Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: September 1, 2022

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002185

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

Applicant/Appellant: Fengate CCC Holdings LP Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit a mixed-use community with five residential and mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 179555 NNY 16 OZ Property Address: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-22-002185 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-002185 OLT Case Name: Fengate CCC Holdings LP v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Fengate CCC Holdings LP Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision Description: To permit a mixed-use community with five residential and mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 179556 NNY 16 SB Property Address: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-22-002186 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-002185

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 69(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Fengate CCC Holdings LP Subject: Protest the levying of fees in relation to an application for a zoning by-law amendment Description: To permit a mixed-use community with five residential and mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 179555 NNY 16 OZ Property Address: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-21-001207 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-002185

Heard: July 13, 2022 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Fengate CCC Holdings LP	Jason Park
City of Toronto	Roman Ivanov
Don Mills Residents Inc.	Conner Harris
Toronto District School Board	Julie Lesage

DECISION DELIVERED BY CARMINE TUCCI AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

1This is the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) for this file.

2The purpose of the Case Management Conference was to receive status updates from both parties and to organize the hearing of these appeals.

3Fengate CCC Holdings LP (“Appellant”/“Applicant”) applied to the City of Toronto to redevelop the site with a variety of land uses and housing types, to create a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented mixed-use community. It would include five residential and mixed-use buildings, with nine towers ranging in height from 40 to 52-storeys, atop 6-storey podiums. The development would include 308,282 square metres of gross floor area, with a Floor Space Index of 9.95. It will include residential uses, at-grade retail uses, at-grade community uses and public parkland. The site will be divided into eight blocks, including five development blocks and two new public park blocks. A new public street will be created. Approximately 4,086 residential units will be provided. The application was deemed complete on July 12, 2021.

4The subject property consists of two municipal addresses: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place. Collectively it is approximately 30,996 square metres in size and is located in the Wynford-Concorde area between the Don Valley Parkway, East Don River Valley, the CP Railway Corridor, and Eglinton Avenue East. It is currently occupied by a commercial office development known as the Concorde Corporate Centre.

5An amendment to the new City Zoning By-law 569-2013 and the former City of North York Zoning By-law No. 7625 is required to permit the proposed uses, increase the height and density, and to revise other development standards to accommodate the proposal.

6A draft plan of subdivision is also required to divide the property into parcels that facilitate the development proposal. The Draft Plan of Subdivision will provide for the creation and conveyance of three new blocks to the City for the new public street and two new public parks.

7Planning Staff recommended that a virtual community consultation meeting be held, that staff undertake a Focused Area Study of the area, and that staff are directed to review the applications concurrently and within the context of the Focused Area Study. A Public Meeting was not held.

NATURE OF THE APPEALS

8The Applicant appealed under s. 34(11) and s. 51(34) of the Planning Act for the failure of Council to make a decision within the prescribed timeframes. The Applicant contends that the applications represent good planning, are consistent with the policies contained in the PPS, and conform with the policies set out in the Growth Plan and the City of Toronto Official Plan.

PARTY / PARTICIPANT STATUS REQUESTS

9The Tribunal received Party Status applications from Don Mills Residents Inc., and the Toronto District School Board.

10The Tribunal canvassed counsel for the Appellant and counsel for the City of Toronto; there were no objections to the granting of Party Status.

11The Tribunal granted Party Status to Don Mills Residents Inc., and the Toronto District School Board.

12The Tribunal received forty-four (44) Participant Status applications.

13The Tribunal canvassed counsel for the Appellant and counsel for the City of Toronto; there were no objections to the granting of Participant Status.

14The Tribunal granted Participant Status to the applications which are listed herein within the Procedural Order in “Attachment 1”.

MEDIATION

15The Tribunal offered all parties the opportunity to seek a resolution via the Tribunal led mediation. The Parties have agreed to consider this offer once they have finalized their Issues List.

MERITS HEARING

16The Tribunal hereby schedules a Video Hearing of these appeals to begin on Monday June 12, 2023, commencing at 10 a.m.; fourteen (14) days have been set aside.

17Parties are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077

Audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll-Free) 1(888) 299-1889

Access code: 927-921-077

18Parties and Participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available at: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

19Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line, provided above.

20Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

21No further notice will be given.

22The Member is not seized.

23So Orders the Tribunal.

