Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: August 12, 2022

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003152

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 4, 2022

(Formerly PL171216)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: KS Eglinton Square Inc. and KS Engelhart GP Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit a complete mixed-use community, which includes the provision of a range of housing forms, new commercial uses as well as the retention of the existing commercial shopping centre.

Reference Number: 16 230579 ESC 35 OZ

Property Address: Various Addresses

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003152

Legacy Case No.: PL171216

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003152

Legacy Lead Case No.: PL171216

OLT Case Name: KS Eglinton Square Inc. v. Toronto (City.)

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

Applicant/Appellant: KS Eglinton Square Inc. and KS Engelhart GP Inc.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision

Description: To permit a residential and mixed use development consisting of 5 blocks with a variety of uses, including stacked townhouses, mid-rise and tall buildings

Reference Number: 17 242390 ESC 35 OZ

Property Address: Various Addresses

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001557

Legacy Case No.: PL171216

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003152

Legacy Lead Case No.: PL171216

Heard: August 4, 2022 by Telephone Conference Call

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

KS Eglinton Square Inc.; and KS Engelhart GP Inc.

Adam Brown Jessica Smuskowitz

City of Toronto

Amanda Hill Daniel Elmadany

Metro Ontario Real Estate Limited

Conner Harris

DECISION DELIVERED BY BRYAN W. TUCKEY AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1The Tribunal completed this written decision with respect to a proposed settlement for the above noted matter. KS Eglinton Square Inc. and KS Engelhart GP Inc. (“Applicant”) has filed Appeals against the City of Toronto (“City”) for its failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) pursuant to s. 22(7) and a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) pursuant to s. 34 (11) of the Planning Act (“Act”). The property is known municipally as 1 through 70 Eglington Square, 1431 and 1437 Victoria Park Avenue and 14, 18, 22 and 26 Engelhart Crescent in the City (“subject lands”).

2The subject lands currently contain a shopping mall with surface parking and four apartment buildings. The Applicant intends to redevelop the subject lands in phases and the OPA and ZBA are required in order to facilitate the proposed mixed-use development.

3The effect of the two planning instruments under appeal is to provide for a comprehensive and complete mixed-use redevelopment plan in order to allow a mixed-use development and to permit an increased height and density on the subject lands. The proposed development would be phased and integrated within a public and privately owned road system and along with publicly and privately owned park and open space areas (“development”).

4The three parties were all represented at a Telephone Conference Call as noted above. The purpose of this call is to ensure the Tribunal has all the materials required to write a decision and to clarify any matter the Tribunal may have.

5Counsel for the Applicant, Adam Brown advised the Tribunal that the Applicant has reached a full settlement (“proposed settlement”) with the City. The details of the proposed settlement are found in the Affidavit of Benjamin Larson.

6The Tribunal has the following information before it in support of the proposed settlement and this written decision.

1. an Affidavit of a qualified land use planner, Mr. Benjamin Larson;
2. draft OPA in a suitable form for the Tribunal to review and approve;
3. draft ZBA in a suitable form for the Tribunal to review and approve;
4. a draft order for consideration of the Tribunal; and
5. a confirmation that City Council approved the proposed settlement at its December 15,2021 meeting (CC38.9). The conditions of Council are included in the planning instruments.

7The Tribunal has two planning instruments for consideration in this written decision:

1. an OPA to the Official Plan for the City of Toronto (“City OP”). The OPA proposes a Site and Area Specific Policy (“SASP”) that provides specific policy guidance with respect to implementing the proposed settlement. The development will be phased.; and
2. a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) to bring the subject lands into City-wide Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, as amended as an exception zone category. Details of the content of this ZBA are found in Mr. Larson’s Affidavit (Tab D). The ZBA is very comprehensive in content and applies to the entirety of the subject lands. It includes a series of site specific provisions including building heights, maximum Gross Floor Areas (“GFA”), a maximum number of dwelling units, provisions for a day nursery along with retail/service commercial, amenity and service use located at grade along with the requisite zone provisions.

BACKGROUND, SUBJECT PROPERTY AND AREA ANALYSIS

8The subject lands currently contain the existing Eglington Square Shopping Centre (“shopping centre”) along with requisite surface parking. The subject lands also contain multiple three story apartment buildings along the north side of Engelhart Crescent. It has a total site area of 6.711 hectares (“ha”).

