Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: January 27, 2022

CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001922 (Formerly) PL200569

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

Applicant and Appellant: Dandaw Development Ltd. Et Al Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law 438-86 - Refusal or neglect of City of Toronto to make a decision Existing Zoning: I1 D1 (Industrial) Proposed Zoning: I1 D1 (Industrial) Site Specific Purpose: To permit two mixed-use tall buildings at 33 and 26 storeys Property Address/Description: 10-30 Dawes Road Municipality: City of Toronto Municipality File No.: 19 124138 STE 19 OZ OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001922 Legacy Case No.: PL200569 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001922 Legacy Lead Case No.: PL200569 OLT Case Name: Dandaw Development Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

Heard: January 7, 2022 by video hearing (“VH”)

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Dandaw Developments Ltd. and Marlin Springs Limited Partnership (“Applicant”)	M. Foderick/ D. Angelucci
City of Toronto (“City”)	J. Davidson/L. Bisset
Canadian Tire Corporation Limited	J. Evola
Tri-Metro Investments Inc.	M. Melling
6 Dawes Danforth Inc.	D. Artenosi/M. Cara
Minto (Dawes) GP Inc.	J. Dawson
Metrolinx	A. Baker/I. Tang

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BLAIR S. TAYLOR ON JANUARY 7, 2022 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1On November 25, 2021, the Tribunal had held a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) with regard to the proposed rezoning of the lands known municipally as 10-30 Dawes Road (“Subject Lands”).

2At the November 25, 2021 CMC, the parties were “confident” that a settlement would be reached, and thus two weeks of a three week hearing were then released from the Tribunal’s hearing schedule, and this CMC set.

3In the lead up to this CMC, the Applicant had circulated and filed an affidavit by its land use planner Peter Smith in support of the proposed rezoning (see Exhibit 1).

4Counsel for 6 Dawes Danforth Inc. had communicated with counsel for the Applicant and the City with regard to the Guest Avenue extension and come to an agreement (Exhibit 2).

5At the CMC there were no objections to the proposed rezoning.

6For the reasons set out below, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approved in principle the draft Zoning By-laws found in Exhibit 1 at Tabs E and F, but withheld the Tribunal’s Final Order pending satisfaction of the conditions of approval found in Exhibits 1 and 2, and provided directions with regard to the preparation of a draft Order and a status update to the Tribunal.

DECISION

7The Subject Lands are designated Mixed-Use and are located in an area well served by higher order public transit, including the TTC Main Street Subway Station and the Danforth Go Rail Station, being within 470 metres (“m”) and 300 m respectively.

8The Subject Lands represent an opportunity to optimize an underutilized parcel of land in an area with very desirable locational attributes and existing municipal infrastructure.

9Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 set out the agreed upon conditions of approval that form the basis for a development proposal for the Subject Lands that will inter alia include a mixed-use development with towers of 24 and 38 storeys, sited on a 6 storey base building with 636 residential units and 523 square metres (“sq m”) of retail gross floor area, 1,102 sq m of office gross floor area, and a 1,025 sq m day care centre.

10The Tribunal canvassed all the parties and with the proposed conditions of approval as set out in Exhibits 1 and 2, there were no objections from any party to the settlement proposal.

11The Tribunal having read the land use planning affidavit of Mr. Smith, having considered Exhibit 2, having heard the submissions of counsel, and having considered the decision of City Council, gave an interim decision allowing the appeal in part, approving in principle the draft Zoning By-law Amendments (“ZBAs”) as found in Exhibit 1 at Tabs E and F, but withholding the Tribunal’s Final Order pending satisfaction of the conditions of approval found in Exhibit 1 and also in Exhibit 2.

12The Tribunal found that the development proposal as presented to the Tribunal had appropriate regard for the matters of Provincial Interest found in s. 2 of the Planning Act, including the appropriate location of growth and development (p), the provision of a full range of housing (j), the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and be oriented to pedestrians (q), and was well designed (r).

13Further the Tribunal found that the development proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to A Place to Grow: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe as optimizing the development potential of an underutilized parcel of land close to public transit and utilizing existing infrastructure, conformed to the City’s Official Plan, conformed to the Council adopted Official Plan Amendment 478, implemented the City’s Tall Building Design Guidelines, represented good land use planning and was in the public interest.

14The Tribunal directed counsel for the Applicant to work with the City counsel and prepare a draft order for consideration by the Tribunal and that it be provided to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator on or before January 17, 2022 and circulated to all the parties.

15Further, the Tribunal directed counsel for the Applicant to provide a written status update to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator by July 22, 2022 with copies to all the parties and the participant.

16Finally, with the interim approval of the development proposal, the Tribunal released the last five days of the hearing that was set to commence on January 24, 2022 from the Tribunal’s hearing schedule.

17Appended hereto as Attachment 1 is the Tribunal’s Interim Order which forms part of this Decision.

18Scheduling permitting, I may be available for case management purposes.

19This is the Interim Order of the Tribunal.

“Blair S. Taylor”

BLAIR S. TAYLOR MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal Website: www.olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.

