Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: April 20, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002152

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

Applicant and Appellant: Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure of the City of Richmond Hill to adopt the requested amendment

Existing Designation: “Richmond Hill Centre”

Proposed Designation: To maintain the existing “Richmond Hill Centre” designation but permit a maximum density of 6.54 Floor Space Index (FSI) and a maximum height of 54-storeys on a site-specific basis

Property Address: 8700 & 8710 Yonge Street

Municipality: City of Richmond Hill

Approval Authority File No.: D01-18007

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002152

Legacy Case No.: PL190576

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002152

Legacy Lead Case No.: PL190576

Case Name: Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc. v. Richmond Hill (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.

Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2523, as amended, of the former Township of Vaughan – Neglect of application by the City of Richmond Hill

Existing Zoning: “General Commercial One (GC1) Zone”

Proposed Zoning: “Residential Multiple Ten Special (RM10-S) Zone” with site-specific development standards in order to facilitate the proposed mixed-use development

Property Address: 8700 & 8710 Yonge Street

Municipality: City of Richmond Hill

Municipality File No.: D02-18033

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002155

Legacy Case No.: PL190577

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002152

Legacy Lead Case No.: PL190576

Heard: April 12, 2023 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.	Ian Andres
City of Richmond Hill	Carlton Thorne

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY ASTRID J. CLOS AND S. deBOER ON APRIL 12, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This is the third Case Management Conference (“CMC”) with respect to appeals filed under subsections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act by Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc. (“Appellant”) from the failure/neglect of the City of Richmond Hill (“City”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframe with respect to a property municipally addressed as 8700 and 8710 Yonge Street, Richmond Hill (“subject property”).

2At the previous CMC, a fifteen (15) day merit hearing was scheduled to commence on September 18, 2023. The Parties agreed to advise the Case Coordinator if the full fifteen (15) days are not required such that unneeded days may be released from the calendar. Hearing dates are an important resource of the Tribunal and should be effectively utilized.

3The purpose of this third CMC is twofold: first, to receive an update from the Parties concerning the revised Issues List based on the resubmission of these applications to the City; and second, to confirm if there would be any challenges pertaining to expert witnesses.

ISSUES LIST

4A revised Issues List was received from the Parties on March 10, 2023.

5After analysis of the document and on consent of the Parties, the Tribunal accepts the revised Issues List as a part of the Procedural Order (“PO”)to be used for the upcoming hearing.

6There were no challenges by either Party concerning expert witnesses.

7The Tribunal directed that an updated PO including the revised Issues List be filed. The Parties provided the Tribunal with the updated PO and Issues List on April 14, 2023. This revised PO and Issues List is appended as Schedule 1 to this Decision and Order.

MEDIATION

8The Parties advised that while they continue to dialogue, to date they have not been able to reach a settlement. Both Parties confirmed that they are willing to work toward a settlement and will continue communicating.

9The Parties have previously been made aware that Tribunal-led mediation is available to them.

HEARING

10A 15-day Hearing has been scheduled to start on Monday, September 18, 2023, at 10 a.m. by video hearing.

11Parties and participants 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://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077

Access code: 927-921-077

12Parties 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: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

13Persons 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 1-888-299-1889. The access code is 927-921-077.

14Individuals 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.

ORDER

15THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:

1. The Merit Hearing is scheduled to start on Monday, September 18, 2023, at 10 a.m. by video hearing for 15 days.

2. The final Procedural Order and Issues List is approved as included as Schedule 1 to this Decision, and as such it is in full force and effect.

16No further notice is required.

17The Panel is not seized, however, may assist with case management, schedules permitting.

“Astrid J. Clos”

ASTRID J. CLOS MEMBER

“Steve deBoer”

STEVE deBOER 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.

