Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de l’Ontario

ISSUE DATE: March 15, 2018 CASE NO(S).: PL171048

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Oak Heights Apartments Inc. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of the City of to adopt the requested amendment Existing Designation: Apartment Neighbourhoods and Parks Proposed Designated: Apartment Neighbourhoods and Parks Purpose: To permit a mixed use building Property Address/Description: 230 Oak Street Municipality: City of Toronto Approval Authority File No.: 13 277895 STE 28 OZ OMB Case No.: PL171048 OMB File No.: PL171048 OMB Case Name: Oak Heights Apartments 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: Oak Heights Apartments Inc. Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law Nos. 569- 2013 and 438-86 - Refusal or neglect of the City of Toronto to make a decision Existing Zoning: R(d.06)(x904) in the City Wide Harmonized Zoning by By-law 569-2013 and R2 Z0.6 in the former City of Toronto Zoning By-law 438-86 Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined) Purpose: To permit a mixed use building Property Address/Description: 230 Oak Street Municipality: City of Toronto Municipality File No.: 13 277895 STE 28 OZ OMB Case No.: PL171048 OMB File No.: PL171049

2 PL171048

Heard: March 5, 2018 in Toronto, Ontario

APPEARANCES:

Parties Counsel

Oak Heights Apartments Inc. Patrick Harrington

City of Toronto Amanda Hill

Toronto Community Housing Serin Remedios Corporation

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY GERALD S. SWINKIN ON MARCH 5, 2018

[1] This was the first Pre-hearing Conference (“PHC”) for this case. The case involves appeals by Oak Heights Apartments Inc. (the “Appellant”) from the failure of City of Toronto (the “City”) Council to act on its applications for official plan amendment and zoning amendment regarding the lands municipally known as 230 Oak Street (the “Property”).

[2] The Property is an irregularly shaped parcel on the south side of Gerrard Street East, just west of . It is presently improved with a 22 storey rental apartment building. The development proposal, as it was described by counsel for the Appellant, is to introduce a further building on the Property in the form of a 32 storey mixed-use building accommodating 330 rental units. Provision of a daycare facility also forms part of the proposal.

[3] At the outset of the hearing, counsel was present for a neighbouring property owner, Toronto Community Housing Corporation, the owner of 220 Oak Street. Serin Remedios was seeking party status for her client. That request was not opposed by either the Appellant or the City and, given the proximate relationship of the lands, the Ontario Municipal Board (the “Board”) conferred party status on Toronto Community 3 PL171048

Housing Corporation in this proceeding.

[4] It appeared from the submissions of counsel for the Appellant and the City that there have been ongoing discussions between the Appellant and the City and that there is some hope that there may be a settlement of the issues regarding the development proposal and requested amendments between them over the course of the next few months.

[5] One issue of paramount concern appears to be related to soil contamination. According to Ms. Remedios, that issue is also what brings her client into this proceeding.

[6] On the premise that the discussions continue in a progressive arc, and provided that the general framework of agreement can be settled before the last meeting of City Council for the year, being the meeting scheduled to commence on July 23rd (as this is an election year and the new council will not form until the new year), the Parties requested that the Board fix a further PHC in the fall. The intention behind this date selection, bearing in mind the Board’s calendar restraints, is that if the parties have been able to come to terms, that PHC date can be converted into a settlement hearing session. If there is no settlement, that PHC session will be used for the purpose of establishing a Procedural Order (“PO”) and a hearing date for the appeals. In that latter eventuality, the Parties are advised to come to the PHC with a draft PO complete with a detailed Issues List.

[7] Accordingly, the Board sets Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 10 a.m. at:

Ontario Municipal Board 655 , 16th Floor Toronto, ON

for the second PHC for this case.

4 PL171048

[8] As noted above, in accordance with Rule 75 of the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, this PHC may be converted into a settlement hearing if the Parties have come to terms on a full and complete settlement. If that is to be the case, the Board requests that the Parties advise the Board, through the Case Co-ordinator, in advance of the second PHC date.

[9] There will be no further notice of this second PHC.

[10] This Member is not seized.

“Gerald S. Swinkin”

GERALD S. SWINKIN MEMBER

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

Ontario Municipal Board A constituent tribunal of Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Website: www.elto.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248