9The subject lands are presently surrounded by established commercial and industrial properties and low-rise residential homes to the South. It is located within the Golden Mile along the Eglinton Avenue East Corridor, which provides a range of retail, service-commercial and office uses serving the traveling public. The general area is comprised mainly of large-format retail buildings and surface parking with low-rise commercial and industrial buildings to the north and south of Eglinton Avenue East.

10The subject property is well served by active transportation options. The options include: the planned Gatineau Hydro Corridor Trail improvements, a new Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit higher order transit station, along with new streets and pedestrian and cycling connections to better connect transit users with the new employment, retail, residential and institutional uses in the area.

11Surrounding land uses are North - an existing park and a commercial plaza with surface parking located at 1880 Eglinton Avenue East; East - an existing grocery store with surface parking, a large commercial-industrial building and an outdoor storage area associated with an industrial use; South - a low-rise residential neighborhood which includes single detached homes and walk up apartments that are within a ‘Neighbourhoods’ designation and a mix of non-residential uses along the east side of Victoria Park Avenue; and West - a mix of commercial retail and service commercial uses and a cluster of predominantly mid-rise apartment buildings.

12The proposed development has had a long history which is summarized as follows. The Applicant filed a privately initiated OPA with the City in September, 2016. The intention of this OPA was to provide a preliminary framework for a mix of tall buildings ranging from 25 to 40 storeys as well as low-rise townhomes at the south end of the subject lands. The proposed development would retain and build around the existing shopping centre. The OPA was appealed to the Tribunal in November 2017, in October 2017, the Applicant submitted a ZBA in support of and to implement the original OPA. In June 2021 the ZBA was appealed to the Tribunal.

13In December 2019, the Applicant provided a ‘without prejudice’ settlement offer and formal revisions to the proposed OPA to the City. Notable revisions included the demolition/redevelopment of the shopping centre, the removal of the block of existing rental apartments along the south side of Engelhart Crescent, and a proposed density of 4.95 Floor Space Index (“FSI”). These changes resulted in more flexibility in building placement and allowed the Applicant to integrate a new street network as well as new public parks.

14On December 15, 2021, City Council endorsed the proposed settlement offer as modified with a series of directions found in CC38.9. It is this proposed settlement that is the subject of the Tribunal’s written decision.

PROPOSED SETTLEMENT

15Mr. Larson opined that the proposed settlement provides for a comprehensive and complete mixed-use redevelopment of the subject lands. This is obtained through a phased redevelopment of the subject lands. The proposed settlement will revitalize the subject lands with a comprehensive and transit supportive mixed-use development which will contribute toward the establishment of a complete community. It maintains the intent of the Golden Mile Secondary Plan’s – OPA 499 (“GMSP”) vision, goals, and objectives.

16The main components of the proposed settlement include the following;

1. a series of new public streets and right-of-way widenings are provided in keeping with the GMSP;
2. two public parks are proposed on the subject lands which when combined reflect a total of 20% of the side area (net any conveyances for public streets and right-of-way widenings) The two public parks will be a minimum of 2,858 square metres (“sq m”) and 7,277 sq m respectively;
3. the public street network serves to develop the subject lands into multiple development blocks that will accommodate a mix of uses in new buildings;
4. a total GFA of 265,007 sq m consisting of 256,550 sq m of residential GFA and 4,909 sq m of non-residential GFA. The total FSI is 3.95 with a maximum number of 3,638 dwelling units;
5. seven new buildings are distributed across the three development blocks with a diversity of built forms consisting of six tall buildings ranging in height from 22 to 46 storeys and two mid-rise buildings ranging in height from six to 11 stories. Angular planes were used to assist in achieving appropriately scaled streetwall heights that respect the adjacent planned right-of-way widths where appropriate. The tall buildings are all slender in size (with a maximum 750 sq m gross construction area for tower floor plates) and incorporate 25 to 28 metre (“m”) separation distances between them. A well-defined six storey podium serves to define Eglinton Avenue East, Eglinton Square and Victoria Park Avenue. Buildings situated along the new internal public streets also have appropriately scaled streetwalls ranging from four to six storeys in height.
6. Proposed retail and commercial uses are predominantly located along Eglinton Avenue East, Eglinton Square and Victoria Park Avenue frontages; and
7. the Applicant has agreed to provide community benefits which include a 929 sq m childcare centre, 85 affordable rental housing units consisting of 30 affordable rental units and 55 market rental units distributed throughout the subject lands along with a cash contribution.

