Toronto Local Appeal Body
40 Orchard View Blvd, suite 253 Toronto, Ontario M4R 1B9
Date:
2024-09-16
23 204180 S45 03 TLAB
Toronto (City) v Ambient Designs Ltd, 2024 ONTLAB 260
MOTION DECISION AND ORDER
Issuance Date:
September 12, 2024
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER Section 45(12), subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (the "Act")
Appellant(s):
CITY OF TORONTO
Applicant(s):
AMBIENT DESIGNS LTD.
Property Address:
19 BRANCH AVE
COA File No.:
23 175993 WET 03 MV (A0288/23EYK)
TLAB Case File No.:
23 204180 S45 03 TLAB
Hearing Date(s):
August 28, 2024
Deadline Date for Closing Submissions/Undertakings:
Decision Delivered By:
TLAB Panel Member S. MAKUCH
REGISTERED PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS:
People Type
First Initial. Last Name
Representative
Applicant
AMBIENT DESIGNS LTD.
Appellant
CITY OF TORONTO
A. SANDHU
Party
E. PORRITT
S. PORRITT M. COOK
Participant
L. GALLANT
INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
This matter was set down for a hearing on August 28, 2024 so that I could be spoken to regarding an issue arising out of my decision of April 8, 2024. In that decision I required that moneys being paid, pursuant to s. 3.2.1.12 of the City’s Official Plan, by the landlord to a tenant required to vacate premises for which variances were being granted, be held in trust by the City until the tenant vacated the property. The City has requested that the decision be altered to the extent that it cannot be the trustee of such funds paid under a Tenant Assistance and Relocation Agreement required under that section, and thus the hearing date was set so that issue could be spoken to.
Section 3.2.1.12 of the Official Plan states as follows: “New development that would have the effect of removing all or part of a private building or related group of buildings and would result in the loss of one or more rental units or dwelling rooms will not be approved unless an acceptable tenant relocation and assistance plan is provided to lessen hardship for existing tenants.”
The parties to the matter were the landlord who requested the variances, the tenant who opposed the variances and the City who opposed the variances unless payments were made pursuant to the Official Plan.
THE LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND FRAMEWORK
- Provincial Interest - S. 2
A decision of the Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB) shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest, enumerated as (a) – (s) in the Planning Act.
- Provincial Policy – S. 3
A decision of the Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB) must be consistent with the 2020 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) for the subject area.
SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE
- No evidence or argument had been heard regarding this issue of trusteeship at the hearing respecting the merits of the variances. The landlord and tenant were unable to attend the hearing respecting the trusteeship on the date the matter was to be spoken to as they had to attend an Adjudicative Case Conference at the Landlord and Tenant Board concerning the rental unit located at the subject property. A late request for an adjournment was made.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
- There is no reason for an adjournment not to be granted so that the parties, the land lord and the tenant, affected by the payment can be heard if such is still required after the Adjudication of the Landlord and Tenant Board. Therefore this matter is adjourned sine die to a date set by staff as soon as possible.
CONCLUSION
- The hearing to allow the TLAB to be spoken to respecting the trusteeship of the City under s.3.2.1.12 of the City of Toronto Official Plan should be adjourned to the earliest possible date.
DECISION AND ORDER
- The hearing to permit the TLAB to be spoken to regarding the trusteeship of the City of Toronto respecting funds required to be paid under s. 3.2.1.12of the City of Toronto Official Plan should be adjourned sine to the earliest possible date.
S. Makuch
Panel Member