Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: September 05, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003048 OLT-22-003049 OLT-22-003050

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

Applicant and Appellant: 2217500 Ontario Ltd. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit one residential building and three mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 211444 WET 07 OZ Property Address: 15, 19, 21 & 23 Toryork Drive Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003048 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003048 OLT Case Name: 2217500 Ontario Ltd. v. Toronto (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: 2217500 Ontario Ltd. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit one residential building and three mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 211444 WET 07 OZ Property Address: 15, 19, 21 & 23 Toryork Drive Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003049 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003048

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

Applicant and Appellant: 2217500 Ontario Ltd. Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision Description: To permit one residential building and three mixed-use buildings Reference Number: 21 211444 WET 07 OZ Property Address: 15, 19, 21 & 23 Toryork Drive Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003050 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003048

Heard: July 24, 2023 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
2217500 Ontario Ltd (“Titan Developments/Applicant”/Appellant”)	Sidonia Tomasella Naomi Mares
City of Toronto (“City”)	Nathan Muscat Jamie Dexter (in absentia)

DECISION DELIVERED BY T.F. NG ON JULY 24, 2023 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Final Order

1This matter was scheduled for one day as a settlement hearing. 2217500 Ontario Ltd. (“Titan Developments/Applicant/Appellant”) made applications to the City of Toronto (“City”) for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”), a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) and Draft Plan of Subdivision (“DPS”) pursuant to the Planning Act to permit one residential building with the height of 29 storeys, and three mixed use buildings with heights of 27, 36 and 38 storeys on properties municipally known as 15,19, 21 and 23 Toryork Drive (“subject property/subject site/site”).

2City Council failed to make a decision with respect to the applications. The Applicant appealed. Subsequent to the appeal, the Parties had engaged in discussions and City Council had accepted the Applicant’s Settlement Offer (“proposed settlement/settlement proposal”) and the City Solicitor attended the hearing in support of the Revised Applications.

3Parties in attendance were in agreement and consent to the proposed settlement. The Affidavit of Lindsay Dale-Harris, the Applicant’s planner was marked as Exhibit 1. The Document Book was marked as Exhibit 2a (Volume 1); Exhibit 2b (Volume 2); Exhibit 2c (Volume 3); and the Visual Evidence was marked as Exhibit 3.

4Ms. Tomasella, Counsel for the Applicant, briefly described the settlement relating to the OPA and ZBA, which was agreed to in principle and requested that the final order to be withheld subject to conditions. The DPS appeal would be postponed for parties continued discussions.

5Mr. Muscat, on behalf of the City, confirmed the settlement proposal of the OPA and ZBA has been accepted by the City as described with final orders withheld until conditions have been satisfied.

6The Humber River Residents Association’s (“HRRA”) concerns per its statements have been addressed by Ms. Dale-Harris. In particular, the concerns that the height and density limits should conform to the Emery Village Secondary Plan (“EVSP”) and that the proposed development will not advance the goal of a complete community.

7Ms. Dale-Harris was qualified to give expert opinion evidence in land use planning matters. She testified in support of the proposed settlement.

THE PROPOSAL

8The settlement proposal will be implemented through the approval of an OPA, a ZBA and a DPS. The draft OPA and the draft ZBA amending the City Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 are included as Exhibit “R” and “S” to Exhibit 1.

9In addition to the settlement Plans (Architectural Plans in Exhibit E to Exhibit 1), the settlement proposal was supported by a series of revised technical studies and reports.

10The settlement proposal provides for a mixed-use development supported by a new park and a new public street that creates three development blocks (Blocks 1, 2 and 3), accommodating three base buildings and four towers, as well as a new public park (Block 4) (the “Public Park”).

11The settlement proposal incorporates the revisions made to the Original Applications to address the cooperative process with the City and the community and to respond to the evolving policy and development context. The settlement proposal conforms to the applicable planning framework and will result in an appropriate level of intensification in a transit-supportive location, will provide 1,275 residential units in a variety of types and sizes, will establish a new public street system and will ensure an attractive, well-designed public realm and public park.

12The settlement Plans maintain the general structure of streets and blocks as proposed in the Original Applications; however, a number of important modifications have been made to address the City’s comments.

