Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 1, 2026
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000835
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Ports Toronto
Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 409
Description: To permit OPA 409 and ZBL 702-2024
Reference Number: 24 110589 STE 14 OZ
Property Address: Villiers Island
Municipality/UT: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000835
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000835
OLT Case Name: Ports Toronto & Lafarge Canada Inc v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellant: Ports Toronto
Applicant: City of Toronto
Subject: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment No. 702-2024
Description: To permit OPA 409 and ZBL 702-2024
Reference Number: 24 110589 STE 14 OZ
Property Address: Villiers Island
Municipality/UT: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000836
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000835
Heard: May 22, 2026 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties City of Toronto ("City")
Counsel/Representative* Jason Davidson Laura Bisset
Parties Toronto Port Authority ("Appellant")
Counsel/Representative* Andrew Jeanrie Samuel Judson (in absentia)
Parties 2034055 Ontario Limited; 1337194 Ontario Inc. ("309 Cherry St. Owners")
Counsel/Representative* Sidonia Tomasella Naomi Mares Patrick Harrington (in absentia)
Parties Amrize Canada Inc. ("Amrize")
Counsel/Representative* Alexander Adams* Kim Mullin (in absentia)
Parties Waterfront Revitalization Corporation ("Waterfront Toronto")
Counsel/Representative* Andrew Biggart
Parties Atura Power ("Atura")
Counsel/Representative* Alice Mihailescu Roberto Aburto (in absentia)
DECISION DELIVERED BY W. DANIEL BEST AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal convened a Merit Hearing to consider a settlement regarding an appeal brought forward for the above-noted matter.
2The two planning instruments to be modified before the Tribunal in this proceeding are Official Plan Amendment No. 409 (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law 702-2024 (“ZBL”), which are a result of a long development history in the City’s Port Lands. Specifically, the two instruments are for the area known as Ookwemin Minising (formerly known as Villiers Island).
3Ookwemin Minising was created as a result of the Port Lands Flood Protection Project. This project rerouted the Don River through a previous industrial area of the waterfront.
4Ookwemin Minising is approximately 98 acres, with approximately 50 acres of parks and green spaces, anchored by Biidaasige Park. The remaining, approximate 48 acres is considered developable lands.
5Ookwemin Minising is one of four districts identified for mixed-use residential development in the Port Lands.
6The boundaries of Ookwemin Minising are as follows:
To the north is Keating Channel.
To the west is the Inner Harbour.
To the south is Polson Slip.
To the east is the Don River.
7The OPA updates the Port Lands Area Specific Policy of the Central Waterfront Secondary Plan generally as it relates to Ookwemin Minising, planning for and regulating development on Ookwemin Minising, defined by the re-naturalized Don River.
8The OPA updates policies for Ookwemin Minising relating to built form, affordable housing, and land use through the introduction of meanwhile uses and expanded commercial use permissions, as well as community infrastructure, affordable housing, views, and parkland policies.
9The following modifications to the OPA to implement the settlement are as follows:
Warehousing as a permitted land use in Mixed Use Residential areas in Ookwemin Minising and manufacturing and warehousing uses must be fully enclosed in a building.
Removing the provisions that meanwhile uses will be specified through the development of a precinct plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) and may be informed by a “Meanwhile Use Strategy,” which may include Urban Design Guidelines.
Clarifying that meanwhile uses must not preclude the long-term development of Ookwemin Minising as envisioned in the Central Waterfront Secondary Plan and Port Lands Area Specific Policy.
Removing the provisions that meanwhile uses in areas designated Parks and Open Space Areas may be longer term “Meanwhile Uses” up to 20 years, and that they will be ancillary to existing parks in the vicinity.
Clarifying that park access agreements, license agreements, and/or any other similar agreement to facilitate meanwhile uses will only apply where necessary.
10The ZBA does not apply to privately-owned lands at 65 Ookwemin Street (formerly 309 Cherry Street), 5 Ookwemin Street (formerly 275 Cherry Street), and 16 Munition Street.
11The ZBA implements the Port Lands Area Specific Policy, as amended by OPA, through land use permissions, heights, densities, and built form performance standards.
12The following modifications to the ZBA to implement the settlement are tied to building heights, density, land use and a holding provision as follows:
Revising the mechanism for measuring heights, referring to sea level instead of the grade.
Converting all permitted heights reflected in the ZBA to the baseline estimate of sea level for Ookwemin Minising (an increase of 77 metres)
Setting the heights as being inclusive of mechanical penthouses and other permitted encroachments.
Revising the tower heights to accommodate the flight procedure information provided to the City, while providing for approximately 9,000 units.
Revising the floor space index to reflect the changes in tower heights.
Adding permissions for manufacturing and warehousing uses that are fully enclosed in a building in the CRE Commercial Residential Zone.
Removing size restriction on manufacturing uses in the CRE Commercial Residential Zone.
Removing restriction that transportation uses and the meanwhile use of public parking be operated by the City.
Adding clarity on the completion of a noise and quality study required to lift the holding provision, including that the owner provide a copy of the study to all identified industrial and port operators, utilities or major facilities in the Port Lands.
13With the exception of the 309 Cherry Street Owners, all Parties were in support of the proposed modifications.
14Ms. Tomasella, Counsel for the 309 Cherry Street Owners, advised that her clients were not provided sufficient information, data, methodology or opinions to support the settlement.
15By correspondence dated April 30, 2026, Ms. Tomasella advised:
“After being informed of this settlement, a request was made by my clients (2034055 Ontario Limited/1337194 Ontario Inc.) to the City and the Toronto Port Authority for additional information to substantiate the rationale for the heights referenced in Zoning Bylaw 702-2024. The information provided was not responsive to my clients’ request.