Case No. OLT-22-002152

SCHEDULE 1

ONTARIO LAND TRIBUNAL

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

Applicant and Appellant: Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure of the City of Richmond Hill to adopt the requested amendment

Existing Designation: “Richmond Hill Centre”

Proposed Designation: To maintain the existing “Richmond Hill Centre” designation but permit a maximum density of 6.54 Floor Space Index (FSI) and a maximum height of 54-storeys on a site-specific basis

Property Address: 8700 & 8710 Yonge Street

Municipality: City of Richmond Hill

Approval Authority File No.: D01-18007

OLT Case No. OLT-22-002152

OLT Legacy Case No.: PL190576

OLT Legacy File No.: PL190576

Case Name: Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc. v. Richmond Hill (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.

Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2523, as amended, of the former Township of Vaughan – Neglect of application by the City of Richmond Hill

Existing Zoning: “General Commercial One (GC1) Zone”

Proposed Zoning: “Residential Multiple Ten Special (RM10-S) Zone” with site-specific development standards in order to facilitate the proposed mixed-use development

Property Address: 8700 & 8710 Yonge Street

Municipality: City of Richmond Hill

Municipality File No.: D02-18033

OLT Case No. OLT-22-002152

OLT Legacy Case No.: PL190576

OLT Legacy File No.: PL190577

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 request of a party or its own motion.

Organization of the Hearing

2. The hearing will begin on September 18, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.

3. The length of the hearing will be 15 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.

4. The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1 to this Order.

5. The order of evidence is set out in Attachment 2. 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.

6. The issues are set out in the Draft Issues List attached as Attachment 3. Subject to paragraph 10 below, 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, except if the Issues List is modified through mediation or pursuant to a settlement between any of the parties.

7. All parties and participants (or their representatives) shall provide an email address and telephone number to the Tribunal. Any such person who retains a representative (legal counsel or agent) must advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, email address and phone number.

8. 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/tribunals/lpat/).

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 October 28, 2022. Any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

10. The City of Richmond Hill shall be entitled to reconsider its issues and to deliver a final Issues List to the Applicant and the Tribunal on or before March 10, 2023.

11. 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, curriculum vitae, and the intended order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before March 24, 2023. For expert witnesses, a party is to include the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified. Any challenges to the qualifications of a witness to give opinion evidence in the area of expertise proposed should be made by motion during or before the Case Management Conference scheduled for April 12, 2023 and notice of same must be served on the other Parties in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules.

12. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before April 28, 2023 and use their 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 May 12, 2023 if agreement is reached.

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 to the other parties on or before June 2, 2023. 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 time as the delivery of expert witness statements.

14. A participant or lay witness must provide to the Tribunal and to the parties a participant statement or witness statement, as the case may be, on or before June 2, 2023.

15. 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 this expert’s evidence and his or her area of expertise on or before June 2, 2023.

16. On or before July 7, 2023, Parties may provide to all other parties and the LPAT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence received.

17. On or before August 4, 2023, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence upon which they will rely on to all of the other parties. If delivered by e-mail or facsimile, hard copies of such evidence shall be provided on the request of any party.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book that shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before September 8, 2023. The Joint Document Book shall also be served on all parties at that time. One (1) paper copy must be filed with the Tribunal, at a later date before the first day of hearing commences.

19. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before September 8, 2023 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 parties shall prepare and file a final hearing plan on or before September 15, 2023. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.

20. Any documents that 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 LPAT case co-ordinator, on or before September 15, 2023.

21. A party wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a motion to the Tribunal in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules, unless the parties consent to such change(s). Such a motion shall be in accordance with Tribunal Rules 7 and 10, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties fifteen (15) days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

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 at least seven (7) days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

23. Documents may be delivered by personal delivery, email (with attachments or through use of an electronic file sharing service), courier, facsimile or registered or certified mail, or otherwise as the Tribunal may direct. The delivery of documents by fax and email shall be governed by the Tribunal’s Rules on this subject. Material delivered by mail shall be deemed to have been received five business days after the date of registration or certification.

24. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rules 17.01 to 17.05 apply to such requests.

25. All filings shall be electronic and, where feasible, exchanged between the parties and provided to the Tribunal in hard copy. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10 MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents shall be governed by Rule 7. 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 July 2, 2020, or as may be amended.

This Member is not seized.

SUMMARY OF KEY DATES

DATE	EVENT
October 28, 2022	Revisions to Proposal (including supporting materials)
March 10, 2023	Final Issues List to be provided by Appellant
March 24, 2023	Witness lists (including names, disciplines and order to be called) to be exchanged and filed
April 12, 2023	Case Management Conference and last date to challenge identification of expert witness
April 28, 2023	Experts Meeting deadline
May 12, 2023	Agreed Statement of Facts to be filed
June 2, 2023	Witness Statements, Expert Reports and Participant Statements to be exchanged and filed
July 7, 2023	Reply Witness Statements (if any) to be exchanged and filed
August 4, 2023	Visual evidence to be exchanged and filed
September 8, 2023	Joint document book and preliminary hearing plan to be filed
September 15, 2023	Final hearing plan and cross-examination materials to be filed
September 18, 2023	Hearing commences

Attachment 1 – List of Parties/Participants

PARTIES

1. Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.
2. City of Richmond Hill

PARTICIPANTS

1. Ali Jalali

Attachment 2 – Order of Evidence

1. Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc.
2. City of Richmond Hill
3. Metroview Developments (Garden) Inc. (Reply, if any)

Attachment 3 – Updated Issues List

The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issues, 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 Richmond Hill

1. Does the development proposal consisting of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the subject lands (collectively the “development proposal”) have regard for the relevant matters of provincial interest enumerated in section 2 of the Planning Act?

2. Is the development proposal consistent with and in conformity with the relevant policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) (the “PPS”) and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020) (the “Growth Plan”)?

3. Is the development proposal in conformity with the relevant policies in the Regional Official Plan (2010) (the “ROP”)?

4. Does the development proposal maintain the intent and principles of and does it conform with the City’s Official Plan (the “Plan”) as adopted by City Council on July 12, 2010, and as approved by the former Ontario Municipal Board, including as it relates to the in-force policies of the Plan respecting:

   a. Urban structure framework and integrating land uses, including but not limited to Section 3.1.3 and 3.1.4.

   b. Height and density, including but not limited to Section 4.2.1;

   c. Angular plane and transition, including but not limited to Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2;

   d. Parkland dedication, including but not limited to Sections 3.1.8 and 4.2.2;

   e. Affordable housing, including but not limited to Section 3.1.5; and,

   f. Any other policies related thereto?

5. Pursuant to Policy 4.2.1.2 of the Plan, does the development proposal conform with the land use and design guidelines which have been endorsed by Council as set out in the Richmond Hill Regional Centre Design and Land Use Study Final Recommendations Report, February 2010?

6. Does the development proposal represent an overdevelopment of the site, including but not limited to matters concerning the proposed height and density?

7. Is the development proposal compatible with and does it fit with the existing as well as the planned/potential built form context and character of adjacent and surrounding lands?

8. Does the development proposal provide for an appropriate transition in relation to the existing as well as the planned/potential built form context and character of adjacent and surrounding lands?

9. Has the appropriateness and feasibility of the development proposal been identified and satisfactorily addressed with respect to matters related to access, parking, sanitary servicing capacity, waste management, parkland dedication, landscaping and outdoor amenity space, and tree preservation?

10. Are the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment appropriate, including with respect to whether the proposed instruments sufficiently regulates matters of built form including height, density, massing, scale, angular plane, setbacks, waste management, access and parking?

11. On the basis that the City is currently undertaking the preparation of the Richmond Hill Centre Secondary Plan, is the development proposal appropriate and does it represent good planning?

12. Is the development proposal appropriate and does it represent good planning?