“Carmine Tucci”

CARMINE TUCCI

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”

Ontario Land Tribunal 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Telephone: (416) 212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248 Website: olt.gov.on.ca

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire 655 rue Bay, suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Téléphone: (416) 212-6349 Sans Frais: 1-866-448-2248 Site Web: olt.gov.on.ca

ISSUE DATE: CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002185

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

Applicant and Appellant: Fengate CCC Holdings LP Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit a mixed-use community with five residential and mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 179555 NNY 16 OZ Property Address: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002185 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002185

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Fengate CCC Holdings LP Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision Description: To permit a mixed-use community with five residential and mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 179556 NNY 16 SB Property Address: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002186 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002185

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 69(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Fengate CCC Holdings LP Subject: Protest the levying of fees in relation to an application for a zoning by-law amendment Description: To permit a mixed-use community with five residential and mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 179555 NNY 16 OZ Property Address: 1-3 Concorde Gate and 10-12 Concorde Place Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-001207 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002185

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The Tribunal orders that:

1. The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.

Organization of the Hearing

2. The hearing, if required, will commence on June 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m., at Ontario Land Tribunal, 655 Bay Street, 16th Floor, Toronto, ON M5G 1E5 in the City of Toronto, or virtually by video hearing.

3. The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:

Date: [Date]

GoTo Meeting:

Access Code:

Audio only telephone line:

Audio-only access code:

4. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 14 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible. The length of the hearing may be shortened as issues are resolved or settlement is achieved. The procedural order deadlines are generally found in Attachment “1” to this Order.

5. The parties and participants identified at the Case Management Conference are listed in Attachment “2” to this Order.

6. The Issues are set out in the Issues List referred to below and included as Attachment “3” to this Order. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits it, unless such changes reflect the narrowing or elimination of issues, or such changes arise from the submission of revised plans. A party who asks for changes to this list may have costs awarded against it.

7. The order of evidence at the hearing shall be as set out in Attachment “4” hereto. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on consent or by Order of the Tribunal.

8. All parties and participants (or their representatives) shall provide a mailing address, email address, and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible. Any such person who retains a representative (legal counsel or agent) subsequent to the first Case Management Conference must advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, mailing address, email address and phone number as soon as possible.

9. If the hearing is to proceed electronically, any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website (https://olt.gov.on.ca/appeals-process/video-hearing/).

Requirements Before the Hearing

10. A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before February 21, 2023. For expert witnesses, a party is to include a copy of the Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified. Any challenges to the witness, including qualifications of a witness to give opinion evidence in the area of expertise proposed shall be made by motion in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules and notice of same must be served on the other Parties on or before March 6, 2023.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before March 20, 2023 to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting, on or before April 3, 2023, the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case coordinator.

12. The parties shall prepare and file a hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before May 15, 2023, with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, at a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time, prior to, or in the course of the hearing.

13. An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement that shall include: an acknowledgement of expert’s duty form, the area(s) of expertise, any reports prepared by the expert, and any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in Section 16. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the expert witness has prepared any report(s) that he/she intends to rely on at the hearing, and which did not form part of the submissions made to the City, such report(s) shall be provided to the other parties at the same as the delivery of expert witness statements, as in Section 16 below.

14. Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in Section 16 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in Section 16 below.

15. On or before May 1, 2023, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

16. On or before May 1, 2023, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements (full disclosure including reports) to the other parties and to the OLT case coordinator, in accordance with Section 24 below.

17. On or before May 8, 2023, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

18. Any party may reply to an expert report, witness statement, outline of expert’s evidence or participant statement, provided that such reply is provided to all other parties on or before May 29, 2023.

19. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal in accordance with the Tribunals Rules (Rule 10), which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties at least 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

20. On or before May 22, 2023, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties. The Tribunal and all parties shall be notified if a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

21. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case coordinator on or before May 24, 2023, to be filed in both electronic and hardcopy format in accordance with Section 24 below.

22. A party who provides the written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have that witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the Tribunal and the parties are notified on or before June 5, 2023, that the written evidence will not form part of their record.

23. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. Such a motion shall be in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rule 10, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties at least 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

24. Any documents which may be used by a party in cross examination of an opposing party’s witness shall be password protected and only be accessible to the Tribunal and the other parties if it is introduced as evidence at the hearing, pursuant to the directions provided by the OLT case coordinator or as directed by the Tribunal.

