The R.W. Bloor Street Development Corporation v. Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 100173

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: October 27, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000649

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

Applicant/Appellant: The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request

Description: To permit a 94-storey mixed-use building

Reference Number: 23 120557 STE 11 OZ

Property Address: 15 - 19 Bloor Street W

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000649

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000649

OLT Case Name: The R.W. Bloor Street Development Corporation v. Toronto (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application

Description: To permit a 94-storey mixed-use building

Reference Number: 23 120557 STE 11 OZ

Property Address: 15 - 19 Bloor Street W

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000650

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000649

Heard: September 22, 2023 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation

J. Hoffman D. Bronskill (in absentia)

Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc.

J. Jakubowski M.E. Bench

Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2208

A. Margaritis

City of Toronto

M. LaFortune J. Braun (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF oral decision DELIVERED BY MEMBERS S. GOPIKRISHNA AND G.A. CROSER ON sEPTEMBER 22, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) regarding Appeals brought pursuant to subsections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act by The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation (the “Appellant”) concerning the refusal of the City of Toronto (“City”) to pass an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment (the “Appeal”) to facilitate the redevelopment of the property known municipally as 15-19 Bloor Street West (“Subject Lands”).

2On behalf of the Parties, Counsel for the City provided a brief overview of the development Application for the Subject Lands. The Applicant’s Application was for a 94-storey, mixed use building on the Subject Lands, with 1262 residential units. The Application was submitted to the City for approval in March, 2023. City Council refused the Application in June, 2023, resulting in the aforementioned Appeal before the Tribunal.

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

3The Panel Members reviewed the Affidavit of Service (“AOS”) sworn by Mina Siskopoulos on August 17, 2023, evidencing that notice of the CMC was provided to all required persons. No concerns were raised by the Parties with respect to the AOS, and it was marked as Exhibit 1.

PARTY STATUS REQUESTS

4There were two requests for Party status, respectively, from Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc. (“Mizrahi”) and Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2208 (“TSCC 2208”). Upon review and consideration of the requests for Party status, and with the consent of the Statutory Parties, the Tribunal granted status to Mizrahi and TSCC 2208.

ISSUES LIST

5The Parties did not have a finalized Issues List (“IL”) for the Tribunal. Counsel for Mizrahi explained that they were in the process of retaining experts, and Counsel for TSCC 2208 said that they had only been recently retained and did not yet have time to formulate an IL. The Tribunal directed the Parties to forward a finalized IL and Procedural Order to the Tribunal on or before Friday, October 20, 2023. The Parties have provided these documents, which have been attached to this decision as Schedule 1.

HEARING ON THE MERITS

6The consensus among the Parties was to schedule a Hearing on the Merits of the Appeal, and that 10-days would be sufficient for the Hearing. A 10-day Hearing on the Merits was scheduled at the CMC to begin on Monday, June 10, 2024 at 10 a.m. by Video Hearing.

7Parties 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:

https://meet.goto.com/370987861

Access code: 370-987-861

8Parties 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: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

9Persons 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: +1 (647) 497-9391 or (Toll Free) 1-888-455-1389. The access code is the same as the access code noted above.

10Individuals 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.

MEDIATION

11The Tribunal highlighted the availability of Tribunal led mediation and advised the Parties to contact the Case Coordinator, should they wish to pursue this option.

ORDER

12THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:

a) Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc. is granted Party Status;

b) Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2208 is granted Party Status;

c) A 10-day Hearing on the Merits will take place via Video Hearing commencing on Monday, June 10, 2024.

13The Panel Members are not seized but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise.

14No further notice will be provided.

“S. Gopikrishna”

S. GOPIKRISHNA

member

“G.A. Croser”

G.A. CROSER

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.

SCHEDULE 1

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000649

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

Applicant/Appellant: The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request

Description: To permit a 94-storey mixed-use building

Reference Number: 23 120557 STE 11 OZ

Property Address: 15 - 19 Bloor Street W

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000649

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000649

OLT Case Name: The R.W. Bloor Street Development Corporation v. Toronto (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application

Description: To permit a 94-storey mixed-use building

Reference Number: 23 120557 STE 11 OZ

Property Address: 15 - 19 Bloor Street W

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000650

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000649

PROCEDURAL ORDER

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 video hearing will begin on Monday, June 10, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. at https://meet.goto.com/370987861

Access code: 370-987-861

Audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9391

(Toll Free) Audio-only telephone line: 1-888-455-1389

Access code for audio-only telephone lines: 370-987-861

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is ten (10) 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 procedural order deadlines are generally found in Attachment 1.

4. Parties and Participants identified at the Case Management Conference are listed in Attachment 2 to this Order. See Attachment 5 for the meaning of these terms.

5. The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.

6. The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 4 to this Order. 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 the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.

7. Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.

8. 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.

