ontario Inc.
Appellant:
HSRE-Parallax 1, LP (formerly known as BRL Realty Limited)
Subject:
Appeal of the Passing of an Application
Description:
To designate the Heritage Conservation District and adopt the Kensington Market HCD Plan.
Property Address:
333 College Street and 303 Augusta Avenue
99 Bellevue Avenue
Municipality/UT:
Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No.:
OLT-25-000267
OLT Case Name:
HSRE-Parallax 1, LP (formerly known as BRL Realty Limited) & 1625445 Ontario Inc. v. Toronto (City)
Heard:
July 23, 2025 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
BRL Realty Limited
J. Hoffman
1625445 Ontario Inc.
D. Bronskill (in absentia)
J. Hoffman
City of Toronto
M. Longo
Y. Nuri
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY D. ARNOLD ON JULY 23, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This first Case Management Conference ("CMC") was held to prepare for a Hearing on the Merits of the appeals to the Tribunal of By-law No. 94-2025 passed by the City of Toronto (the "City") designating a defined area as the Kensington Market Heritage Conservation District, with such appeals made by BRL Realty Limited with respect to the properties municipally known as 333 College Street and 303 Augusta Avenue (the "BRL Appellant") and by 1625445 Ontario Inc. with respect to the property municipally known as 99 Bellevue Avenue (the "162 Appellant") pursuant to section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18 (the "BRL Appeal" and the "162 Appeal" respectively and the "Appeals" collectively).
2The Tribunal marked the Affidavit of Service of Olivia Morris sworn on June 12, 2025 into evidence as Exhibit 1 in these proceedings, and is satisfied that same demonstrates proper notice such that no further notice is required in these proceedings.
3BRL Appellant advised the Tribunal that the lands that are the subject of the BRL Appeal are in the process of being conveyed to a successor in title – HSRE-Parallax 1, LP – and requested accordingly that BRL Realty Limited be replaced with HSRE-Parallax 1, LP as the Appellant with respect to the BRL Appeal in these proceedings. On no objection of the other Parties, the Tribunal granted this request. Counsel for BRL Realty Limited indicated that they represent HSRE-Parallax 1, LP and, as such, the Tribunal will continue to communicate with this counsel with respect to these proceedings.
4There were no requests for Party or Participant status in these proceedings.
MEDIATION AND SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS
5The Tribunal encourages the Parties to seek opportunities for settlement or narrowing of some or all of the issues and, in this regard, consideration for the Tribunal-facilitated mediation may be requested through the Case Coordinator.
HEARING DATES AND PROCEDURAL ORDER
6The Parties requested that the Tribunal schedule a Hearing on the merits of the Appeals to take place in early summer 2026 and the Tribunal concurred with this request. The Parties estimated that approximately five witnesses would be called to give evidence (land use planning, heritage planning, and architecture) and accordingly five days was determined to be an appropriate allocation for this Hearing.
7A draft Procedural Order was submitted to the Tribunal for its consideration following this CMC. The Tribunal reviewed same and the Procedural Order in these proceedings attached as Schedule "A" to this Order is approved. In this regard, it is noted that the approved Procedural Order was revised at paragraph 15 to reflect the required minimum 35 days notice to the Tribunal by the Parties if some or all of the hearing dates are no longer required in order to allow sufficient time for the Tribunal to redeploy any hearing days that are not required in these proceedings.
8A Hearing of the Appeals is scheduled to take place by video commencing on Monday, June 1, 2026, at 10 a.m. and continue for five hearing days up to and including Friday, June 5, 2026.
9Parties and/or Observers are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/660145013
Access code: 660-145-013
10Parties 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 GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
11Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889. The access code is: 660-145-013.
12Individuals 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 event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
ORDER
13The Tribunal Orders as follows:
(a) BRL Realty Limited (the “BRL Appellant”) is substituted with the successor in title to the lands that are the subject of the BRL Appellant's lands, namely: HSRE-Parallax 1, LP. The Title of Proceedings before the Tribunal shall be amended accordingly. All notices will continue to be directed to counsel for the BRL Appellant who advised the Tribunal that they continue as counsel for the substituted Appellant, HSRE-Parallax 1, LP.
(b) A Hearing of the Appeals is scheduled to take place by video commencing on Monday, June 1, 2026, at 10 a.m. and continue for five hearing days up to and including Friday, June 5, 2026.
(c) The Procedural Order attached as Schedule "A" to this Decision is approved.
14The Member is not seized in this matter but will remain available for continued case management to the extent that the Tribunal calendar permits.
15No further Notice is required or will be given.
“D. Arnold”
D. ARNOLD
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 A
Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-25-000267
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(4) of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18. as amended
Appellant:
1625445 Ontario Inc.
Appellant:
HSRE-Parallax 1, LP (formerly known as BRL Realty Limited)
Subject:
Appeal of the Passing of an Application
Description:
To designate the Heritage Conservation District and adopt the Kensington Market HCD Plan.