OLT-21-001922 – Attachment 1

Ontario Land Tribunal Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

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

BEFORE: BLAIR S. TAYLOR MEMBER Wednesday, the 26th day of January, 2022

THIS MATTER having come on for a settlement hearing on January 7, 2022;

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeal is allowed in part and Zoning By-law Nos. 438-86 and 569-2013 are hereby amended substantially in accordance with the proposed Zoning By-law Amendments in Exhibits "E” and “F” of Exhibit 1, respectively, and generally in accordance with the plans and drawings in Exhibit "D” of Exhibit 1. The Final Order is withheld until the Tribunal has been advised that the following conditions have been met to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor:

a. the final form of the Zoning By-law Amendments are to the satisfaction of the Director, Community Planning, Toronto East York District and the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, and other appropriate divisions, and that they secure, among other matters:

i. the on-site vehicle and bicycle parking ratios to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services;

ii. space within the development for installation and maintenance access holes and sampling ports on the private side, for both storm and sanitary service connections;

iii. a minimum of 10 percent of all units on the lands at 10-30 Dawes Road as 3-bedroom units and a minimum of 27 percent of all units on the lands at 10-30 Dawes Road as 2-bedroom units;

iv. the prohibition on north facing projecting balconies below the 12th floor of the north tower;

v. maximum tower heights of 24 storeys (north tower) and 38 storeys (south tower), plus mechanical penthouses with a separation distance of 25 metres; and

vi. that the lands described as the subject of the amendments include all of the lands known municipally as 10 Dawes Road and 30 Dawes Road, as well as the portion of the former Guest Avenue which is subject to By-law 1097-2021.

b. City Council has enacted a valid road closure by-law to permanently close to vehicular and pedestrian traffic a portion of Guest Avenue being approximately 344.2 square metres bisecting the site;

c. the owner has entered into and satisfied the obligations of a land exchange agreement, whereby the portion of Guest Avenue set out in paragraph (b) above would be conveyed to the owner, and those portions of the site on the west side and south sides of the site respectively would be conveyed to the City;

d. the owner has entered into an Agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act, and any other necessary agreements, satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor, with such agreement(s) registered on title to 10-30 Dawes Road, in a manner satisfactory to the City Solicitor to secure the community benefits and matters of legal convenience as set out in paragraph 103 of Exhibit 1;

i. Such agreement shall include, inter alia, a provision that the owner will be responsible for the construction of the small portion of the Dawes Road extension located on its site and such obligation may be satisfied by the posting of a Letter of Credit.

e. the owner has, at the owner's expense:

i. submitted a revised Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, Hydrogeological Report and supporting documents (the "Engineering Reports"), including confirmation of water and fire flow, sanitary and storm capacity, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;

ii. addressed all outstanding engineering issues, and any other comments that may arise further to the review of materials submitted as part of the process to address the issues set out in the memorandum from Engineering and Construction Services, and the General Manager, Transportation Services;

iii. secured the design and the provision of financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure and/or new municipal infrastructure identified in the accepted Engineering Reports to support the development, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, should it be determined that improvements or upgrades and/or new infrastructure are required to support the development;

iv. submitted a pedestrian level wind study acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of, the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and that such matters arising from such study, be secured if required;

v. submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of, the General Manager, Transportation Services and that such matters arising from such study, be secured if required;

vi. submitted a revised Landscape Plan, including any necessary financial securities, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation and that such matters arising from such study, be secured if required;

vii. submitted an Environmental Noise and Vibration Assessment Report acceptable to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and that such matters arising from such study, be secured if required;

viii. submitted a Transportation Demand Management Plan, including any necessary financial securities to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and that such matters arising from such study, be secured if required; and the Plan shall include:

Mode share targets intended on shifting travel away from passenger cars and required parking;
Method(s) by which the target mode share and parking rates will be reached (e.g. future implementation of a bike share station, carshare or transit pass program);
The level of commitment to implement, enforce and maintain the plan moving forward; and
Expected short-term and long-term outcomes;

Should the accepted Transportation Demand Management Plan include any cash contribution toward Transportation Demand Management measures, such cash contribution shall be paid by the owner prior to the issuance of the first above-grade building permit for the development and allocated in accordance with the Transportation Demand Management Plan, and such cash contribution shall be indexed upwardly in accordance with the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Construction Price Index for the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area, reported quarterly by Statistics Canada in Building Construction Price Indexes Publication No. 18-10-0135-01, or its successor, calculated from the date of the Section 37 Agreement to the date of payment;

f. the owner has entered into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 10 and 10A Dawes Road in accordance with the plans and drawings prepared by IBI Group Architects (Canada) Inc. and dated April 12, 2021, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, the Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by ERA Architects, dated April 6, 2021 and in accordance with the Conservation Plan required in paragraph (g), to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning including registration of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor;

g. the owner has provided a detailed Heritage Conservation Plan, prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is consistent with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment for 10 and 10A Dawes Road, prepared by ERA Architects, dated April 6, 2021, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

“Euken Lui”

EUKEN LUI ACTING REGISTRAR