17The proposed settlement is the subject of a comprehensive transportation planning analysis which includes the requirements found in the GMSP. These studies concluded that there is capacity in the existing and proposed transportation network to accommodate the proposed settlement. Municipal servicing has also been the subject of extensive technical analysis of both the City’s existing and planned municipal infrastructure. These studies concluded that the proposed settlement can be accommodated by existing and planned infrastructure including new municipal infrastructure as the public street network is created and expanded as development is phased across the subject lands.

18A complete series of architectural plans in support of the proposed settlement are found in ‘Exhibit C’ of Mr. Larson's witness statement.

LAND USE PLANNING POLICY

19Mr. Larson in his Affidavit took a very comprehensive view and review of all relevant planning policy, economic development, and urban design objectives. After doing so for this application, he prepared a comprehensive Affidavit in support of the proposed settlement. The OPA and ZBA applications are also supported by a multi-disciplinary project team.

Provincial Policy

20Mr. Larson reviewed s. 2 – Provincial Interests in the Act and noted the many matters that speak specifically to the proposed settlement. He opined that the proposed settlement gives proper consideration and regard to all matters of s. 2 of the Act.

21Mr. Larson outlined the relevant policies in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”) which articulates the provincial led planning policy regime. The PPS encourages the wise management of land in order to achieve efficient land use patterns by directing growth to settlement areas and promoting a compact form of development. Provisions of the PPS summarized in his Affidavit are:

1. promoting efficient development and land use patterns that sustain healthy, livable, and safe communities;
2. focus growth and development in settlement areas;
3. development is in an appropriate location and promotes opportunities for transit-supportive development. Promotes appropriate development standards to facilitate intensification, redevelopment, a compact urban form, while avoiding or mitigating public health and safety risks;
4. accommodation of an appropriate range of residential and other uses and accommodating a significant supply and range of housing options through intensification and redevelopment. Directing new housing to locations where appropriate infrastructure in public services are or will be available;
5. the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit supportive development. Providing a suitable range of recreation, parks and open space while encouraging a sense of community by promoting well designed built form and conserving features that help define local character;
6. promotes densities and mix of land uses which result in the efficient use of land and infrastructure;
7. supports active transportation and are transit supportive. Provides infrastructure and public service facilities in an efficient, coordinated, and cost-effective manner that considers impacts from a changing climate;
8. identify appropriate areas for intensification with appropriate development standards and directing development to locations that have an appropriate level of infrastructure and public service facilities; and
9. supporting long-term prosperity by optimizing the use of land resources, infrastructure, and public service facilities.

22Mr. Larson opined that the proposed OPA and ZBA are consistent with the 2020 PPS.

23Mr. Larson in his Affidavit outlined how the proposed settlement conforms to A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 (“Growth Plan”) as amended. The Growth Plan establishes a comprehensive growth management strategy for municipalities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Relevant policy considerations found in Mr. Larson’s Affidavit include:

1. the subject lands are designated “Mixed Use Areas” in the City OP and is located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area (“PMTSA”). The subject property is also located within the boundaries of the GMSP which provides an overarching framework for land use, development capacity, a new street network and a parks and open space system;
2. important policies relate to the creation of complete communities and optimizing the use of land and infrastructure. A diverse range and mix of housing options that are convenient to a range of transportation facilities, provide for a more compact built form and vibrant public realm are encouraged;
3. municipalities are directed to undertake integrated planning in order to manage forecasted growth to the horizon of the growth plan. Integrated planning will assist in providing an urban form that will optimize infrastructure particularly along transit and transportation corridors, in an effort to support the achievement of complete communities through a more compact built form;
4. supports intensification to make efficient use of land and infrastructure is promoted. Prioritize intensification and higher densities in strategic growth areas to make efficient use of land an infrastructure and support transit viability;
5. assists in the development of a complete community with a diverse mix of land uses;
6. provides for a complete community by promoting a compact built form that is integrated in the community and with adjacent land uses;
7. helps ensure economic development and competitiveness of the Greater Golden Horseshoe by integrating and aligning land use planning and economic development goals and strategies; and
8. makes efficient use of available infrastructure to accommodate growth

24Mr. Larson opined that the proposed OPA and ZBA conform to the policies of the 2019 Growth Plan as amended.