Property Address:
333 College Street and 303 Augusta Avenue
99 Bellevue Avenue
Municipality/UT:
Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No:
OLT-25-000267
OLT Case Name:
HSRE-Parallax 1, LP (formerly known as BRL Realty Limited) & 1625445 Ontario Inc. v. Toronto (City)
Procedural Order
- The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the Parties’ request or its own motion.
Organization of the Hearing
The video hearing will begin on June 1, 2026 at 10:00 a.m.
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 5 days. The Parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues, where possible. The procedural order deadlines are generally found in Attachment 1.
The Parties and Participants identified at the Case Management Conference are listed in Attachment 2 to this Order.
The Issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3 to this Order. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a Party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.
The order of evidence is set out in Attachment 4 to this Order. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.
Any person intending to participate in the hearing shall provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal. Any such person who retains a representative must advise the other Parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number.
Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.
Requirements Before the Hearing
A Party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other Parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before January 23, 2026. For expert witnesses, a Party is to identify the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified. Any challenges to the witness, including qualifications of a witness to give opinion evidence in the area of expertise proposed shall be made by motion in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules and notice of same must be served on the other Parties on or before on or before February 6, 2026.
Expert witnesses in the same discipline(s) shall have at least one meeting on or before March 13, 2026 to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. The experts shall prepare a list of any agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing, and provide this list to all of the Parties and the Tribunal on or before March 20, 2026.
An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing, the acknowledgement of expert's duty and curriculum vitae. Copies of this must be provided as in Section 13. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the expert witness has prepared any report(s) that he/she intends to rely on at the hearing, and which did not form part of the submissions made to the City, such report(s) shall be provided to the other Parties at the same time as the delivery of expert witness statements, as in Section 13.
Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the Party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence, as in Section 13.
On or before April 3, 2026 the Parties shall provide copies of their witness statements and expert witness statements (full disclosure including reports) to the other Parties.
At least on or before April 24, 2026, the Parties may provide to all other Parties a written response to any written evidence.
On or before April 27, 2026 the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required. If no hearing dates are intended to be released from the Tribunal's calendar, no Party is required to advise the Tribunal anything further in that regard.
On or before May 11, 2026 the Parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other Parties. The Tribunal and all Parties shall be notified if a model will be used, all Parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the scheduled commencement of the hearing.
A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. Such a motion shall be in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rule 10, which requires that the moving Party provide copies of the motion to all other Parties at least 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.
A Party who provides a witness’ written evidence to the other Parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the Party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.
The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before May 22, 2026 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing
The parties shall cooperate to prepare an electronic joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before May 22, 2026.
If one ore more Appellants wishes to propose any modification(s) to the West Queen West Heritage Conservation District Plan any such modification(s) shall be delivered to all Parties and the City on or before February 10, 2026. Should an Appellant attempt to advance any modification(s) after this date without the consent of the City, the Tribunal may limit or exclude such modification(s) from being considered at the hearing.
All filing of documents and materials shall be electronic to the Tribunal, the Parties and Participants (if any). The Tribunal will be provided a hard copy of documents and materials in advance of the hearing event, if requested, as soon as practicable. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7. All documents to be filed with the Tribunal shall be organized, tabbed and digitally searchable and such materials will be filed in accordance with directions contained in the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, dated June 29, 2021, or as may be amended. Section 2 applies regardless if the hearing event is in-person or electronic.
No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.
The Tribunal may conduct mediation on consent of all Parties, on consent of those Parties who wish to participate in mediation, or if the Tribunal sees fit.
The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in this Procedural Order are set out in Attachment 5.
This Member is not seized.
So orders the Tribunal.
ATTACHMENT 1
SUMMARY OF DATES
DATE
EVENT
January 23, 2026
Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
February 6, 2026
Last date to challenge identification of expert witness
February 10, 2026
Final date to propose modifications
March 13, 2026
Experts meeting prior to this date
March 20, 2026
Agreed Statement of Facts
April 10, 2026
Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
April 24, 2026
Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)
May 11, 2026
Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
May 22, 2026
Final Work Plan filed with the Tribunal
May 22, 2026
Finalize Joint Document Book
June 1, 2026
Hearing commences
ATTACHMENT 2
LIST OF PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS
Appellant
Address
Representative
A1
HSRE-PARALLAX 1, LP
333 College Street and 303 Augusta Avenue
Joe Hoffman Goodmans LLP Bay Adelaide Centre 333 Bay Street, Suite 3400 Toronto, Ontario MSH 2S7 jhoffman@goodmans.ca
416-597-5168
A2
1625445 Ontario Inc.
99 Bellevue Avenue
David Bronskill Goodmans LLP Bay Adelaide Centre 333 Bay Street, Suite 3400 Toronto, Ontario MSH 2S7 dbronskill@goodmans.ca 416-597-4299
A3
City of Toronto
Matthew Longo 55 John Street 26th Floor Metro Hall Toronto, Ontario M5V 3C6 matthew.longo@toronto.ca 416-392-8109
ATTACHMENT 3
ISSUES LIST
NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the Tribunal or any Party that the issue is either relevant or appropriate. The identification of an issue on this list by a Party indicates that Party’s intent to lead evidence or argue that the issue is relevant to the proceeding, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other Parties the case they need to meet and shall not be construed as the Tribunal have jurisdiction over such matters in each circumstance. Accordingly, no Party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the Tribunal.
