17th Annual GTA Rankings: TOP-10 DEVELOPMENT LAW FIRMS

NRU
Dec. 16, 2015

Growth plan conformity exercises continue to keep law firms busy at the Ontario Municipal Board, with a ruling on how much parkland a growing municipality can extract from developers potentially defining all official plans going forward. And for the first time since 2005 a law firm other than Aird & Berlis and Davies Howe has taken the number one spot.

Vaughan’s 2010 official plan remains the largest appeal this year in terms of remaining appellants, with several dozen cases yet to be resolved. Closer to resolution are growth plan conformity appeals in Peel Region, Ajax and Brampton. But the decision that had the biggest ramifications concerned Richmond Hill’s 2010 official plan.

The board was asked to decide whether a policy that set an alternative parkland dedication rate of one hectare per 300 residential units—the maximum alternative rate set out in the Planning Act—could be justified. In a huge victory for the development industry, the board said no, and set a cap on the amount of parkland or cash-in-lieu the town could seek from a new development. The town has sought leave to appeal to the divisional court. Concerned what the decision could mean for their own parkland dedication policies, Mississauga, Markham, Oakville and Vaughan are all seeking intervener status.

There was no shortage of interesting appeals this year. In Milton, a settlement will allow over 4,000 future residents to move into multiple subdivisions that make up what is known as the Milton Heights Neighbourhood. In Newmarket, the board’s approval of a 730-unit subdivision on the former Glenway golf course has led municipalities such as Aurora thinking hard about the future of their own golf courses.

In the 17th annual rankings of the GTA’s most prominent planning and development firms, NRU looked back at OMB decisions and stories from August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2015. There have been a number of shakeups among the top 10 spots, with a new firm crowned number one, and several law firms making huge leaps up the rankings since 2014.

For the Toronto rankings, see the December 18 edition of NRU Toronto.

1 [3] WeirFoulds
Solicitors: Glenn Ackerley, Denise Baker, John Buhlman, Jeff Cowan, Julia Croome, Jill Dougherty, Bruce Engell, Aisling Flarity, Sean Foran, Barnet Kussner, Ian Lord, Michael McQuaid, Jennifer Meader, Kim Mullin, Gregory Richards, Sylvain Rouleau, Lynda Townsend and Christopher Tzekas.

In the 2014 law review, NRU said that “WeirFoulds is well positioned to make a run for the top spot in next year’s rankings.” The fi m did not disappoint, edging ahead of Aird & Berlis and Davies Howe. The last time either of those two firms didn’t grab the top spot was back in 2005 when Kagan Shastri took the top honors.

