Request to dismiss appeal without a hearing denied
NRU
March 4, 2015
In a February 19 decision, board members Jason Chee-Hing and Anne Milchberg refused a request by Liberty Development Corporation to dismiss an appeal without a hearing by Royal 7 Developments Ltd. Royal 7 appealed the City of Vaughan’s approval of official plan and zoning bylaw amendments for Liberty to permit a high-rise, mixed-use development consisting of up to 1,328 residential units at the southwest corner of Maplecrete Road and Regional Road 7. Both parties sought costs on their respective motion filings. Liberty asked that the appeal be dismissed without a hearing on the grounds that it was frivolous and lacked legitimate planning reasons. Liberty argued it was an attempt to freeze development to force it into a cost sharing agreement. Further, the developer stated, the recovery of Royal 7’s front-ended costs should be addressed during the draft plan of subdivision stage and not through the official plan and rezoning process.
Royal 7 contended that the issues raised by the appeal are genuine, legitimate and authentic planning issues worth adjudication before the board. Royal 7 noted that it front ended the cost of constructing the installed services and that the purpose of the official plan appeal is to establish an appropriate site specific policy to address equitable cost sharing arrangements by benefiting landowners.
The board agreed that the issues raised by Royal 7’s appeal are legitimate and deserve to be fully argued at a hearing. The board denied the motion to dismiss the appeal and costs were not awarded.
Solicitors involved in this decision were Barry Horosko (Bratty & Partners LLP) representing Liberty Development Corporation, Quinto Annibale and Steven Ferri (Loopstra Nixon LLP) representing Royal 7 Developments Ltd. and Claudia Storto representing the City of Vaughan. (See OMB Case No. PL140812.)