Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Tribunal d’appel de l’aménagement local

ISSUE DATE: January 05, 2021 CASE NO(S).: PL030514

The Municipal Board (the “OMB”) is continued under the name Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”), and any reference to the Ontario Municipal Board or Board in any publication of the Tribunal is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P. 13, as amended

Appellant: See Schedule “1” Subject: New Official Plan for the City of , as adopted by By-law No. 1082-2002 Municipality: City of Toronto LPAT Case No.: PL030412 LPAT File No.: PL030412 (various files see Schedule “1”) LPAT Case Name: 3C Lakeshore Inc. v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P. 13, as amended

Appellant: See Schedule “2” Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 257 Municipality: City of Toronto LPAT Case No.: PL030514 LPAT File No.: O030096

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Appellant: See Schedule “3” Subject: By-law No. 1049-2006 Municipality: City of Toronto LPAT Case No.: PL030514 LPAT File No.: R060297

2 PL030514

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

Applicant and Appellant: 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home Depot) Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of City of Toronto to adopt the requested amendment Existing Designation: Central and Proposed Designation: Site Specific (To be determined) Purpose: To permit Commercial and Residential uses Property Address/Description: 429 Lakeshore Boulevard East and 324 Municipality: City of Toronto Approval Authority File No.: 05 171818 STE 28 OZ LPAT Case No.: PL060106 LPAT File No.: O060034

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home Depot) Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 438-86 – Neglect of application by City of Toronto Existing Zoning: Mixed Industrial-commercial category Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined) Purpose: To permit Commercial and Residential uses Property Address/Description: 429 Lakeshore Boulevard East and 324 Cherry Street Municipality: City of Toronto Municipal File No.: 05 171818 STE 28 OZ LPAT Case No.: PL060106 LPAT File No.: Z060015

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P. 13, as amended

Appellant: See Schedule “4” Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 388 Municipality: City of Toronto Municipal File No. 10 117319 SPS 00 OZ LPAT Case No.: PL101091 LPAT File No.: PL101091

3 PL030514

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P. 13, as amended

Appellant: See Schedule “5” Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 389 Municipality: City of Toronto Municipal File No. 10 117319 SPS 00 OZ LPAT Case No.: PL101091 LPAT File No.: PL101092

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Appellant: See Schedule “6” Subject: By-law No. 1174-2010 Municipality: City of Toronto LPAT Case No.: PL101091 LPAT File No.: PL101093

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: CASTAN Waterfront Development Inc., 1147390 Ontario Limited, 161774 Ontario Limited, 2017919 Ontario Limited and Marland III Corporation (“Castan”) Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 438-86 – Neglect of application by City of Toronto Existing Zoning: Industrial IC Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined) Purpose: To permit Commercial and Residential uses Property Address/Description: 351 & 369 East (Victory Soya Silo Site) Municipality: City of Toronto Municipal File No.: 07 143093 STE 28 OZ LPAT Case No.: PL101091 LPAT File No.: PL101094

Schedule “1”

Appellants to the City of Toronto New Official Plan (PL030412):

4 PL030514

LPAT FILE Appe Schedul APPELLANT NAME No. al No. e O030146 Pier 27 Toronto Inc. (formerly Avro Quay Limited) 27 B O030219 Castan Waterfront Development Inc. 42 B O030138 Harbour Remediation and Transfer Inc. 66 E O030275 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home Depot) 68 B O030167 Lafarge Canada Inc. 77 E O030121 Ontario Power Generation 99 D

Schedule “2”

Appellants to the Official Plan Amendment No. 257 of the City of Toronto (PL030514 – O030096):

File No. APPELLANT NAME Site O030219 1147390 Ontario Limited and Queen’s 215 Lake Shore Blvd. E. and 178 & Quay Avante Limited 180 Queens Quay East (“Fedex South Greenland Lakeside Development Site”) Company (“Fedex North Site”) 2017919 Ontario Limited and Marland III 351 & 369 Lake Shore Blvd. E. Corporation (“Victory Soya Silo Site”) Marland I Corporation and Marland II 20 Polson St. and 176 Cherry St. Corporation (“Polson Quay”) O030275 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home 429 Lake Shore Blvd. E. and 324 Depot) Cherry St. O030146 Pier 27 Toronto Inc. (formerly Avro 25 Queens Quay East Quay Limited) Canadian Pacific Express & Transport 150 Commissioners St. & 155 Villers Ltd. St. Concord Adex Development Corp Railway Land Central & West Korex Don Valley ULC 21 O030167 Lafarge Canada Inc. 54 Polson St and 535 Commissioners St Ontario Film and Television Studio Central Waterfront Secondary plan Owners Association area O030121 Ontario Power Generation 440 Unwin Avenue Michael Shapcott (Toronto Disaster General appeal – Housing Policy Relief Committee)

5 PL030514

Schedule “3”

Appellants to the Zoning By-law 1049-2006 of the City of Toronto (PL030514 – R060297):