13Changes to the location of the Public Road have resulted in an increase in the size of the Public Park to 1,813 square metres (“sq m”) (approximately 14% of the net site area). Access to the Public Park has also been improved, as the two privately owned Publicly Accessible Spaces, (“POPS”) have been designed to improve pedestrian connectivity from Toryork Drive, Weston Road and Road 2A toward the Public Park.

14The setback along Toryork Drive has been reduced to 2 metres (“m”) to create a stronger street edge and promote a vibrant retail environment while the tower step backs have been increased along this frontage to reduce visual impacts and provide improved access to sunlight and skyview.

15Block 1 includes at-grade residential units along its south frontage and across from the Public Park, and the servicing for the Block is now located on the east side of the Block 1 podium which will enhance the character internal to the site and improve the pedestrian realm.

16Block 2 includes POPS A, a linear north POPS with an approximate area of 610 sq m which is now located on the east side of the north-south leg of the Public Road to create a more direct pedestrian connection between Toryork Drive and the Public Park. Active uses in the Block 2 podium now wrap around the frontage from Toryork Drive and to the south to animate POPS A. The revised massing and orientation of the shared podium and Tower C on Block 2 accommodate the relocated POPS A and contribute to a continuous public realm along the Public Road and the Public Park.

17The podium on Block 3 includes at-grade residential units along the eastern frontage to contribute to an animated pedestrian environment adjacent to the Public Park. The length of this podium has been shortened to create space for the new 325 sq m POPS B, located on the southern portion of Block 3. A driveway along the southern frontage of the site facilitates a connection from Road 2A to the site and to any future development on abutting sites to the south.

18The height and density have been reduced. The height of Tower C has been reduced from 27 to 26 storeys and the overall density has been reduced from 6.18 Floor Space Index (“FSI”) to 6.04 FSI.

19The revised draft ZBA includes a Holding Provision which ensures that the provision of servicing infrastructure in Road 2A will be coordinated with the development of Blocks 1, 3 and the Public Park, if deemed necessary by the City.

SITE AND AREA CONTEXT

20The subject site has an area of 15,688 sq m (approximately 1.57 hectares) and is located on the southwest side of Toryork Drive, west of Weston Road and north of Finch Avenue West. The buildings which were located at 15 and 23 Toryork Drive have been demolished. There is a vacant one storey building at 19 Toryork Drive and a vacant 2-storey building at 21 Toryork Drive.

21North of the subject site, on the north side of Toryork Drive are low scale industrial and commercial uses and associated surface parking. Further north are the Canadian Pacific Rail (“CPR”) tracks and industrial uses which form part of a larger employment area.

22To the east are single-storey commercial buildings occupied by retail and office uses, with associated surface parking. Further to the east, beyond the CPR rail line, are additional employment/light industrial uses along the north side of Finch Avenue West, generally extending east to Highway 400 and north to Highway 407.

23Southeast of the subject site, at the southeast corner of Finch Avenue West and Weston Road, is the site of the former Finch Weston Mall, which is being redeveloped in four phases. Phase 1 (now completed) is located on the east side of Weston Road, south of Zappacosta Drive, and comprises two connected 10-storey buildings, and one 28-storey building with retail uses at grade. Phase 2 (immediately east of Phase 1, on the east side of Vena Way) is currently under construction and will contain two towers with heights of 26 and 30 storeys connected by a shared podium. The Phase 3 and 4 lands are located on the north side of Zappacosta Drive and on the south side of Finch Avenue West. The lands are subject to official plan amendment and rezoning applications which are currently under review by the City. The current proposal includes five towers with heights of 20-55 storeys, on-site parkland dedication and a new POPS.

24To the immediate south of the subject site are low-rise commercial buildings and a five- storey residential mixed-use building, fronting onto Finch Avenue West.

25To the immediate west of the subject site is the planned 20 m right-of-way for the new Road 2A. Road 2A has been designed to include two vehicular travel lanes, one in each direction, with a left-turn lane at the new signalized intersection of Emery Village Link 2A and Finch Avenue West. Sidewalks are to be provided on both sides of the road which will connect with the existing sidewalks along Finch Avenue West and Toryork Drive.

