Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 11, 2026
CASE NO.: OLT-24-000742
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Forty-Six Spadina Ave. Limited and Capitol Buildings Properties Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: To permit development of 30-storey mixed-use building with 550 residential units
Reference Number: 22 188521 STE 10 OZ
Property Address: 40-62 Spadina Avenue and 378 Wellington Street West
Municipality/UT: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000742
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000742
OLT Case Name: Forty-Six Spadina Ave. Limited and Capitol Buildings Properties Inc. 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: Forty-Six Spadina Ave. Limited and Capitol Buildings Properties Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit development of 30-storey mixed-use building with 550 residential units
Reference Number: 22 188521 STE 10 OZ
Property Address: 40-62 Spadina Avenue and 378 Wellington Street West
Municipality/UT: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000743
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000742
OLT Case Name:
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 11, Sched. A
Appellant: Forty-Six Spadina Ave. Limited and Capitol Buildings Properties Inc.
Subject: Site Plan
Description: To permit development of 30-storey mixed-use building with 550 residential units
Reference Number: 22 188520 STE 10 SA
Property Address: 40-62 Spadina Avenue and 378 Wellington Street West
Municipality/UT: Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000744
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000742
OLT Case Name:
BEFORE:
S. BRAUN
VICE-CHAIR
Monday, the 8th day of June, 2026
THESE MATTERS, having come before the Tribunal as a Written Hearing on June 8, 2026;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been advised of a settlement reached between Forty-Six Spadina Ave. Limited and Capitol Buildings Properties Inc. (“Appellant”) and the City of Toronto (“City”) in relation to the appeals pursuant to ss. 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been advised that the added Party, Shell Canada Limited (“Shell”), does not object to the settlement between the Appellant and the City;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been further advised that the Participant, Haishan Qian, was provided with a copy of the materials in support of the proposed settlement on May 25, 2026 (after which no further communication was received from Ms. Qian by either the Parties or the Tribunal);
AND THE TRIBUNAL having reviewed the materials submitted in support of the proposed settlement, on the consent of all Parties, which request:
an Interim Order allowing the Planning Act appeals, in part, and approving the draft Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and draft Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) (collectively, “proposed instruments”), in principle, withholding a Final Order pending confirmation of the satisfaction of several pre-requisite conditions detailed below; and
adjournment of the City of Toronto Act appeal, sine die;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having considered the submissions of the Parties along with the aforementioned materials, which include sworn Affidavit evidence from Alex Savanyu, Registered Professional Planner, whom the Tribunal herein recognizes as qualified to provide opinion evidence in the area of land use planning;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Mr. Savanyu, which provides a detailed overview of the Subject Lands (40-62 Spadina Avenue and 378 Wellington Street West) and their development history, as well as the proposed instruments, the development they would permit and a comprehensive review of the applicable legislation, policies and guidelines and the ways in which the proposed instruments meet all necessary legislative tests;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Mr. Savanyu, that the proposed instruments, inter alia:
allow for intensification in the form of transit-supportive mixed-use development at a scale commensurate with the locational and heritage attributes of the Subject lands, creating new housing options and optimizing existing and planned infrastructure within a strategic growth area, as well as Major Transit Station Areas;
provide a full range of housing, aiding in the achievement of complete communities, with a unit mix that meets the requirements of the DSP to provide a total of 40% two- and three-bedroom units;
contribute both residential and non-residential gross floor area to help achieve minimum density targets specified for the Subject Lands; and
conform with and appropriately address public realm, built form and heritage conservation policies in the OP and transition policies in the KSP, achieving compatibility with the existing and planned context of the surrounding area;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been satisfied by the evidence, that the proposed instruments represent good planning in the public interest, demonstrate appropriate regard for applicable matters of provincial interest in s. 2 of the Planning Act and consistency with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been further satisfied that the proposed Official Plan Amendment aligns with the objectives of the City of Toronto Official Plan (“OP”), including the Downtown Secondary Plan (“DSP”) and the King-Spadina Secondary Plan (“KSP”), and the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment will conform with the OP, including the DSP and KSP, as proposed to be amended;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been additionally satisfied that all applicable guidelines have been appropriately addressed, including but not limited to: Tall Building Design Guidelines;Growing Up Guidelines (Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities); and the King Spadina Urban Design Guidelines;
NOW THEREFORE THE TRIBUNAL MAKES THE FOLLOWING INTERIM ORDER:
The appeals pursuant to subsections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act are allowed, in part, on an interim basis contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction, or receipt of the pre-requisite matters identified in paragraphs 2 (a) to (g) below, and the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Attachments 1 and 2, respectively to this Interim Order, are hereby approved in principle.
The Tribunal will withhold issuance of a Final Order contingent upon confirmation from the City Solicitor of the satisfaction of the following pre-requisite matters:
a) The final form and content of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Executive Director, Development Review;
b) The Appellant has provided confirmation of water, sanitary, and stormwater capacity to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, or the determination of whether holding provisions are required in the Zoning By-law Amendment;
c) The Appellant has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Development Engineering as they relate to the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;
d) The Appellant has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Urban Forestry, Tree Protection and Plan Review as they relate to the Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the Supervisor, Tree Protection and Plan Review;
e) The Appellant has provided an updated Conservation Plan, reflecting the settlement proposal and prepared by a qualified heritage consultant, for 40-46 Spadina Avenue, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, City Planning;
f) The Appellant has submitted an Archeological Assessment to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; and
g) The City has conveyed to the Owner a portion of the public lane abutting 58-62 Spadina Avenue, known as Part 3, Plan 66R-22924, to be part of the development site, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services, the Director, Real Estate Services and the City Solicitor.
The Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final drafts of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment, and the Tribunal may be spoken to in the event any matter or matters should arise in connection with the implementation of this Interim Order.
If the Parties do not submit the final drafts of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment and provide confirmation that all other contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order set out in paragraph 2 above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order by June 8, 2027, the Parties shall provide a written status report to the Tribunal by that date, as to the expected timing of same.
The Appeal pursuant to s. 114(5) of the City of Toronto Act is adjourned sine die.
“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