Municipal Policy

City of Toronto Official Plan

25Mr. Larson advised the Tribunal that the City OP broadly guides land use and development throughout the City. It is based on steering growth and change to parts of the City that can and should accommodate it while protecting ‘Neighborhoods’ and greenspace from development pressures

26The subject lands are designated ‘Mixed-Use Areas’ within the City OP and are situated on an Avenue within the overall City structure. It is located within a PMTSA and is adjacent to ‘Neighborhoods’ designated lands to the south.

27City OP policy as it applies to the subject lands, permits a broad range of commercial, residential, institutional uses in single-use or mixed-use buildings, as well as parks and open spaces. Development is intended to create a balance of a high-quality urban environment that reduces automobile dependency, meets the needs of the local community, and provides opportunities for new jobs and homes on underutilized lands.

28Mr. Larson noted that the City OP sets out a number of strategies and objectives to assist in meeting its desired outcome within Mixed Use Areas that include:

1. building new neighborhoods by providing a comprehensive planning framework to reflect the City’s OP City-wide goals in keeping with the context of the Plan.
2. using municipal land, infrastructures, and services efficiently. Directing planning for new development in the context of reducing auto dependency and creating a multi-modal approach to address the transportation demands and impacts of new development;
3. concentrating jobs and people in areas well served by surface transit and rapid transit stations;
4. promoting mixed use development to increase opportunities for living close to work and to encourage walking and cycling for local trips;
5. offering opportunities for people of all means to be affordably housed;
6. facilitating social interaction, public safety, and cultural and economic activity. Acknowledges the importance of the public realm and high quality urban design in creating great communities and building a great City;
7. promoting quality architectural, landscape and urban design in each of the character areas, and ensures that sidewalk and boulevards are designed to promote safe, attractive, interesting, and comfortable spaces for pedestrians in order to support the development of sustainable, economically vibrant, and complete communities;
8. provides direction on built form and building typologies. New development is intended to fit harmoniously within the new planned context including buildings to be massed and located to frame adjacent streets, a series of set back policy directions, active grade uses, a transition of scale to low-rise areas and ensuring connections/access to adjacent sidewalks, streets, parks, and open spaces.
9. the vision of the GMSP is for a vibrant public realm as a key structural element for its successful implementation with existing, new, and reconfigured/widened streets that link to new parks and a series of open spaces.
10. improving air quality with an energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and
11. protecting neighborhoods, adjacent land uses, and green spaces from the effects of nearby development.

29Mr. Larson is of the opinion start the OPA and ZBA support and conform to the policies of the City OP.

Zoning By-law Amendment

30The subject lands are zoned District Commercial Zone DC-39-71-111-112-113-114 and Apartment Residential Zone A-8-22-44-64-83-115 in the former Scarborough Employment Districts Zoning By-law No. 8978. The DC zoning permits a wide range of retail, employment, and commercial uses while the A zoning permits residential apartment buildings, group homes, and multiple family dwellings with specific GFA, parking and other performance standards.

31By-law No. 8978 has been superseded with respect of the subject lands by the City-wide Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 (“By-law 569-2013”) as amended. Therefore, an amendment to the former Scarborough By-law is not required.

32Under By-law 569-2013 the subject lands are zoned CR 0.1 (c0.1; r0.0) SS3 (x471) which permits Apartment Buildings, Mixed-Use Buildings and Townhomes and RA (au99.0) (x475) which permits Apartment Buildings and other related uses.

33The proposed ZBA would rezone the subject lands to an Exception CR (791) Zone in keeping with City practices. The ZBA establishes provisions for such matters such as location of buildings, maximum heights of buildings, tower setbacks, tower separation and stepbacks, minimum required parking and loading requirements and minimum amount of two and three bedroom units. There are a series of exception regulations and other salient applicable regulations. The ZBA also has a series of Holding Provisions along with Section 37 requirements and outlines the various obligations of the Applicant.