What gave WeirFoulds the edge this year? It was not only the huge number of appeals that NRU reported on, but the two very challenging cases it took on. The first was the seven-headed hydra—better known as appeals against the 2010 City of Vaughan official plan—so named because when you settle one appeal, two more spring forth. The second was the appeals of the Richmond Hill 2010 official plan. While the decision regarding the town’s parkland dedication alternate rate did not go in the town’s favour, WeirFoulds was instrumental in helping it achieve a settlement or victory in almost every case. Notably, several developments challenged caps on building heights in the town, but none—so far—have been successful.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Brampton in a settlement regarding OPA and ZBA to develop fourstorey villa apartments and stacked townhouses (Kussner) (settlement); representing Hamilton in a settlement relating to compensation for lands expropriated by Hamilton (Tzekas) (settlement); representing King North Commercial opposing a settlement between the King City Corporate Centre and King Township regarding an OPA for ancillary commercial uses (Townsend, Meader, Mullin) (settlement); representing Brampton regarding appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendments (Kussner); representing Parkside Hills, and Silverwood Homes in a settlement with Hamilton regarding the adoption of a Rural Hamilton OPA that would prohibit a stormwater management facility on Parkside and Silverwood lands (McQuaid) (settlement); representing 1804487 Ontario in an appeal against Hamilton for OPA and ZBA to allow a medical facility (Baker) (settlement); representing 1804482 Ontario in a settlement regarding an appeal against Hamilton’s approval of a ZBA, draft plan of subdivision and draft plan of condominium for 1804482 Ontario (Baker) (settlement); representing Barrie regarding an appeal by Melchoir against the failure of Barrie to make a decision regarding a proposed plan of subdivision and ZBA for 196 Barton Ave (Engell) (x); representing Brooklin Development General Partner in an ongoing case regarding Brooklin’s compensation for lands expropriated by the Ministry of Transportation (McQuaid); representing multiple appellants in appeals regarding permissions for drive-through facilities in Milton’s urban ZBL (Baker); representing Shoppers Drug Mart in an appeal to permit a mixed-use building and eight townhouses in Hamilton (Kussner); representing Northampton Residences in an appeal to permit an eight and 12-storey residential development in Whitby (Baker, Meader) (√); representing Parkside Hills regarding a revised draft plan of subdivision in Hamilton (McQuaid) (settlement); representing multiple clients related to appeals for drive-through restaurants in Ajax (Baker) (settlement); representing Halloway Developments in an appeal for OPA to alter environmental protections in Clarington (Meader) (settlement); representing Adi Development Group in an appeal to permit four mid-rise residential buildings in Burlington (Baker) (√); representing Minto Multi-Residential Income Partners 1 in an appeal for amendment to Oakville’s official plan regarding urban design policies (Baker) (settlement); representing Shoppers Drug Mart in an appeal resulting in a settlement with Hamilton for a mixed-use development (Kussner) (settlement); representing Sonoma Homes and Hamilton in a settlement to permit an office and medical centre (Baker) (settlement); representing Brampton in multiple appeals against an OPA (Kussner); representing Vaughan regarding appeals to its 2010 official plan (Engell); representing M. Putzer Hornby Nursery regarding an appeal of Milton’s Derry Green Corporate Business Park Secondary Plan (Baker) (settlement); representing Aurora in a settlement regarding a draft plan of subdivision (Meader) (settlement); representing 2190557 Ontario and 2107925 Ontario in an appeal regarding ZBA and draft plan of subdivision to construct housing in Hamilton (Baker) (settlement); representing Richmond Hill regarding appeals to its 2010 official plan (Kussner); representing Vaughan in a request to review a decision granting OPA and ZBA to construct townhouses in Vaughan (Engell) (x); representing Robert and Jennifer McCullough in an appeal against minor variances granted by the Burlington COA to construct a detached dwelling (Meader) (settlement); representing Kiro Holding in an appeal against the Oakville COA refusal of minor variances to sever a lot (Baker) (√); representing Roger and Brenda Newell and two other neighbours against an appeal for a ZBA to construct an 11-unit apartment in Oakville by Trafalgar Oaks Development (Baker) (x).

2 [2] Aird & Berlis
Solicitors: Lauren Chee-Hing, Eileen Costello, Laura Dean, Robert Doumani, Patricia Foran, Tom Halinski, Patrick Harrington, Jody Johnson, Kim Kovar, Sidonia Loiacono, Leo Longo, John Mascarin, Josephine  Matera, David Neligan, Jane Pepino, Andrea Skinner, Christopher Williams and Steven Zakem.