Requirements Before the Hearing

9. 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, and updated supporting documents and reports to the other parties on or before Monday, March 4, 2024. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for the Tribunal to adjourn 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 Monday, March 4, 2024 and in accordance with paragraph 24 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Curriculum Vitae, the witness’ Acknowledgment and Expert’s Duty Form and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified. Any challenges to the 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 Friday, March 22, 2024.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, March 22, 2024 and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Thursday, April 11, 2024.

12. An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in paragraph 14 below. 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.

13. 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 paragraph 14 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 paragraph 14 below.

14. On or before Friday, April 26, 2024, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 24 below.

15. On or before Friday, April 26, 2024, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 24 below. 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 Monday, May 13, 2024, the parties may provide to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator a written reply to any expert witness statement (or expert report) in accordance with paragraph 24 below.

17. On or before Monday, May 6, 2024, parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

18. On or before Tuesday, May 21, 2024, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 24 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

19. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within ten (10) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 24 below.

20. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Friday May, 31, 2024.

21. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

22. A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

23. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Monday, June 3, 2024 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as 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 in the course of the hearing.

24. All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy. 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.

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

The Members are not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

ATTACHMENT 1

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE

EVENT

Monday, March 4, 2024

Last date to provide copies of revised proposal, including all revised plans and drawings (if any)

Monday, March 4, 2024

Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)

Friday, March 22, 2024

Challenges to qualifications of witnesses, if any

Friday, March 22, 2024

Experts Meeting

Thursday, April 11, 2024

Agreed Statement of Facts

Friday, April 26, 2024

Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements

Monday, May 6, 2024

Parties to confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required

Monday, May 13, 2024

Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)

Tuesday, May 21, 2024

Exchange of visual evidence (if any)

Friday May, 31, 2024

Preparation of Joint Document Book

Monday, June 3, 2024

Hearing Plan filed with the Tribunal

Monday, June 10, 2024

Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES

1. The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation

   David Bronskill and Joe Hoffman, Goodmans LLP

   dbronskill@goodmans.ca / jhoffman@goodmans.ca

   416.597.4299 / 416.597.5168

2. City of Toronto

Jessica Braun and Michelle LaFortune, City of Toronto Legal Services jessica.braun@toronto.ca / michelle.lafortune@toronto.ca 416.392.7237 / 416.338.0642

3. Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc.

Mary Ellen Bench and Jessica Jakubowski, Dentons Canada LLP maryellen.bench@dentons.com / jessica.jakubowski@dentons.com 416.863.4724 / 416.361.2320

4. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2208

Andy Margaritis, Davies Howe LLP andym@davieshowe.com

416.263.4520

ATTACHMENT 3

ISSUES LIST

NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the OLT or any party that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is either appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT will be a matter of evidence at the hearing or in a motion, as necessary. The identification of an issue on this list by a party indicates that party’s intent to lead evidence or argue that the issue is relevant to the proceeding, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other parties the case they need to meet and shall not be construed as the OLT having jurisdiction over such matters in each circumstance. Accordingly, no party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the OLT.

CITY OF TORONTO ISSUES

Matters of Provincial Interest

1. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest set forth in section 2 of the Planning Act, and, in particular sections 2(h), (j), (k), (l), (n), (o), (q) and (r) and section 2.1 of the Planning Act?

2. Is the proposed development consistent with Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, pursuant to section 3 of the Planning Act, and, in particular policies 1.3.1(a) and (d); 1.4.3 (b); 1.5.1(a); and, 1.7.1(b) and (d).

3. Does the proposed development conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, as amended, and, in particular 2.2.1.4 (a), (c), (e); 2.2.3.1 (c), 2.2.5.3, and 2.2.6.1.

City of Toronto Official Plan Conformity

4. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, as modified, and, in particular the policies related to:

a. Downtown: The Heart of Toronto (2.2.1.4);

b. The Public Realm (3.1.1);

c. Built Form (3.1.3);

d. Built Form – Building Types (3.1.4);

e. Housing (3.2.1.1);

f. The Future of Retailing (3.5.3);

g. Mixed Use Areas (4.5.2);

h. Secondary Plans: Policies for Local Growth Opportunities (5.2.1); and

i. Interpretation (5.6).

