Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 07, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001201
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Referred by: Payzac Development Corporation
Subject: A site plan amendment request to revitalize vacant property to develop a 9-storey residential building.
Property Address/Description: 4151 Kingston Road
Municipality: City of Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001201
OLT Case Name: Payzac Development Corporation v. Toronto (City)
Heard: December 9, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Payzac Development Corporation
Andrew Jeanrie
Stephanie Brazzell (in absentia)
City of Toronto
Matthew Longo
Ariel Lo-Wong
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY YASNA FAGHANI ON DECEMBER 9, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1This was a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) held in response to the request of Payzac Development Corporation (“the Applicant”). The matter concerns an appeal of a Site Plan application for the property located at 4151 Kingston Road in the City of Toronto (the “City”) regarding the development of a nine-storey residential building. The City failed to make a decision within the statutory timeframe and the Applicant appealed the non-decision to the Tribunal under section 41(12) of the Planning Act (“Act”).
2At the first CMC in April of 2022, the Parties advised the Tribunal that fruitful settlement negotiations were taking place and the Parties were optimistic about the possibly of a full resolution of the Appeal. At that time, the Tribunal directed the Parties to contact the Case Coordinator for the purpose of scheduling a Hearing, if necessary, or, otherwise, to provide notification of the withdrawal of the appeal. In October of 2024, the Applicant contacted the Tribunal to schedule a CMC after the Parties came to a last-minute impasse and further direction from the Tribunal was required.
PROCEEDINGS UPDATE
3Counsel for the Applicant advised that the Parties had made good progress regarding the Site Plan; however, there remained a dispute with respect to the extent of road widening decision by the City. Counsel for the City agreed with the remaining outstanding issue and noted that ongoing discussions continued to occur with the Applicant regarding sidewalk safety for pedestrians and cyclists. Of note, the Applicant’s counsel advised that the Applicant was at risk of losing Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) funding for the proposed project and therefore required that a Hearing be scheduled.
4Both Parties requested the scheduling of Hearing dates at some time in March of 2025. The Applicant’s Counsel anticipated calling two witnesses – a planner and a transportation engineer. Counsel for the City also anticipated calling two witnesses.
5After hearing submissions from the Parties, the Tribunal scheduled a Merit Hearing of three (3) days in March. Several weeks after the CMC the parties submitted a finalized Procedural Order (PO) and Issues List (IL).
6After submission of the finalized PO and IL, and before the issuance of this decision, the Parties again reached out to the Tribunal advising that they continue to exchange materials and notes regarding the application with efforts to resolve the issues. They requested a one-day (1-day) status Hearing instead of a 3-day Merit Hearing. The Parties advised that the one-day status Hearing would be used to either advise the Tribunal of a settlement, or to impose procedural deadlines for a later single day Hearing. The tribunal granted the Parties’ request and changed the 3-day Merit Hearing it had scheduled to a one-day Telephone Case Conference (TCC) on March 19, 2025, with details below.
MEDIATION/SETTLEMENT
7The Parties were made aware of Tribunal-led mediation and indicated that they are not opposed to mediation. They admitted that they had not initially turned their minds to mediation but believed it may be a possibility at this juncture. The Tribunal advised that a request for mediation could be made through the Case Coordinator and encouraged the Parties to make contact at the appropriate time.
HEARING PLANNING – PO and IL
8As discussed above, the Parties submitted a finalized Procedural Order (PO) and Issues List (IL). Pending the outcome of the TTC, the Tribunal may order a new PO IL to be issued at a future date.
9A Tribunal has scheduled a telephone conference call on Wednesday, March 19, 2025 at 9 a.m. .
1Individual(s) are directed to call 416-212-8012 or (Toll Free) 1-866-633-0848 on the assigned date at the correct time. When prompted, enter the conference line code 4779874 to be connected to the call. It is the responsibility of the person(s) participating in the call to ensure that they are properly connected to the call and at the correct time. Questions prior to the call may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
10The Member is not seized but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise.
ORDER
14THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT:
a. A telephone conference call to proceed on Wednesday, March 19, 2025 at 9 a.m.
“Yasna Faghani”
YASNA FAGHANI
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.