This was another great year for Aird & Berlis, which maintained its second place position based on its number of clients and its great success rate. While it nudged ahead of rival Davies Howe this year, there were three—not just two— firms in a dead heat for first place. The firm has been busy across the GTA representing clients in appeals of the major growth plan conformity amendments. It also represented Milton in its two big settlements: subdivision appeals in the Milton Heights area and employment-related appeals of the Derry Green Corporate Business Park Secondary Plan.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing King in a settlement with King City Corporate Centre for an OPA for ancillary commercial uses (Halinski) (settlement); representing multiple parties regarding appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Zakem); representing Orlando Corporation in an appeal of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Longo) (settlement); representing Monterey Heights Development Corporation in an appeal for OPA and ZBA to permit low-rise apartments and townhouses (Zakem) (√); representing DiCenzo Construction Company in a settlement with Hamilton for a ZBA to build townhouses (Zakem) (settlement); representing DiCenzo Construction Company in a settlement regarding an appeal of Hamilton’s approval of a ZBA, draft plan of subdivision and draft plan condominium for 18044820 Ontario (Zakem) (settlement); representing Vaughan against an ongoing appeal of the city’s development charges by-law (Doumani); representing Orlando  Corporation in an appeal of Peel Region’s development charges by-law in an attempt to reduce the industrial development charges in Peel (Longo) (x); representing Milton regarding subdivision appeals in the Milton Heights area (Skinner) (settlement); representing SMNE Developments (on behalf of Cor-Lots Developments) in an appeal of Markham’s COA approval of a minor variance to reduce a separation distance (Zakem) (√); representing Hamilton in a settlement with Calloway Real Estate Development Investment and Trinity Development Group regarding Calloway’s appeal of a ZBA and OPA to allow commercial uses (Zakem) (settlement); representing Rutherford Commercial Holdings and Loblaw Properties in a case between Vaughan and West Rutherford Properties (Costello); representing multiple clients in appeals of the 2010 Vaughan offi cial plan (Harrington, Zakem); representing the Canadian Fuels Association and Imperial Oil in appeals of the 2010 Vaughan official plan (Pepino) (settlement); representing the North Markham Landowners Group in an appeal to remove lands under a minister’s zoning order related to the Pickering Airport (Foran) (settlement); representing 2334193 Ontario in an appeal of Ajax’s growth plan conformity OPAs (Zakem, Skinner); representing Bonnydon in an appeal for OPA to alter environmental protections in Clarington (Zakem) (settlement); representing DiCenzo Construction Company in an appeal to permit 130 townhouses and two detached houses in Hamilton (Zakem) (√); representing multiple parties in an appeal for amendment to Oakville’s official plan regarding urban design policies (Williams) (settlement); representing Choice Properties REIT and Loblaw Properties in appeal against Scugog’s comprehensive ZBL (Foran) (settlement); representing 394 Lakeshore Oakville Holdings in an appeal for minor variances for a residential dwelling in Oakville (Zakem) (settlement); representing Gordon Woods Homeowners’ Association in opposition to a settlement for seven detached dwellings in Mississauga (Costello) (x); representing Orlando Corporation in an appeal for modifications to the Mississauga official plan (Longo) (settlement); representing Loblaw Properties and Choice Properties REIT in a settlement for a Pickering OPA (Harrington) (settlement); representing Litchfield Developments in an appeal for a 52-unit townhouse development in Markham (Kovar) (settlement); representing Choice Properties Real Estate and Investment Trust in an appeal against conditions imposed for a minor variance in Caledon (Skinner) (√); representing Milton regarding an appeal of the town’s Derry Green Corporate Business Park Secondary Plan (Costello) (settlement); representing King regarding an appeal to modify the Nobleton Community Plan (Halinski); representing 394 Lakeshore Oakville Holdings in an appeal for a zoning exemption in Oakville (Zakem, Costello) (settlement); representing Rangi Brothers Logistics in a settlement regarding modifications to the Caledon official plan to guide applications and development approvals in Sandhill (Harrington) (settlement); representing King against an appeal to overturn the COA’s refusal to grant a minor variance to construct a cabana (Halinski) (√).

3 [1] Davies Howe Partners
Solicitors: Jeffrey Davies, John Alati, Isaiah Banach, Kimberly Beckman, Matthew Di Vona, Kate Fairbrother, Mark Flowers, Kyle Gossen, Marisa Keating, Meaghan McDermid, Michael Melling, Aaron Platt, Susan Rosenthal, Katarzyna Sliwa, Daniel Steinberg and Alexander Suriano.