Downtown Secondary Plan Conformity

5. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the Downtown Secondary Plan being Section 6, Chapter 41 of the Official Plan, and, in particular the policies related to:

a. Goals – Complete Communities (3.1; 3.3; 3.4; 3.5);

b. Goals – Prosperity (3.11);

c. Land Use and Economy – Bloor-Bay Office corridor (6.7);

d. Land Use and Economy – Mixed Use Areas 1 – Growth (6.24);

e. Land Use and Economy – Retail (6.42);

f. Parks and Public Realm (7.1; 7.3);

g. Mobility – A Walkable Downtown (8.4; 8.5);

h. Mobility – Parking and Curbside Management (8.27; 8.28);

i. Built Form – Improving the Public Realm (9.1; 9.3; 9.4; 9.8; 9.10);

j. Built Form – Physical Determinants of Intensity and Scale (9.11; 9.13 – 9.15 inclusive);

k. Built Form – Creating a Comfortable Microclimate (9.17 – 9.21)

l. Built Form – Transition (9.22– 9.27 inclusive); and

m. Built Form – Amenity Space (9.30 – 9.33 inclusive);

n. Interpretation (15.1)

Bloor Yorkville/North Midtown Area SASP 211

6. Does the proposed development conform with the Mixed-Use Areas policies (b)?

Official Plan Amendment 352/SASP 517

7. Does the proposed development conform with Official Plan Amendment 352 (SASP 517)?

Tall Building Design Guidelines

8. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for and achieve the intent and purpose of the applicable Tall Building Design Guidelines?

Other Design Guidelines

9. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable Bloor-Yorkville/North Midtown Guidelines?

10. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities Guidelines?

11. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable Retail Design Manual guidelines?

Site-Specific Issues

12. Does the proposed development represent good land use planning, and urban design, having appropriate regard for matters such as:

a. The existing and planned context;

b. The proposed built form, massing and scale, building setbacks and stepbacks, streetwall height, building height, density, floor plate size, and design;

c. The built form relationship to the adjacent and abutting properties regarding the proposed setbacks, stepbacks, base building heights, overall building height, and separation distances; and

d. The appropriate mix of uses in the appropriate quantity.

13. Does the proposed development establish appropriate relationships at grade, including provision of an appropriate pedestrian realm, streetscaping and contributions to public space?

14. Does the proposed development comply with the City of Toronto's Private Tree By-law and City Street Tree By-law, and does the proposed development provide sufficient soil volumes to support the proposed trees?

15. Does the proposed development provide adequate indoor and outdoor amenity space?

16. Has the proposed development demonstrated that there is sufficient infrastructure capacity to accommodate the proposed development?

17. Is the form and content of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment appropriate and is its approval of the proposal in the public interest?

Conditions to OLT Order on Zoning By-law Amendment

18. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied and the Tribunal receive confirmation from the City Solicitor that:

a) the final form of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the City Solicitor;

b) the owner has revised the Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, Hydrogeological Report, Hydrological Review Summary, and Groundwater Summary to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

c) all comments from Engineering and Construction Services contained in their April 21, 2023 memorandum are addressed to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and,

d) the owner has made satisfactory arrangements for the construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure in connection with the Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, to be resubmitted for review and acceptance by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, should it be determined that improvements to such infrastructure are required to support this development.

MIZRAHI DEVELOPMENTS GROUP (THE ONE) INC. ISSUES LIST

Matters of Provincial Interest

1. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest set forth in section 2 of the Planning Act, and, in particular sections 2(h), (n), (o), and (r) and section 2.1 of the Planning Act?

2. Is the proposed development consistent with Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, pursuant to section 3 of the Planning Act, and, in particular policies 1.3.1(a) and (d); 1.4.3 (b); 1.5.1(a); and, 1.7.1(b) and (d).

3. Does the proposed development conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, as amended, and, in particular 2.2.1.4(b).

City of Toronto Official Plan Conformity

4. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, as modified, and, in particular the policies related to:

a. 2.2.1.4(f);

b. 3.1.3(1)(f), 3.1.3(3), 3.1.3(5); and

c. 3.1.4(10), 3.1.4(11), 3.1.4(12).

Downtown Secondary Plan Conformity

5. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the Downtown Secondary Plan being Section 6, Chapter 41 of the Official Plan, and, in particular the policies related to:

a. Goals – Complete Communities (3.3);

b. Built Form – Improving the Public Realm (9.1);

c. Built Form – Physical Determinants of Intensity and Scale (9.11; 9.13, 9.15 inclusive);

d. Built Form – Creating a Comfortable Microclimate (9.21)

e. Built Form – Transition (9.23, 9.25);

f. Interpretation (15.1.4)

Official Plan Amendment 352/SASP 517

6. Does the proposed development conform with Official Plan Amendment 352 (SASP 517)?

Tall Building Design Guidelines

7. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for and achieve the intent and purpose of the applicable Tall Building Design Guidelines?

Other Design Guidelines

8. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable Bloor-Yorkville/North Midtown Guidelines?