APPELLANT NAME Site Redpath Sugar Ltd. (formerly Tate & Lyle) 95 Queens Quay East QQE 162 Inc. (formerly Gemess Investments Ltd.) 162 Queens Quay East Kintork (Ontario) Limited and Nuko Investments 143-177 Lake Shore Blvd E & 130 Limited Queens Quay E. 1147390 Ontario Limited 215 Lake Shore Blvd. E. and 178 & Queen’s Quay Avante Limited 180 Queens Quay East (“Fedex South Greenland Lakeside Development Company Site”) (“Fedex North Site”)

Schedule “4”

Appellants to the Official Plan Amendment No. 388 of the City of Toronto (PL101091):

APPELLANT NAME Site 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home Depot) 429 Lakeshore Blvd. E. & 324 Cherry St. 1307547 Ontario Limited, 1341665 Ontario 15-55 Polson St. & 222-238 Cherry St. Limited, & 1536165 Ontario Limited Royal Canadian Yacht Club 11 Parliament St.; 130 & 150 Cherry St. Lafarge Canada Inc. 54 Polson St. Studios Inc. 225 Commissioners St. 2017919 Ontario Limited and Marland III 351 & 369 Lake Shore Blvd. E. Corporation (“Victory Soya Silo Site”) Marland I Corporation and Marland II Corporation 20 Polson St. and 176 Cherry St. (“Polson Quay”) 1337194 Ontario Inc. & 2034055 Ontario Limited 309 Cherry St.

Schedule “5”

Appellants to the Official Plan Amendment No. 389 of the City of Toronto (PL101092):

APPELLANT NAME Site 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home Depot) 429 Lakeshore Blvd. & 324 Cherry St. Royal Canadian Yacht Club 11 Parliament St.; 130 & 150 Cherry

6 PL030514

St. Toronto Port Authority 30 Bay St. & 60 Harbour St.

Schedule “6”

Appellants to the Zoning By-law 1174-2010 of the City of Toronto (PL101093):

APPELLANT NAME Site 3C Lakeshore Inc. (formerly Home Depot) 429 Lakeshore Blvd. E. & 324 Cherry St. Royal Canadian Yacht Club 11 Parliament St.; 130 & 150 Cherry St. Lafarge Canada Inc. 54 Polson St. Joseph Haupert 307 Lakeshore Blvd. E. 2017919 Ontario Limited and Marland III 351 & 369 Lake Shore Blvd. E. Corporation (“Victory Soya Silo Site”) Marland I Corporation and Marland II Corporation 20 Polson St. and 176 Cherry St. (“Polson Quay”) 1337194 Ontario Inc. & 2034055 Ontario Limited 309 Cherry St.

Heard: December 18, 2020 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties Counsel

City of Toronto R.A. Robinson, S. O’Connor and L. Pinder

Toronto District School Board P. Patterson

Toronto Waterfront Revitalization C. Kapelos and A. Biggart Corp.

Lafarge Canada Inc. K. Mullin

Ontario Power Generation Inc. M. Cicchino

Studios of America Q. Annibale and B. Ruddick

Manufacturers Life Insurance C. Williams, L. Dean and A. Everton* Company

Cadillac Fairview Corporation Ltd. M. Laskin

7 PL030514

1307547 Ontario Limited and N.T. Macos others

Toronto Port Authority A. Jeanrie

2034055 Ontario Ltd. and P. Harrington and S. Tomasella 1337194 Ontario Inc. (309 Cherry Street)

Hydro One Networks Inc. M. Engelberg and R. Dhillon

Toronto Waterfront Studios I. Tang and L. English Development Inc.

Tribal, Castlepoint, Kerbel Inc. D. Baker and A. Flarity

CRH Canada Group Inc. J. Kahn

Toronto Hydro-Electric System J. Debono and A. Kurtz Limited

DECISION DELIVERED BY BRYAN W. TUCKEY AND G.C.P. BISHOP AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

[1] The Local Planning Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) conducted a further Case Management Conference (“CMC”) by video on Friday, December 18, 2020. The purpose of this CMC is to assess the impact of the Tribunal led mediation on: the hearing length and timing; the reduction or refinement of issues before the Tribunal; hearing organization; determine the date when the hearing will commence; and establish key dates along with submission requirements for the hearing

[2] The CMC was attended by Counsel for all 16 parties who participated as required in the discussion. There are no participant representatives present.

[3] The Tribunal asked the Counsel for the City. Mr. Robinson to outline the results of the mediation process. The Tribunal learned that all parties had met by video on Thursday, December 17, 2020 and have come to a consensus on a preferred go forward strategy. With his in mind, all other Counsel for parties were content to have

8 PL030514

Mr. Robinson lead the Tribunal through the preferred strategy. Only those with additional comments or advice to the Tribunal spoke.

[4] Mr. Robinson outlined in detail the results of the mediation sessions and subsequent Toronto (“City”) Council direction on matters that are either settled; moving towards a settlement; or issues that remain requiring a Tribunal hearing. All parties have taken full advantage of the Tribunal led mediation as directed by the decision issued on September 11, 2020.