Davies Howe had another great year, but two strong challengers along with a small drop in the number of appeals it represented knocked the firm back two spots this year. However, NRU noted no losses for the firm this year, just wins, settlements and ongoing appeals. The firm notably represented Yonge
Bayview Holdings in its appeal of Richmond Hill’s official plan parkland dedication polices, scoring a huge win for the development industry. Along with appeals of Vaughan and Richmond Hill’s official plans, Davies Howe also represented clients in the Milton Heights appeal and appeals of Scugog’s comprehensive zoning by-law.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Heathwood Homes and Osmington regarding appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Sliwa); representing Solmar Developments and Northwest Brampton Landowners Group in appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (McDermid, Sliwa); representing multiple clients in appeals of the 2010 Richmond Hill official plan (Rosenthal, Banach) (settlement); representing Huntingwood Developments against an appeal by Shiva Ganesh Mandir Temple to Brampton’s ZBA refusal for a place of worship (Katarzyna Silwa and students-at-law Matthew di Vona and Marisa Keating ) (√); representing Shiplake Developments and Angelo, Louise and Josephine Cimetta in appeals of the 2010 Richmond Hill official plan (Alati, Platt); representing multiple parties in appeals to permit plans of subdivision in the Milton Heights area of Milton (McDermid ) (settlement); representing Mark and Erin Cattral and 12 others against an appeal of Markham’s COA’s refusal to allow three variances to Patrick Ko and Christina Ma (Sliwa) (√); representing multiple clients in appeals of the 2010 Vaughan official plan (McDermid, Sliwa, Alati, Flowers, Suriano); representing Celebration Estates in an appeal of the 2010 Vaughan official plan (Sliwa) (settlement); representing Kenneth and Charmaine Kumar in an appeal for variances to legalize a pool cabana in Mississauga (Suriano) (settlement); representing the York Region District School Board regarding an appeal to permit a 730-unit subdivision in Newmarket (Flowers) (settlement); representing Medallion Developments (Castlefi eld) Limited in an appeal of Ajax’s growth plan conformity amendments (Platt); representing Stockworth Mbg and 513487 Ontario in appeal against Scugo’s comprehensive ZBL (Flowers); representing Yonge Bayview Holdings in an appeal of parkland policies in the Richmond Hill official plan (Flowers) (√); representing Beverley Homes Holding in an appeal to construct a 30-unit townhouse complex in Mississauga (Flowers); representing Osmington and Heathwood Homes (Brampton) in an appeal against Brampton’s OPA (Platt); representing Loretta and Ron Phinney in an appeal for minor variances for a house in Oakville (Melling, McDermid) (√);  representing Harbour View Investments in an appeal against rezoning in Caledon (Alati, McDermid); representing Nobelton North Holdings in an appeal to modify the Nobleton Community Plan (Melling, McDermid); representing Hanlon Glen Holmes in an appeal against an OPA approved by Mississauga (Platt) (√); representing Behrooz Yazdani Zenooz and Rohan Ahrari Yazdani in an appeal for rezoning to allow for the construction of a residential subdivision in Richmond Hill (Rosenthal, McDermid) (settlement); representing Larry Th omas against an appeal of the COA granting of a severance in the Richmond Hill (Flowers, student-at-law Shouldice-Stewart) (√); representing 1215 Appleby Line Holdings in an appeal to allow a ZBA to construct a hotel in Burlington (Sliwa) (settlement).

4 [6] Kagan Shastri
Solicitors: Ira Kagan, Alexandra De Gasperis and Paul DeMelo.

Kagan Shastri reclaims fourth place the year, in part thanks to two huge decisions going its way. The most notable of course, were Elginbay Corporation and Zamani Homes’ successful appeals of the of Richmond Hill’s official parkland dedication by-laws. Almost as notable however, was Marianneville Developments’ appeal to permit a 730-unit subdivision in Newmarket. After a contentious fight, the firm achieved a settlement with the town. While the firm’s municipal law team may be small, it continues to punch well above its weight.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Republic Live in an appeal by a local landowner against a temporary use bylaw that was granted to allow a music festival to take place in Clarington (DeMelo) (√); representing Caledon 410 Developments regarding appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Kagan); representing Peel Region in an appeal to reduce the region’s industrial  development charges by-law (DeMelo) (√); representing Ritson Division Retail Group against an appeal of Oshawa’s approval of OPA and ZBA to allow commercial and retail uses on formerly industrial lands (Kagan); representing multiple clients in appeals of the 2010 Vaughan official plan (Kagan); representing Marianneville Developments in an appeal to permit a 730-unit subdivision in Newmarket (Kagan, De Gasperis) (settlement); representing Toronto Workmen’s Circle and Children’s Camp in an appeal settled with Ajax to permit 251 single-detached and townhouse dwellings (DeMelo) (settlement); representing Elginbay Corporation and Zamani Homes (Richmond Hill) in appeals of parkland policies in the Richmond Hill official plan (Kagan) (√); representing Blue Serenity Holdings against an appeal to a temporary-use by-law in Georgina (Kagan) (√); representing Auburn Development in an appeal to grant OPA and ZBA to the Urban Hamilton Official Plan and zoning by-law (Kagan) (settlement); representing Mulock Canada Med in an appeal to grant ZBA to construct a retail commercial building in Newmarket (Kagan, De Gasperis) (√); representing Zamani Homes in an appeal of the 2010 Richmond Hill official plan (Kagan, De Gasperis) (settlement); representing Samuel, Son & Co. regarding an appeal for a ZBA by 1215 Appleby Line Holdings to construct a hotel in Burlington (DeMelo) (settlement).