Given that Zoning Bylaw 702-2024 does not apply to my clients’ lands, it is not my clients’ intention to actively participate in the Tribunal’s consideration of the proposed settlement. However, given that my clients have to date not been provided with sufficient information to understand the proposed settlement and the data/methodology upon which it is based, my request is for written confirmation that the Tribunal’s consideration of this settlement will in no way prejudice my clients’ lands or my clients’ ability to challenge this information in other proceedings.
In short, my clients’ lack of opposition to the proposed settlement should not be taken as my clients’ acceptance of the settlement’s contents, including the information, data and opinions being proffered in support of this settlement.”
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
16When considering an appeal of an application to amend an OPA filed pursuant to s. 17 of the Planning Act (“Act”) and an application to amend a ZBA filed pursuant to s. 34 of the Act, the Tribunal must have regard to matters of Provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act and to the Decision of the City Council, and the information it considered by it pursuant to s. 2.1(1) of the Act.
17Section 3(5) of the Act requires that the decisions of the Tribunal affecting planning matters be consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS”).
18The Tribunal must also be satisfied the ZBA conforms with the Official Plan(s) in effect.
19Overall, the Tribunal must be satisfied that the OPA and ZBA represent good planning and are in the public interest.
SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCE
20In support of the proposed settlement, the following Exhibits were filed:
Exhibit 1: Affidavit of Erika Ivanic received on May 15, 2026.
Exhibit 2: Ookwemin Minising Overview for OLT Member received May 21, 2026.
Exhibit 3: Affidavit of Sean Hertel received on May 19, 2026
Exhibit 4: Correspondence of Ms. Tomasella dated April 30, 2026, received on May 1, 2026.
21Ms. Ivanic is a registered planner and a Project Manager with the City in the Development Review Division, Community Planning. Based on her experience and expertise outlined in her curriculum vitae, the Tribunal qualified her to provide opinion evidence as an expert in land-use planning.
22Ms. Ivanic stated that the planning instruments as modified have appropriate regard to matters of Provincial interest. Ms. Ivanic highlighted that the OPA and ZBA will promote:
The protection of ecological systems by re-naturalizing the area of the Don River.
The conservation and management of natural resources by the emphasis of parks and green spaces.
The conservation of features of significant cultural and historical significance through the cooperation with the First Nations Peoples.
The development of an orderly, safe and healthy communities by establishing active transportation and pedestrian friendly networks.
The promotion of built forms that are well designed, encourage a sense of place and provide for public spaces that are high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant within the urban boundary and existing settlement area.
23Ms. Ivancic stated the planning instruments as modified to the Tribunal are consistent with the PPS as follows:
Responding to the Toronto Port Authority’s concerns respecting the long-term operational and economic role of major facilities and airports, specifically the Port and Billy Bishop Airport.
Ensuring compatibility between sensitive land uses and port/industrial uses.
Providing for appropriate housing options and densities to meet current and future needs.
Providing densities and a mix of land uses which efficiently use land and resources and optimize existing and planned infrastructure and public service facilities.
24The former City Official Plan (“former COP”) is the in-force Official Plan for the Island.
25According to Ms. Ivanic’s affidavit and supporting documents, the former COP supports a waterfront precinct planning approach and sets out a policy framework, including goals and objectives for the waterfront.
26Schedule E-2 of the affidavit states:
“…the primary goal for the waterfront, as set out in Policy 14.2., is to promote increased and sustainable public enjoyment and use of the area by ensuring that future developments and actions by both the public and private sectors help to achieve objectives such as improving public access to the waterfront, increasing the amount of public parkland, and enhancing the quality of the waterfront as a place.”
27According to Ms. Ivanic’s affidavit and supporting documents, the draft ZBA proposes:
A simple zoning envelope to allow for architectural innovation and creativity, building design approaches to achieve the climate-positive objectives, and to allow tower location to be informed by policy criteria, built form guidelines and relevant studies submitted at the site plan stage.
Public lands on Ookwemin Minising will be rezoned to implement the proposed land uses. Development lands designated "CRE – Commercial Residential Employment," the Parks areas are zoned "OR – Open Space Recreational," and the river valley is zoned - "ON – Open Space - Natural Zone."
Permitted uses have associated conditions, such as maximum sizes for some entertainment, industrial, or commercial activation uses, so these uses can be incorporated into a mixed-use residential building within a dense urban condition.
SUMMARY
28Ms. Ivanic opined that the settlement represents good planning, and the proposed modifications to the planning instruments address the relevant matters of Provincial interest identified in s. 2 of the Act, is consistent with the PPS, and conforms with the applicable former COP. Ms. Ivanic recommended, the Tribunal approve the OPA and ZBA instruments as presented.
FINDINGS AND DISPOSITION
29The Tribunal accepts the uncontroverted planning opinion evidence of Ms. Ivanic in its entirety. The Tribunal finds the Settlement Proposal addresses the relevant matters of Provincial interest identified in s. 2 of the Act, is representative of good land use planning, is consistent with the PPS, and conforms with the former COP.
ORDER
30THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed, in part, and the Official Plan for the City of Toronto is amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order.
31THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed, in part, and directs the City of Toronto to amend By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, as set out in Attachment 2 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the clerk of the City of Toronto to assign a number to this by-law for record keeping purposes.
“W. Daniel Best”
W. DANIEL BEST
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.
Attachment 1
Attachment 2