25. All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy, to the Tribunal and the Parties. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7. The Tribunal will be provided a hard copy of documents and materials in advance of the hearing event as soon as practicable. All documents to be filed with the Tribunal shall be organized, tabbed and digitally searchable and such materials will be filed in accordance with directions contained in the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, dated June 29, 2021, or as may be amended. This Section 24 applies regardless of whether the hearing event is in-person or electronic.

26. If the applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal, including all revised plans, drawings, proposed instruments, updated supporting documents and reports, to the other parties on or before January 23, 2023. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

27. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. Tribunal Rule 17 applies to such requests.

28. The Tribunal may conduct mediation on consent of all parties, on consent of those parties who wish to participate in mediation, or if the Tribunal sees fit.

29. The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in this Procedural Order are set out in Attachment “5”.

This Member is [not] seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

BEFORE:

Name of Member: ) Date: ) )

_____________________________________

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

ATTACHMENT “1”

SUMMARY OF KEY DATES

Date	Hearing Event
January 23, 2023	Filing of revised proposal, including all revised plans, drawings, proposed instruments, updated supporting documents and reports (if required) – para. 26
February 21, 2023	Exchange of List of Witnesses and the order in which they will be called – para. 10
March 6, 2023	Notice of Motion (if required) to challenge witness(es) – para. 10
March 20, 2023	Expert Witness Meeting – para. 11
April 3, 2023	Filing of Statement(s) of Agreed Facts and Issues – para. 11
May 1, 2023	Delivery of Participant Statements – para. 15 Exchange of Witness Statements – para. 16
May 8, 2023	Confirmation to Tribunal if all reserved hearing dates are still required – para. 17
May 15, 2023	Filing of Hearing Plan – para. 12
May 23, 2023	Exchange of Visual Evidence – para. 20
May 24, 2023	Filing of Joint Document Book – para. 21
May 29, 2023	Exchange of Reply Evidence/Statements – para. 18
June 5, 2023	Notification to Tribunal and Parties if witness not to provide oral evidence – para. 22
June 12-29, 2023 (14 days)	Contested Hearing (if required) – para. 2

ATTACHMENT “2”

PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES

Fengate CCC Holdings LP Jason Park / Adrian Frank Devine Park LLP 2302 - 250 Yonge Street Toronto, ON M5B 2L7 T: 416.645.4572 / 416.645.4582 E: jason.park@devinepark.com / adrian.frank@devinepark.com

CITY OF TORONTO Roman Ivanov / Colin Dougherty Legal Services, Planning & Administrative Tribunal Law 26th fl., 55 John St. Toronto ON M5V 3C6 T: 416.392.4807 / 416.392.3116 E: Roman.Ivanov@toronto.ca / Colin.Dougherty@toronto.ca

TORONTO LANDS CORPORATION, AS AGENT FOR TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD Pitman Patterson / Julie Lesage / Borden Laden Gervais LLP Bay Adelaide Centre, East Tower 22 Adelaide Street West, Suite 3400 Toronto, ON M5H 4E3 T: 416.367.6109 / 416.367.6276 E: PPatterson@blg.com / JLesage@blg.com

DON MILLS RESIDENTS INC. Conner Harris Rayman Harris LLP 250 The Esplanade Suite 202 Toronto, ON M5A 1J2 T: 416.597.5422 E: conner@rbllp.com

PARTICIPANTS

Abdallah Abdula E: abdallah.abdula@gmail.com

Ak Hajee E: akhajee@gmail.com

Alicja Kane-Makarewicz E: akmakar@look.ca

Almisc Co-operative Homes Inc. / Jane Rowan T: 416.570.3622 E: manager.almise@rogers.com jane.rowan@sympatico.ca;