Golden Mile Secondary Plan – OPA 499

34The GMSP provides more specific along with additional land use planning policy guidance that are in conformity with the general objectives and policies of the City OP. At the time of the submission of the original OPA, the subject lands were not located within a Secondary Plan Area. City Council has adopted OPA 499, and the proposed settlement has been informed by the vision, objectives, and policies set forth in the GMSP.

35The GMSP defines a range of development densities, an overall built form strategy, locations of new parks, potential privately owned publicly accessible spaces (“POPS”) and public art locations along with a series of future public road alignments. It also includes policies encouraging and promoting a diverse range of housing to accommodate a range of household types, sizes, and incomes.

36It is Mr. Larson's opinion that the policies of the GMSP are relevant, and the proposed settlement has had appropriate regard to the GMSP.

37In conclusion, Mr. Larson is of the opinion that the proposed settlement represents good planning and is in the public interest. The proposed OPA and ZBA have appropriate regard to s.2 of the Act, are consistent with the PPS, conform to the Growth Plan, as amended, conform with the policies of the City OP and the SASP which provides for additional detailed policies to further implement the GMSP, thus having appropriate regard for OPA 499 – GMSP. The Tribunal agrees.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

City Guidelines Relating to the Proposed Settlement

38Mr. Larson when questioned at the Telephone Conference Call (in addition to those found in the Affidavit) brought to the attention of the Tribunal a number of City Guidelines that are relevant to the proposed settlement. These guidelines are not statutory policy documents but serve to compliment and detail City OP policy. The planner advised the Tribunal that the proposed settlement has had appropriate regard for the following City guidelines:

1. Golden Mile Urban Design Guidelines
2. Tall Building Guidelines;
3. Mid-Rise Guidelines; and
4. Growing up - Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities.

Section 37

39The City and the Applicant have come to an agreement on a series of Section 37 Community Benefits that are detailed in Schedule A – Section 37 Provisions in the ZBA. The Community Benefits will be secured in a Section 37 Agreement prior to the issuance of any building permit. Community Benefits include: the provision of affordable housing units; a childcare centre, parkland dedication, POPS and mid block connections, and transportation demand management measures, a cash contribution, along with other matters as specified.

Metro (Grocery Store Lands)

40The east/west street that extends through the southern portion and the north/south street located along the border of the subject lands and the Metro property were noted by Mr. Larson. Both street alignments are of particular interest to the lands owned by Metro Ontario Real Estate Ltd. located to the east of the subject lands. Mr. Harris, Counsel for Metro Ontario Real Estate Ltd., advised the Tribunal that the Applicant has agreed to consult with his client with respect to the location of the proposed streets and their alignments when either the draft plan of subdivision or site plan application is being prepared. Mr. Brown confirmed that this consultation would happen at the appropriate time.

Relationship between the Proposed SASP and OPA 499

41Mr. Larson noted in his Affidavit that should there be duplication between the proposed SASP and OPA 499, which includes the GMSP, should it come into effect on the subject lands, a revised SASP will be requested of the Tribunal to eliminate any duplicative policies and to allow all policies to be read and applied together on a go forward basis. The Tribunal agrees.

TRIBUNAL FINDINGS

42The Tribunal accepts the content of the Affidavit of Mr. Larson in its entirety and finds the OPA and ZBA (as put forward in the proposed settlement) meet all the relevant policy tests of s. 2 of the Act, the PPS, the Growth Plan, all relevant foundational policies of the City OP, and meets the intent of By-law No. 569-2013. The development represents good planning and is in the public interest. The Tribunal agrees that the proposed settlement has had appropriate regard for the relevant City Guidelines and OPA 499 – GMSP.

43The Tribunal finds that the City has extremely well established planning policy for the subject lands and surrounding area and has followed a careful, complete, and comprehensive planning review of the proposed settlement, the OPA and ZBA. The Tribunal is satisfied with the efforts of the City and all Applicants involved, to create a vision for the Golden Mile that has the potential to be truly remarkable. It is an extraordinary City Building venture and the policies found in the proposed SASP provide a complete and comprehensive basis on which to guide development.

