April 29, 1998
To:Toronto Community Council
From:Sylvia N. Watson, Toronto Community Council Solicitor
Subject:Massey-Ferguson Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Dismissal of Appeal by Ontario Municipal Board (Ward 20 - Trinity Niagara)
Purpose:
To advise Council of the Order of the Ontario Municipal Board dismissing the appeal by Tony O'Donohue of the
Massey-Ferguson Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law and his appeal of that Order to Divisional Court.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
n/a
Recommendations:
"It is recommended that this report be received for information."
Council Reference/Background/History:
On September 23, 1997, the Council of the former City of Toronto adopted amendments to the Official Plan and passed a
Zoning By-law consistent with the planning framework developed for the larger Garrison Common North area since 1994,
redesignating the Massey Ferguson Lands and 15 Sudbury Street from Restricted Industrial Area to General Use Area "A"
to permit a range of commercial, residential and light industrial uses and replacing the previous industrial-commercial
zoning with CR zoning permitting a range of commercial and residential uses.
On October 24, 1997 Mr. Tony O'Donohue appealed the Zoning amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board. On
December 19, 1997, he appealed the decision of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to approve the Official Plan
amendment. His were the only appeals.
The appellant did not make oral submissions at any public meeting leading to the adoption and passage of the Official Plan
Amendment or Zoning By-law, nor did he make written submission prior to their adoption or passage.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The property owners, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, 819774 Ontario Inc. and 844905 Ontario Limited, brought a
motion before the Ontario Municipal Board for an order dismissing the appeals without holding a hearing. The City
appeared in support of the motion.
The grounds of the motion for dismissal were as follows:
(1)The reasons set out in the notices of appeal did not disclose any apparent land use planning grounds upon which the
Board could allow all or part of the appeals;
(2)The appeals were not made in good faith and were frivolous or vexatious;
(3)The appellant did not make oral submissions at a public meeting nor did he make written submissions to the Council
before the Official Plan Amendment was adopted and the Zoning By-law Amendment was passed.
After hearing from counsel for the property owners, the City and Mr. O'Donohue two days in February, 1998, the Board
(G.A. Harron, Member) reserved its decision.
On April 24, 1998 the Board dismissed the appeals in their entirety.
The Board found that there was a lengthy planning process which gave the appellant ample opportunity to get involved and
express his concerns. Mr. O'Donohue had extensive experience in municipal matters and should have been aware of the
process. He did not provide a reasonable explanation for not getting involved in the process and would not give a
reasonable explanation for having failed to do so.
Mr. O'Donohue has sought leave to appeal the Order of the Ontario Municipal Board to Divisional Court. This should be
heard in June, 1998.
Conclusions:
A further report will be forthcoming on the result of the appeal to Divisional Court.
Contact Name:Raymond M. Feig, Solicitor
Telephone:(416) 392-7224
Fax:(416) 392-0024
E-Mail:rfeig@city.toronto.on.ca
Sylvia N. Watson
Toronto Community Council Solicitor
RMF:ih
Attach.
p:\1998\ug\cps\leg\TO980019.leg