[5] Considerable progress is made on many of the issues and Mr. Robinson has reported to City Council on two separate occasions describing the progress and seeking instruction. At the December 17, 2020 meeting, Council approved a proposed settlement with several of the parties in this proceeding.

[6] He informed the Tribunal that the status of parties are now classified into three categories being: those who have settled; parties where there are outstanding noise and compatibility issues; and parties whose issues have not been resolved and will be subject to a hearing of the Tribunal.

[7] Settlements have been reached with six parties. As the direction from City Council is very recent, Counsel for the respective parties are continuing to work with City staff to finalize appropriate Minutes of Settlement. Most are very close to being finalized and parties advocated that time be held in the Tribunals schedule at the end of January 2021 so settlements could be presented for the Tribunals consideration.

[8] The second category is outstanding noise and compatibly issues between the City and six of the parties. Parties are very close to agreement on the policy issues but must complete additional technical work to determine the policies appropriateness, and impact of these policy changes on their client’s property. A Terms of Reference is being completed to coordinate and manage required modelling. When the Terms of Reference are completed, technical experts will meet to evaluate noise compatibility and determine impacts on their client’s lands. Appellant parties were canvased and

9 PL030514

were supportive of the City’s approach. All parties are optimistic that the noise and compatibility issues may be resolved. A status update will be provided to the Tribunal at the January 2021 settlement hearings.

[9] The final category are the three parties where the City could not find an appropriate settlement of the issues. A full hearing on these matters would be required albeit with a scoped Issues List and fewer expert witnesses being required. A shorter hearing will be the result. All parties suggested that the most effective and efficient time for a full hearing to commence would be the end of March or early April 2021.

[10] Parties were canvased and supported the suggested timing for both the settlement hearings and the hearing of the merits.

[11] The Tribunal advised that it is scheduling only video hearings in 2021. With the reduced number of parties expected at the full hearing, the Tribunal’s video platform can accommodate. Arbitration Place provided the service for the Tribunal led mediation. Should the parties prefer the Arbitration Place option, it is the parties responsibly to determine a cost sharing arrangement suitable to all. This matter may be reviewed at the January settlement hearing as required.

[12] The Tribunal agrees with the strategy to complete these matters and determined the following:

a. A four day settlement hearing will commence on Tuesday, January 26, 2021. Three items are required prior to the settlement hearing being:

i. The City will prepare a revised Procedural Order to define submission dates; revised witness and Issues Lists; and an order of evidence to manage the Tuesday, April 6, 2021 hearing;

ii. the necessary affidavits of expert witnesses who will be offering evidence at the January 26, 2021 settlement hearing;

10 PL030514

iii. The Procedural Order and all necessary affidavits will be submitted to the Tribunal no later than 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday,January 19, 2021; and

b. A total of three weeks will be required to deal with the contested planning matters. An eighteen day hearing will commence Tuesday, April 6, 2021 ending Thursday, April 29, 2021. Due to the loss of one of the days discussed at the CMC, the Tribunal will assist by sitting an extra half hour a day if required to assist with the hearing work plan. The Tribunal will hear the noise and compatibility issues (if remain outstanding) at the convenience of the Tribunal and the parties. The Tribunal will require two hard copies of all material required for the hearing no later than 4:30 p.m. Tueday, March 30, 2021.

[13] A Settlement Hearing is scheduled for four days to proceed by video on Tuesday, January 26, 2021 at 10 a.m.

[14] Parties and Participants are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/616898365

Access code: 616-898-365

[15] Parties and 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 GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

[16] Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or Toll Free 1-888-299-1889. The

11 PL030514

access code is 616-898-365.

[17] Individuals 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 CMC by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

[18] A hearing is scheduled for eighteen days to proceed by video on Tuesday, April 6, 2021 at 10 a.m. ending Thursday April 29, 2020.

[19] Parties and Participants are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/580892325

Access code: 580-892-325

[20] Parties and 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 GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

[21] Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or Toll Free 1-888-299-1889. The access code is 580-892-325.

[22] Individuals 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 CMC by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having

12 PL030514

carriage of this case.

ORDER

[23] Accordingly, the Tribunal Orders.

[24] A Settlement Hearing is scheduled for four days to proceed by video on Tuesday, January 26, 2021 at 10 a.m.

[25] A hearing is scheduled for eighteen days to proceed by video on Tuesday April 6, 2021 at 10 a.m. ending Thursday April 29, 2020.

[26] Counsel for the City will:

a. prepare a revised Procedural Order defining submission dates; revised witness and issues lists; and an order of evidence to manage the April 6, 2021 hearing; and

b. the necessary affidavits of expert witnesses who will be offering evidence at the January 26, 2021 settlement hearing;

c. all material for a) and b) will be submitted to the Tribunal no later than 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 19, 2021

13 PL030514

“Bryan W. Tuckey”

BRYAN W. TUCKEY MEMBER

“G.C.P. Bishop”

G.C.P. BISHOP VICE-CHAIR

If there is an attachment referred to in this document, please visit www.olt.gov.on.ca to view the attachment in PDF format.

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal A constituent tribunal of Ontario Land Tribunals Website: www.olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248