Bernard (and Marlene) Deuchars T: 416.447.4587 E: bernard.deuchars@yahoo.com

Beryl Macleod T: 416.441.2343 E: bea-mail@rogers.com

Carole Kurtz E: carolekurtz2002@hotmail.com

Carolyn (Cary) Greenberg T: 647.385.9973 E: sunapplekk@gmail.com

Craig Hunter T: 416.456.3663 E: rcraighunter@gmail.com

Daniel Serbert T: 416.543.5629 E: lornaeatonca@yahoo.com

Dilys Jones T: 416.385.9418 E: dilysjones@rogers.com

Elaine Selke T: 416.229.1387 E: elaineselke@rogers.com

Florence Arlene Mawson E: arlenemawson1@gmail.com

Geoffrey Hedges E: ghedges@rogers.com

George Cecil Adams & Katherine Marie Adams E: cecadams@rogers.com

Gerald Mawson Geoff Norris E: gmawson@hotmail.com E: norrisga@gmail.com

Gloria Alvarez E: gloria_mag@hotmail.com

Irene Miao-Glass T: 416.422.4327 E: imiaoglass@gmail.com

Iris Singh T: 416.435.1480 E: irissingh2@gmail.com

James Dubray T: 416.450.3110 E: dubray.jamesl@gmail.com

John Kurtz E: dockurtz2004@yahoo.ca

John McMahon T: 416.281.6203 E: mcmahj@hotmail.com

Judith E.J. McMahon E: jmcmahon349@hotmail.com

Julianne Fernie T: 416.710.2784 E: julfernie@aol.com

Karl Frank E: k.frank@sympatico.ca

Kathryn Ellett E: k.ellett@rogers.com

Kevin Meschino T: 416.444.4124 E: kevin.meschino@gmail.com

Leila Petrook T: 416.485.0449 E: lpetrook@gmail.com

Linda O’Reilly T: 647.435.9873 E: lgcor@hotmail.com

Margaret Scott T: 416.444.4710 E: margmscott69@gmail.com

Marlene (and Bernie) Waisglass T: 416.445.8248 E: marwaisglass@rogers.com

Maureen Kaukinen E: mkaukinen@sympatico.ca

Michele Goddard E: michele.goddard@sympatico.ca

Michelle Boissiere T: 416.425.3523 E: mboissiere121@gmail.com

Naomi Joel E: naomijoel@hotmail.com

Neal Cooper E: neal_cooper@rogers.com

Patricia Szego T: 416.751.9621 E: patszego@gmail.com

Peter Evans T: 416.733.7748 E: peteralexevans@gmail.com

Richard MacFarlane T: 416.484.4560 E: rnmacfarlane@gmail.com

Sara Kellerman T: 416.444.9763 E: saralkellerman@gmail.com

Saul Joel E: sjoel@rogers.com

Vaino Einola E: vainoeinola@sympatico.ca

Walter Lemon E: walterlemon@rogers.com

ATTACHMENT “3”

ISSUES LIST

Note: The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

CITY OF TORONTO

1. Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment represent good planning, have regard to the matters of provincial interest, and are they consistent with 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, and 4.6 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020?

2. Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment represent good planning, have regard to the matters of provincial interest, and conform with 1.2.1, 2.2.4, 2.2.5, 2.2.6, 3.2 the Growth Plan, 2019?

3. Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment represent good planning, have regard to the matters of provincial interest, and conform with the Toronto Official Plan?

4. Is it premature to consider this application prior to the completion of the Focused Area Study for the Wynford-Concorde Area?

5. Land Use

Does the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment adequately contribute to creating a complete community, in relation to the proposed non-residential gross floor area, and the degree of office replacement proposed?

6. Site Organization

Does the proposed site organization, including the location of buildings, setbacks, location of non-residential uses and servicing locations, the location of parks, the manner in which the public realm elements fit within the broader area, and in consideration of the future public realm framework, serve to create a development that will adequately function as a complete community?

7. Height & Density

Is the height of the proposed development and for the zoning by-law amendment good planning? Is the proposed height appropriate for the site? In particular:

a) Does the proposal have regard for the Planning Act, particularly subsections 2(h) and (p)?

b) Does the proposal conform with the Toronto Official Plan?

c) Does the proposal have appropriate regard for the Tall Building Guidelines?

8. Built form

Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment provide for a built form that is good planning? Is the proposed built form appropriate in terms of massing and transition? In particular:

a) Does the proposal have regard for the Planning Act, particularly subsections 2(h) and (p)?

b) Does the proposal conform with the Toronto Official Plan?

c) Does the proposal have appropriate regard for the Tall Building Guidelines?

9. Housing

Does the proposed development reflect the Official Plan's city-wide goals of providing a full range of housing in terms of form, tenure, and affordability?