5 [14] Turkstra Mazza Lawyers
Solicitors: Shelley Kaufman, Paul Mazza, Fred Rudolph, Nancy Smith, Scott Snider, Anna Toumanians and Herman Turkstra.

Turkstra Mazza takes a giant leap into the top-10 rankings this year. The firm has been particularly busy in Hamilton, representing over half-a-dozen clients in matters ranging from a medical centre and residential care facility in the Mewburn area to mid-rise buildings along the Niagara Escarpment to representing the city regarding appeals of the Airport Employment Growth District Secondary Plan.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Royalcliffe Developments and Lake Path Holdings in a settlement regarding OPA and ZBA to develop four-storey villa apartments and stacked townhouses (Snider) (settlement); representing Northwest Brampton Landowners Group in an appeal of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Kaufman); representing Shieldbay Developments in the settlement between Dundas-Trafalgar and Oakville— Shieldbay is the abutting landowner and will be part of a cost-sharing agreement with Minto Communities (Snider) (settlement); representing Paletta International Corporation in an ongoing case opposing the siting of a hazardous waste transfer facility at 899 Nebo Rd (Snider); representing Latiq Quershi in a case with Mississauga regarding the city’s failure to make a decision regarding OPA and ZBA to allow eight detached-dwelling lots at 2525 Hammond Rd (Snider); representing St. Joseph’s Villa in a case regarding the MMAH’s failure to make a decision regarding the Hamilton Urban Official Plan; representing North End Neighbours and other parties in an appeal of the West Harbour Secondary Plan in Hamilton (Turkstra); representing Ponderosa Nature Resort in an appeal to permit a mobile home park in Hamilton (Rudolph); representing Recchia Developments in an appeal to permit 12 semi-detached units in Hamilton (Smith) (x); representing Northwest Brampton Landowners Group in an appeal against Brampton OPA (Kaufman); representing Tarapark Developments and Milton 5-7 Holdings regarding an appeal of Milton’s Derry Green Corporate Business Park Secondary Plan (Smith) (settlement); representing Hamilton in appeals against its urban and rural official plans and amendments to the applicable zoning by-laws (Smith) (settlement); representing Cooper Construction in an appeal for site-specific building and parking regulations to permit development of a multi-storey office building (Toumanians, Smith) (settlement); representing Vetco Holdings in an appeal by the Niagara Escarpment Commission against Hamilton’s approval of two ZBAs (Smith) (settlement); representing 6263801 Canada regarding an appeal against the approval of minor variances to construct a detached dwelling in Burlington (Snider) (settlement); representing Oakville against an appeal for a ZBA t to construct an 11-unit apartment in Oakville by Trafalgar Oaks Development (Smith) (x); representing A. DeSantis Developments and Heritage Highlands Corporation in an appeal to modify the Urban Hamilton official plan (Snider) (settlement).

6 [NA] Wood Bull
Solicitors: Mary Bull, Peter Gross, Sharmini Mahadevan, Alexandra Sadvari, Johanna R. Shapira and Dennis Wood.