Site-Specific Issues

9. Does the proposed development represent good land use planning, and urban design, having appropriate regard for matters such as:

a. The existing and planned context;

b. The built form relationship to the adjacent and abutting properties regarding the proposed setbacks, stepbacks and separation distances, in relation to light, view, privacy, sky view, wind and noise impacts;

c. Whether the scale of the proposed development can be accommodated by means of vehicular access, without undue impacts on other existing and approved development;

d. Whether additional transportation/ traffic measures are required to permit the development proposed;

e. Does the analysis of adverse impacts on the existing public laneway take into account appropriate consideration of the development of the block and the other properties that are accessed by the existing laneway?;

f. Whether the proposed development would create undue impacts and conflicts in and around the public laneway and on Balmuto Street among different users (bicycles, pedestrians and vehicles), taking into account existing and approved development;

g. Whether the proposed development adversely impacts the access provided off Balmuto Street;

h. Whether the generated wind flow and wind speeds around the proposed development cause adverse impacts on the existing properties;

i. Is the Noise and Vibration Impact Study feasible and does it contain the level of necessary details to adequately assess and establish noise controls?;

j. Does the Noise and Vibration Impact Study consider any noise generating equipment located at the 1 Bloor Street West property, potential noise impacts on or caused by the proposed development, and required mitigation measures to be incorporated at the proposed development?; and

k. Does the built form of the proposed development provide for appropriate and safe interaction between pedestrians and vehicles at grade, and provide for safe loading, pick-up and drop off points?

TORONTO STANDARD CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION NO. 2208 ISSUES LIST

Matters of Provincial Interest

1. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest set forth in section 2 of the Planning Act, particularly sections 2(h),(n),(q) and (r)?

2. Is the proposed development consistent with Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, pursuant to section 3 of the Planning Act, particularly policies 1.5.1(a), 1.6.7.2 and 1.7.1(d)?

3. Does the proposed development conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, as amended, particularly policy 2.2.1.4(e)?

City of Toronto Official Plan Conformity

4. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, as modified, and, in particular the policies related to:

a. Structuring Growth in the City: Integrating Land Use and Transportation (2.2.4, 2.2.5(g) and (h);

b. Downtown: The Heart of Toronto (2.2.1.4):

c. The Public Realm (3.1.1);

d. Built Form (3.1.3); and

e. Secondary Plans: Policies for Local Growth Opportunities (5.2.1).

Downtown Secondary Plan Conformity

5. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the Downtown Secondary Plan being Section 6, Chapter 41 of the Official Plan, and, in particular the policies related to:

a. Mobility – A Walkable Downtown (8.4, 8.5);

b. Mobility – Parking and Curbside Management (8.27);

c. Built Form – Improving the Public Realm (9.1, 9.3, 9.4, 9.8);

d. Built Form – Physical Determinants of Intensity and Scale (9.11; 9.13 – 9.15 inclusive);

e. Built Form – Creating a Comfortable Microclimate (9.20 - 9.21); and

f. Built Form – Transition (9.22, 9.24.1, 9.25.3, 9.27).

Bloor Yorkville/North Midtown Area SASP 211

6. Does the proposed development conform with the Mixed-Use Areas policies (b)?

Official Plan Amendment 352/SASP 517

7. Does the proposed development conform with Official Plan Amendment 352 (SASP 517)?

Tall Building Design Guidelines

8. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for and achieve the intent and purpose of the applicable Tall Building Design Guidelines?

Site-Specific Issues

9. Does the proposed development represent good land use planning, urban design, and having appropriate regard for matters such as:

a. The existing and planned context;

b. The proposed built form, massing and scale, building setbacks and stepbacks, streetwall height, building height, density, floor plate size, and design;

c. The built form relationship to the adjacent and abutting properties regarding the proposed setbacks, stepbacks, base building heights, overall building height, and separation distances; and

10. Does the proposed development establish appropriate relationships at grade, including provision of an appropriate pedestrian realm and streetscaping particularly as it relates to the public lane located to the south of the proposed development?

11. Has the proposed development demonstrated that there is sufficient transportation infrastructure, particularly as it relates to its reliance on the public lane located to the south of the proposed development, to accommodate the proposed development?

12. Does the proposed development ensure that construction management matters including, but not limited to, noise levels, laneway access and potential disruptions, construction hoarding, signage, hours of operation and traffic impacts, are properly addressed and accounted for? If not, should a Construction Management Plan (“CMP”) be prepared to address these matters?

13. Is it appropriate for the Zoning by-law as amended to include a holding provision, to be lifted upon the completion, or substantial completion of the Bloor-Yonge Station Expansion Project?

Conditions to OLT Order on Zoning By-law Amendment

14. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied and the Tribunal receive confirmation from the City Solicitor that:

e) The preparation of a CMP, to be approved by City Staff in consultation with TSCC #2208.

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation
2. City of Toronto
3. Mizrahi Development Group (The One) Inc.
4. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2208
5. The R. W. Bloor Street Development Corporation in reply (if any)

ATTACHMENT 5

Meaning of Terms Used in the Procedural Order

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 authorisation 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.

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.