10. Shadow Impact

Is the shadow impact of the proposed development on the public realm, streets, open spaces, and the proposed parks acceptable?

11. Wind

Is the wind impact of the proposed development acceptable? In particular on the public realm, streets, open spaces, proposed public parks, and outdoor amenity areas.

12. Parks

a. Does the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment conform to Policy 3.2.3 of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

b. Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment show the parkland conveyance in the size, location and configuration that is satisfactory to the City, pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act, and the City’s Parkland Dedication By-law (Chapter 415, Article III of the Municipal Code)?

c. Where the City has determined that on-site parkland is required pursuant to section 42(1) of the Planning Act and the City’s Parkland Dedication By-law Chapter 415, Article III of the Municipal Code (the “Section 42 Parkland”), does the Ontario Land Tribunal have the jurisdiction to determine the size, location and configuration of the Section 42 Parkland for a site?

13. Amenity Space

Does the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment provide sufficient indoor and outdoor amenity space?

14. Transportation

Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment provide sufficient parking for the development?

15. Order if approved

In the event the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied:

1. The official plan and zoning by-law amendment has been prepared in a content and form satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;
2. The City has advised that any building envelope changes to address the findings of the wind tunnel study have been made to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division;
3. The City has confirmation of water, sanitary and stormwater capacity from the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, or the determination of whether holding provisions are required in the Zoning By-law Amendment; and
4. The owner has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Engineering and Construction Services as they relate to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and construction Services.

TORONTO LANDS CORPORATION, AS AGENT FOR TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

1. Does the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment have regard to Section 2 (h), (i), (m) and (n) of the Planning Act?

2. Is the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment consistent with sections 1.1.1(b) and (g), 1.1.3.2(b), 1.1.3.3, 1.1.3.7(b), 1.2.1(d), 1.4.3(c) and (d), 1.6.1, and 1.7.1(c) of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020?

3. Does the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment conform to sections 1.2.1, 2.1, 2.2.1.2(a) and (c), 2.2.1.3(b), 2.2.1.4(a) and (d), 3.1, 3.2.1.5 and 3.2.8 of A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 (the “Growth Plan”)?

   1. Does the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment contribute to the achievement of a complete community, as described under the Growth Plan?

4. Does the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment conform with sections 2.4.14(a), 3.2.2, 4.5.2(g), and 5.1.2 of the City’s Official Plan?

5. Is the approval of the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment premature in the context of availability of school space and accommodation (community/public service facilities)?

6. Is the approval of the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment premature until the City of Toronto has completed a Focused Area Study for the area surrounding the Subject Lands, which considers the requirement for a new TDSB elementary school as part of that study?

7. Is it appropriate and good planning to use a holding symbol or other requirement in the Zoning By-Law Amendment to phase development and ensure that educational facilities are developed and provided in tandem with the pace of growth?

8. Is it good planning to approve the Zoning By-Law Amendment without considering the cumulative impact of the other outstanding planning applications in the area on the ability of school facilities to accommodate growth including the subject development?

9. Does the draft Plan of Subdivision have sufficient regard to Section 51(24) (c) and (j) of the Planning Act?

DON MILLS RESIDENTS INC.

General

1. Do the applications and proposed development (including but not limited to: urban design and built form; proposed heights and densities), or any proposed modifications thereto, represent good planning?

2. Is a secondary planning exercise, and/or a Focused Area Study, appropriate for the area including the subject property in order to guide future development?

a. Should the Focused Area Study set to commence in the Fall of 2022 apply to this development proposal?

3. Are the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications (including but not limited to: built form and urban design; proposed heights and densities) compatible with the existing neighbourhood and City of Toronto guidelines?

Urban Design and Built Form

4. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to policies 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, and 3.3?

5. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, provide appropriate setbacks and tower separation?

6. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, meet the general intent of the City of Toronto’s Urban Design Guidelines, including but not limited to:

a. Tall Buildings Urban Design Guidelines;

b. Complete Streets Guidelines;

c. Privately-Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces (POPS) Urban Design Guidelines;

d. Toronto Accessibility Design Guidelines; and

e. Growing Up Urban Design Guidelines?