During NRU’s 2013-2014 law review, Wood Bull was only reported in a mere three cases, resulting in the firm not making the top 20. This year however, the firm’s appearances in NRU have more than tripled, vaulting it all the way to sixth place. Despite grumblings from council, Wood Bull helped Newmarketachieve a settlement with Marianneville Developments for a 730-unit subdivision on the former Glenway golf course lands. The firm also achieved settlements for clients across the GTHA, solidifying its ranking in the top 10.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Calloway Real Estate Investment in a settlement with Hamilton and Trinity Development Group regarding a ZBA and OPA to allow a range of commercial uses (Shapira) (settlement); representing multiple clients in an appeal of Burlington’s 2014 development charges by-law (Wood); representing Newmarket regarding an appeal to permit a 730-unit subdivision (Bull, Shapira) (settlement); representing Silgold Developments in appeal for amendment to Oakville’s official plan regarding urban design policies (Wood) (settlement); representing Morguard Investments in an appeal against a Brampton OPA (Gross); representing Seven427 Developments and Smart Centres in an appeal for a rezoning in Vaughan (Shapira) (settlement); representing Airfields Developments against an appeal for rezoning in Caledon (Mahadevan); representing Seven427 Developments in an appeal against Vaughan’s official plan (Shapira) (√); representing Mondelez Canada in an appeal to grant OPA and ZBA to the Urban Hamilton official plan and zoning by-law (Wood) (settlement); representing Flamborough Power Centre, Flamborough South Centre and Clappison Five and Six Properties in a settlement with Hamilton regarding site-specific provisions of the Urban Hamilton official plan (Mahadevan) (settlement).

7 [5] Goodmans
Solicitors: Ian Andres, Anne Benedetti, David Bronskill, Tom Friedland, Joseph Hoff man, Roslyn Houser, Robert Howe, Max Laskin, Allan Leibel, Catherine Lyons, Mark Noskiewicz, Nicholas Staubitz and Michael Stewart.

Goodmans dropped a couple of ranks this year, thanks to fewer reported decisions and even fewer resolutions than last year. The firm was involved in a number of key appeals, including the 2010 Vaughan official plan and a settlement for Forest Bay Homes that will permit an 832-unit subdivision in Markham. Representing more than just big developments, Goodmans also helped a soup kitchen in Oshawa get the variances it needed to move to a more suitable location, despite opposition from local residents. There are a lot of appeals yet to be decided, so expect a better showing next year as its cases move towards completion.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Canadian Tire Corporation regarding appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Howe); representing Valleymede Building AMA Corporation in an ongoing appeal for OPA and ZBA to allow residential developments totalling 442 units in three - and four-storey buildings and stacked townhouses in Markham (Hoff man); representing multiple clients in appeals of the 2010 Vaughan official plan (Hoff man); representing the Kennedy McCowan Landowners Group in an application to remove lands under a minister’s zoning order related to the Pickering Airport (Lyons) (settlement); representing Forest Bay Homes in an appeal to permit an 862-unit subdivision in Markham (Benedetti) (settlement); representing Durham Outlook for the Needy against an appeal of the COA granting of variances to permit a soup kitchen in Oshawa (Bronskill) (√); representing LTF Real Estate Company in an appeal against Vaughan’s official plan (Hoff man) (√); representing Bronte Community Developments Corporation in an appeal to grant OPA and ZBA to construct three eight-storey apartment buildings in Oakville (Noskiewicz, Hoff man) (√); representing Baif Developments in an appeal of Richmond Hill’s official plan policies regarding Downtown Local Centre, Key Development Areas and related policies (Houser, Andres).

8 [4] Ritchie Ketcheson Hart & Biggart
Solicitors: R. Andrew Biggart, John R. Hart, Bruce C. Ketcheson, Effie Lidakis and Joshua Silver.
Planners: N/A

