Tepfam Holdings Inc. v. Toronto (City), 2026 CanLII 12505

ISSUE DATE: February 11, 2026

CASE NO(S).: OLT-25-000834

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

Appellant: Tepfam Holdings Inc.

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

Description: To facilitate the development of two mixed use residential towers.

Reference Number: 24 246869 STE 14 OZ

Property Address: 280 Commissioners Street (Part of Block D Registered PLAN 554-E City of Toronto)

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No: OLT-25-000834

OLT Case Name: TEPFAM HOLDINGS INC. v. Toronto (City)

Heard: February 10, 2026 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Tepfam Holdings Inc.

A. Platt K. Vergis-Mayo (in absentia)

City of Toronto

J. Davidson

115 Saulter South LP

M. Laskin A. Benedetti (in absentia)

Toronto Port Authority

S. Judson A. Jeanrie (in absentia)

PT Studios Inc.

L. English I. Tang (in absentia)

Atura Power

A. Mihailescu R. Aburto (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HARDY ON FEBRUARY 10, 2026 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This is the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) conducted in these proceedings before the Tribunal concerning an appeal brought by Tepfam Holdings Inc. (“Appellant”) pursuant to s. 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”) relating to the City of Toronto’s (“City”) failure to adopt the Appellant’s application for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”). The OPA pertains to lands municipally known as 280 Commissioners Street, Toronto (“subject property”).

2The OPA is required to facilitate a proposed development consisting of two residential towers with a shared mixed-use base building. The proposed towers are 40 and 45 storeys in height and includes 937 residential dwellings, retail space, Production, Interactive and Creative uses and self-storage.

CONFIRMATION OF NOTICE

3The Tribunal confirmed with Counsel that there were no known issues with service of Notice of the CMC and as such, no further notice is required. The Tribunal received the Affidavit of Service of Notice of Darlene Power sworn on January 14, 2026, which was marked as Exhibit 1 to the CMC.

STATUS REQUESTS

4In advance of the CMC, the Tribunal received four requests for Party Status from 115 Saulter South LP, Toronto Port Authority, PT Studios Inc. and Atura Power, which were together marked as Exhibit 2.

5In its written status request form, 115 Saulter South LP explained that it owns land immediately north of the subject property and has active planning applications pertaining to its property. Consequently, it has an interest in the proceedings with respect to the built form relationship between the two properties, coordination of infrastructure and other matters. At the CMC, counsel for 115 Saulter South LP submitted that at this point, it does not intend on taking an active role in the proceedings but reserves the right to do so if the proposal is revised. On consent of the Parties, the Tribunal granted 115 Saulter South LP status as a Party to the Appeal.

6In its written status request form, Toronto Port Authority explained that it owns Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport and as such, has an interest in the protection of airspace. At the CMC, counsel for the Toronto Port Authority submitted that it intends to monitor the proceedings to ensure any impacts on airspace are not compromised. On consent of the Parties, the Tribunal granted Toronto Port Authority status as a Party to the Appeal.

7In its written status request form, PT Studios Inc. provided detailed reasons for its interest and its ability to assist the Tribunal in fully and completely adjudicating the appeal. PT Studios’ lands are located immediately south of the subject property, separated by Commissioner Street, where it operates an active film studio. PT Studios submitted that it has a direct interest in the built form of the proposed development and in contributing to a coordinated approach to development on Commissioners Street. At the CMC, counsel for PT Studios Inc. submitted that its issues were similar to those of the City, and it anticipates calling two witnesses. On consent of the Parties, the Tribunal granted PT Studios Inc. status as a Party to the Appeal.

8In its written status request form, Atura Power provided detailed reasons for its interest and ability to assist the Tribunal in fully and completely adjudicating the appeal. Being a corporation operating an electric utility, Atura Power is a specified person pursuant to s. 1(1) of the Act and owns lands located approximately 700 metres away from the subject property. At the CMC, counsel for Atura Power submitted that its main concerns relate to air quality and it anticipates calling 1-2 witnesses. On consent of the Parties, the Tribunal granted Atura Power status as a Party to the Appeal.

9There were no other individuals or entities present at the CMC requesting status in the proceedings.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT / MEDIATION

10Counsel for the Appellant advised that discussions around settlement and mediation were premature at this point given the Parties were not confirmed until this CMC. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that some discussions had been entered into regarding potential settlement and further, it was their intention to reach out to all Parties following the CMC to discuss the potential for settlement and/or mediation.

PROCEDURAL ORDER AND HEARING DATES

11In advance of the CMC, the Appellant filed a draft Procedural Order with the Tribunal. The Tribunal reviewed the draft Procedural Order with the Parties and directed counsel for the Appellant to file a final draft Procedural Order with the Tribunal by February 27, 2026.

12The Tribunal Member will remain available, schedule permitting, to assist if any issues arise in finalizing the draft Procedural Order.

13Following a discussion at the CMC related to further appearances, the Tribunal declined to set a second CMC directing the Parties to contact the Case Coordinator if a further CMC is required. The Tribunal scheduled a 19-day video hearing for the appeal commencing Tuesday, April 6, 2027, at 10 a.m. ending on Friday, May 7, 2027. The Tribunal will not be sitting on April 16, 22, 23 and May 2-3, 2027. The hearing details are as follows:

14Parties and/or Participants 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/719383509

Access code: 719-383-509

15Parties and/or Participants 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

16Persons 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: 719-383-509.

17Individuals 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.

18As of March 30, 2026, all hearing events are governed by the Tribunal’s Artificial Intelligence Practice Direction. This Practice Direction requires a party, participant, or witness to include a declaration within each submitted document if generative AI was used to create or generate content.

ORDER

19THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the case management directives above are so ordered.

20There will be no further notice and this Member is not seized.

“C. Hardy”

c. hardy

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.