44The Tribunal understands this is an early step in its implementation and long term commitment is required by all involved. This commitment is demonstrated through the Affidavit outlining the efforts of all Parties to come to the proposed settlement.

45The Tribunal finds that the OPA and ZBA align with the established principles of relevant provincial policy; the City OP, and the GMSP for reasons including the following:

a. the subject lands are within “Mixed Use Areas” and a “Protected Major Transit Station Area” within the City where intensification is promoted. It is along the route of the new higher order Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit route and will be served by a transit station;

b. represents a comprehensive, well-organized development and land use pattern that serves to make efficient use of land and infrastructure;

c. accommodates an appropriate range of residential and other uses and provides a significant supply and range of housing options through intensification and redevelopment. The proposed settlement will add a total of 3,638 much needed additional dwelling units in the City;

d. serves to integrate land use planning, growth management, transit supportive development as it offers excellent transit-oriented development being within walking distance of an Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit station;

e. promotes densities and mix of land uses which result in the efficient use of land and infrastructure. It is appropriately scaled and sized to ensure a balance between the priority of intensification without resulting in negative built form impacts by providing an appropriate transition and buffer to adjacent land uses;

f. contributes to the creation of complete communities and optimizes the use of land and infrastructure; with a diverse mix of land uses by promoting a compact built form that is integrated into the community and with adjacent land uses;

g. helps to ensure economic development and competitiveness of the City;

h. serves to integrate and align land use planning and economic development goals and strategies; and

i. makes efficient use of available infrastructure to accommodate growth.

46In conclusion, the Tribunal finds that the proposed settlement, as described in the Affidavit, is appropriate and a desirable addition to the City, represents good land use planning, is consistent or in conformity with and meets the objectives of all requisite public policy and is in the public interest.

47The Tribunal is presented with a draft OPA and ZBA. The proposed settlement and planning instruments were presented to the City Council on December 15, 2021. City Council accepted the ‘without prejudice’ settlement offer subject to a series of conditions which have been included in either the OPA or ZBA. The Tribunal conducted its review of the proposed settlement on August 4, 2022 during the telephone hearing and was then satisfied with the evidence and made its findings and determined that the Final Order should issue to allow the Appeals in part and approve the instruments. It is therefore appropriate that this Order is effective as of August 4, 2022 in keeping with Rule 24.3 of the Tribunal’s – Rules of Practice and Procedure.

48The Tribunal finds that should any part of the Official Plan Amendment No. 499 in Tribunal Case No. OLT-22-002510 come into force and effect as it applies to the lands subject of this Order, the City and Applicant may seek revisions to delete, amend or revise policies and/or mapping, which are duplicative or similar to amendments to the City OP contained in OPA No. 499 and any such amended Order will be effective on the date of this Order.

ORDER

49THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Official Plan Amendment Appeal and the Zoning Appeal are allowed, in part, and that the City of Toronto’s Official Plan is hereby amended in the manner set out in Attachment “1” to this Order and Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 of the City of Toronto, as amended, is hereby amended in the manner set out in Attachment “2” to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk to format the Official Plan Amendment in Attachment “1” and the Zoning By-law Amending in Attachment "2", as may be necessary, for record keeping purposes.

50THE TRIBUNAL CONFIRMS AND ORDERS that pursuant to subsections 17(5) and 22(11) of the Planning Act and Rules 24.2 and 24.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure should any part of Official Plan Amendment No. 499 in Tribunal Case No. OLT-22-002510 come into force and effect as it applies to the lands subject of this Order, the City and Appellant may seek a revised Attachment "1" to delete, amend or revise policies and/or mapping, which are duplicative or similar to amendments to the Official Plan contained in Official Plan Amendment No. 499 and any such amended Order will be effective on the effective date of this Order.

51THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT, pursuant to Rule 24.3 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, notwithstanding the eventual date of the formal issuance of this Order, it shall be, and was, effective as of Thursday, August 4, 2022 which is the date that the Tribunal received and considered the evidence in support of the request for the Final Order in this proceeding and determined that the Appeals should be allowed and the amending instruments should be approved.

“Bryan W. Tuckey”

BRYAN W. TUCKEY

MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: 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.

ATTACHMENT “1”

OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT

ATTACHMENT “2”