Ritchie Ketcheson Hart & Biggart took a slight tumble this year, dropping from fourth to eighth place. Its caseload as reported in NRU has dropped, but it remains in the top 10 thanks to providing strong representation for their municipal clients. Ritchie Ketcheson has achieved settlements both big and small, representing Ajax regarding a proposed 251-unit subdivision and Georgina regarding the legalization of a bed and breakfast.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Georgina against an appeal by Brenda Th ornton regarding the COA’s refusal to grant a minor variance to allow a boat house (Ketcheson) (√); representing Great Land (Westwood) in an appeal to permit a 24-storey, mixed-use building in Richmond Hill (Biggart, Ketcheson) (settlement); representing West Rutherford Properties in an appeal for ZBA and OPA to develop two 12-storey apartments and 21 townhouses at 3660 Rutherford Rd in Vaughan (Ketcheson); representing Michael Wortel in a settlement with Hamilton for a ZBA to allow two additional residential lots on the property (Ketcheson) (settlement); representing Markham against an appeal to permit a funeral establishment and cemetery (Ketcheson); representing Whitby against an appeal to permit an eight- and 12-storey residential development (Ketcheson) (x); representing Ajax in settlement for 251 single-detached and townhouse dwelling development (Biggart) (settlement); representing Oakville with regard to various appeals to the offi cial plan and ZBL as they relate to the requirements of the Growth Plan (Biggart) (settlement); representing Georgina regarding an appeal for a ZBA to legalize an existing a bed and breakfast in Georgina (Lidakis) (settlement).

9 [20] Folger Rubinoff
Solicitors: Albert Engel, Joel Farber, Sara Hickey and Jared Schwartz.

Last year, NRU only reported on Folger Rubinoff’s involvement in the 2010 Vaughan official plan appeals, which was good enough to sneak them into twentieth place. This year, the firm continues to slog through its Vaughan appeals, but adds several settlements, moving it up to ninth place. The firm achieved settlements for clients as part of Brampton and Ajax’s growth plan conformity amendments and a site-specific amendment for MacStar Developments for its property in Hamilton’s Airport Expansion Growth District.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing Trinity Development Group, in a settlement with Calloway Real Estate Development Investment and Hamilton regarding Calloway’s appeal of a ZBA and OPA to allow commercial uses (Farber) (settlement); representing multiple clients in appeals of the 2010 Vaughan official plan (Farber); representing Sisley Holdings and 740 Dundas Realty regarding policies governing the sale of used cars (student-at-law Witkowski) (settlement); representing 138868 Ontario (Shoppers World) in an appeal against a Brampton OPA (Farber); representing multiple parties in an appeal to rezone property in Vaughan to permit commercial and warehouse uses (Farber) (settlement); representing MacStar Developments in appeals against Hamilton’s urban and rural official plans (Farber) (settlement).

10 [16] Davis Webb
Solicitors: Neil G. Davis, Ellen S. Pefh any and Ronald K. Webb.

Davis Webb saw the number of decisions reported in NRU double, resulting in the firm returning to the top 10 after a dip to 16th place last year. The firm achieved settlements for multiple parties in the Milton Heights area of Milton that will permit 159 new units, as well as for Brampton Brick in its appeal of Brampton’s growth plan conformity exercise.

OMB Cases and Decisions—representing G.C. Jain Investments and Brampton Brick in appeals of Peel Region’s growth plan conformity amendment (Webb); representing multiple parties in appeals to permit plans of subdivision in the Milton Heights area of Milton (Davis) (settlement); representing Maria Elmer, party to an appeal by Valleymede Building AMA for OPA and ZBA to permit a development containing three, fourstorey residential buildings (Webb, student-at-law Anthony Simone ); representing Correct Group of Companies in the approval of a revised draft plan of subdivision in Caledon (Webb) (√); representing Eva Franceschini in appeal of the COA’s approval of a severance in Mississauga (Webb, student-at-law Simone) (x); representing Brampton Brick in an appeal against Brampton official plan amendment (Godley); representing Rogers Telecommunications regarding a site-specific modification to an OPA to allow below-grade parking structures in Mississauga (Davis) (settlement); representing Yvonne and Randall Bowers in an appeal against Brampton’s failure to make a decision regarding a ZBA seeking to legalize an existing two-storey three-unit house (Webb, student-at-law Simone) (√).

The next 10 firms…
11. [N/A] Municipal Law Chambers
12. [11] Jeffrey Streisfi eld of Land Law
13. [15] Garrod Pickfi eld;
14. [13] Thomson Rogers
 15. [10] DLA Piper (formerly Davis)
16. [8] Loopstra Nixon
17. [N/A] Border Ladner Gervais
18. [7] Bratty and Partners
19. [12] McMillan
20. [18] Parente, Borean.