Traffic Management and Parking

7. Are the traffic management studies carried out in support of the applications complete and appropriate?

8. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to them, include adequate traffic management measures considering the scale of the proposed development and other development in the surrounding area?

9. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to them, include adequate parking for the area?

10. Is a City-led parking and/or traffic management study appropriate for the larger area within which the applications are located?

a. If so, what is the appropriate scope of such a study?

11. Should a traffic plan during construction for the single roadway into, and out of, the site be prepared?

a. If so, what are the appropriate features of such a plan?

12. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), including but not limited to policies 3.2.2, 3.2.3, and 3.2.4?

13. Are the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), including but not limited to policies 1.6.7 and 1.6.8?

Heights and Densities

14. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to policies 2.1, 2.2, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.5?

15. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), including but not limited to policies 2.2.1, 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.2.6, 5.2.1, 5.2.4, and 5.2.5?

16. Are the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), including but not limited to policies 1.1.1, 1.1.3, and 1.4?

Public Realm, Community Services and Facilities

17. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, include adequate public realm resources and community services and facilities – including (but not limited to) specifically child care and school facilities?

18. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, meet the directives of establishing a complete community?

19. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to policies 2.3.1, 3.1.1, 3.2.2, and 3.2.3?

20. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), including but not limited to policies 2.2.1.4, 3.2.8 and 4.2.5?

21. Are the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), including but not limited to policies 1.5, 1.6.1, 1.6.2, 1.6.3, 1.6.4, and 1.6.5?

Natural Heritage

22. Are the natural heritage studies carried out in support of the applications complete and appropriate?

23. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, adequately consider natural heritage issues?

24. Has preservation of mature trees and an appropriate tree canopy for streets, landscape, and parks in the area been adequately considered?

25. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to policies 2.3.2, 3.4, and 4.3?

26. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), including but not limited to 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.4, 4.2.9, and 4.2.10?

27. Are the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), including but not limited to policies 1.8 and 2.1?

Geotechnical Concerns

28. Are the geotechnical studies carried out in support of the applications complete and appropriate?

29. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, adequately account for the geotechnical conditions of the area?

Safety Concerns

30. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, adequately account for the neighbouring rail corridor?

31. Have safety concerns about the neighbouring rail corridor, including risks of derailment and other adverse events, been adequately mitigated in the applications or any modifications to them?

32. Did the risk assessment performed by the proponent adequately examine all potential adverse scenarios and appropriately assess the risks arising therefrom?

33. Do the applications, or any modifications to the applications, conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to policy 4.4?

34. Do the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), including but not limited to 3.2.5?

35. Are the applications, or any proposed modifications to the applications, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), including but not limited to policies 1.6.4 and 1.6.8?

ATTACHMENT “4”

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Fengate CCC Holdings LP
2. City of Toronto
3. Toronto Lands Corporation as agent for Toronto District School Board
4. Don Mills Residents Inc.
5. Reply by Fengate CCC Holdings LP (if any)

ATTACHMENT “5”

Purpose of the Procedural Order and Meaning of Terms

A party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. An unincorporated group cannot be a party and it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorization from the party.

NOTE that a person who wishes to become a party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the case management conference (CMC), must ask the Tribunal to permit this.

A participant is an individual or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a party may do so). Section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A participant may also be asked questions by the parties should the Tribunal direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.

A participant must be identified and be accorded participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a participant does not have the rights of a party to make such requests of the Tribunal.

Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.

Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing.

A witness statement is a short written outline of the person’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss ; and a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing.

An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness’ opinions on those issues and the complete reasons supporting their opinions and conclusions and (5) a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of expert’s duty.

A participant statement is a short written outline of the person’s or group’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a statement of the participant’s position on the appeal; a list of the issues which the participant wishes to address and the submissions of the participant on those issues; and a list of reports or materials, if any, which the participant wishes to refer to in their statement.

a. Additional Information

A summons may compel the appearance of a person before the Tribunal who has not agreed to appear as a witness. A party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons through a request. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) The request should indicate how the witness’ evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the information provided in the request that the evidence is relevant, necessary or admissible, the party requesting the summons may provide a further request with more detail or bring a motion in accordance with the Rules.

The order of examination of witnesses is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:

• direct examination by the party presenting the witness;
• direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;
• cross-examination by parties of opposite interest;
• re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or
• another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Tribunal.