Issues List of 1625445 Ontario Inc. (99 Bellevue Avenue)
Boundary
Has a reasonable rationale been provided for the proposed HCD boundary?
Should the proposed HCD boundary be revised to exclude properties on College Street and/or the property known municipally as 99 Bellevue Avenue?
Objectives
Are the Plan’s objectives sufficiently clear, precise and accurate to enable appropriate application of Section 41.2 of the Ontario Heritage Act?
Is Section 7.4 consistent with the Plan’s objectives?
Policies and Guidelines
Are mandatory policies and/or guidelines appropriate in an HCD Plan?
Is it appropriate for the proposed HCD Plan to establish mandatory requirements for non-contributing properties?
Is it appropriate to restrict demolition of a non-contributing property until such time as a heritage permit is issued by the City for a replacement building or structure?
Is Section 7.4 appropriate given that it focuses on urban design considerations already addressed in the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan?
Are the policies in Section 7.4 appropriate to guide future redevelopment of the property known municipally as 99 Bellevue Avenue given the property’s characteristics, including but not limited to existing use, lot frontage and lot size?
Are mandatory storefront widths and heights in Policy 7.6.3 appropriate?
General
Is the proposed HCD Plan consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2024)?
Does the proposed HCD Plan conform with the City of Toronto Official Plan?
Issues List of HSRE-PARALLAX 1, LP (333 College Street and 303 Augusta Avenue)
Boundary
Has a reasonable rationale been provided for the proposed HCD boundary?
Should the proposed HCD boundary be revised to exclude properties at 333 College Street and 303 Augusta Street?
Objectives
Are the Plan’s objectives sufficiently clear, precise and accurate to enable appropriate application of Section 41.2 of the Ontario Heritage Act?
Is Section 7.4 consistent with the Plan’s objectives?
Policies and Guidelines
Are mandatory policies and/or guidelines appropriate in an HCD Plan?
Is it appropriate for the proposed HCD Plan to establish mandatory requirements for non-contributing properties?
Is it appropriate to restrict demolition of a non-contributing property until such time as a heritage permit is issued by the City for a replacement building or structure?
Is Section 7.4 appropriate given that it focuses on urban design considerations already addressed in the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan?
Are the policies in Section 7.4 appropriate to guide future redevelopment of the properties known municipally as 333 College Street and 303 Augusta Avenue?
General
Is the proposed HCD Plan consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2024)?
Does the proposed HCD Plan conform with the City of Toronto Official Plan?
ATTACHMENT 4
ORDER OF EVIDENCE
NOTE: Where Parties of like interest have issues in common, they shall make reasonable efforts to coordinate their examinations-in-chief and cross-examinations so as to minimize any duplication or overlap of evidence.
City of Toronto
Appellants and Parties aligned in interest with the City of Toronto
Appellants and Parties opposed to the City of Toronto
Reply Evidence (if required)
City of Toronto Reply Evidence (if required)
ATTACHMENT 5
Purpose of the Procedural Order and Meaning of Terms
Party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other Parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. If an unincorporated group wishes to become a Party, it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a Party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer, and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorization from the Party.
NOTE that a person who wishes to become a Party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the Case Management Conference, must ask the Tribunal to permit this.
Participant is an individual, group or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A Participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a Party may do so). Subsection 33.2 of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a Party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a Participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A Participant may also be asked questions by the Parties should the Tribunal direct a Participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.
A Participant must be identified and be accorded Participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A Participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A Participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a Participant does not have the rights of a Party to make such requests of the Tribunal.
Written and Visual Evidence:
Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a Party intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.
Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a Party intends to present as evidence at the hearing.
Witness Statements:
A witness statement is a short written outline of the person’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which the witness will discuss and the witness’ opinions on those issues; and a list of reports that the witness will rely on at the hearing.
An expert witness statement should include the expert’s (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness’ opinions on those issues and the complete reasons for the opinions and (5) a list of reports that the witness will rely on at the hearing.
A Participant statement is a short written outline of the person’s or group’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which the Participant wishes to address and the submission of the Participant on those issues; and a list of reports, if any, which the Participant wishes to refer to in their statement
Additional Information:
Summons: A Party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons. This request must be made before the time that the list of witnesses is provided to the Tribunal and the Parties (see Rule 13 on the summons procedure). If the Tribunal requests it, an affidavit must be provided indicating how the witness’ evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the affidavit, it will require that a motion be heard to decide whether the witness should be summoned.
The order of examination of witnesses: is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:
- direct examination by the Party presenting the witness;
- direct examination by any Party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;
- cross-examination by Parties of opposite interest;
- re-examination by the Party presenting the witness; or
- another order of examination mutually agreed among the Parties or directed by the Tribunal.