26West of the future Road 2A is Emery Parks Yard, a City-owned property that houses offices for Toronto Parks, Forests and Recreation (27 Toryork Drive).

27The subject site is currently well-served by public transit with bus stops located adjacent to the subject site on the north side of Toryork Drive, at the intersection of Toryork Drive and Weston Road, and at all corners of the Finch Avenue West and Weston Road intersection. Access to public transit will improve significantly when the planned Emery Station on the Finch West LRT opens later in the year.

[Section 2](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html#sec2_smooth) of the [Planning Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html)

28Ms. Dale-Harris referred to Section 2 of the Planning Act that sets out matters of provincial interest for which planning authorities shall have regard.

29She explained that the site is in a location which is appropriate for growth and development. The settlement proposal is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians. It provides for a built form which encourages a sense of place and the provision of public space that is of a high quality, safe and accessible.

30The Tribunal finds that the settlement proposal has regard for matters of Provincial Interest, including the orderly development of safe and healthy communities (s.2(h)); the adequate provision of a full range of housing (s.2(j)); the appropriate location of growth and development (s.2(p)); and the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians (s.2(q)).

PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT 2020 (“PPS”)

31In Ms. Dale-Harris’s opinion, the settlement proposal is consistent with the PPS in particular, the policies relating to growth management, residential intensification, transit supportive development, and the efficient use of land /infrastructure.

32Policy 1.1.1, states that healthy, liveable and safe communities are to be sustained by promoting efficient development and land use patterns; accommodating an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of residential types…recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long-term needs; and promoting the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit-supportive development, intensification and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs.

33Policy 1.1.3.3, which provides clear provincial direction to municipalities regarding the provision of transit supportive, compact, mixed use development which implements provincial targets and supports the promotion of economic development by encouraging this form of development. The Tribunal agrees with Ms. Dale-Harris that this compact and transit-supportive development will assist in the achievement of this policy objective.

34With respect to housing, Policy 1.4.1 directs planning authorities to provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities required to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area. Ms. Dale-Harris opined, and the Tribunal agrees that the settlement proposal will provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options that will help meet projected requirements.

35With respect to Policies 1.4.3 b), c), d) and e), the Tribunal agrees with Ms. Dale-Harris’ opinion that the settlement proposal will provide appropriate residential intensification to meet the needs of residents in a location with existing infrastructure, including future higher-order transit, at a density that will efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities and promote the use of active transportation and transit.

36Policy 1.5.1 states that healthy, active communities should be promoted by a) planning public streets, spaces and facilities to be safe, meet the needs of pedestrians, foster social interaction and facilitate active transportation and community connectivity, and; b) planning and providing for a full range and equitable distribution of publicly accessible built and natural settings for recreation, including facilities, parklands, public spaces, open space areas, trails and linkages, and, where practical, water-based resources. The Tribunal agrees with Ms. Dale-Harris that the settlement proposal includes public streets and open space including a new Public Park to facilitate comfortable pedestrian movement, provide opportunities for social interaction and support active transportation.

37The subject site will encourage a transit supportive development. The mixed use development comprising a range of residential units is an efficient use of the land and infrastructure that prioritizes intensification adjacent to a higher order transit area. The Tribunal finds that the proposal is consistent with the PPS.

GROWTH PLAN

38Ms. Dale-Harris opined that the settlement proposal conforms with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2020 (“Growth Plan”), in particular, Policy 2.2.1(2)(c), provides that, within settlement areas, growth will be focused in delineated built-up areas, strategic growth areas, locations with existing or planned transit (with a priority on higher order transit where it exists or is planned), and areas with existing or planned public service facilities. Based on its location, the subject site has the characteristics of a strategic growth area as defined in the Growth Plan and is adjacent to planned higher order transit. The settlement proposal will provide new housing on a subject site that is within a strategic growth area and is intended to accommodate growth.

39Policy 2.2.1(3)(c) directs municipalities to undertake integrated planning to manage forecasted growth to the horizon of the Growth Plan, which will, among other things, provide direction for an urban form that will optimize infrastructure, particularly along transit and transportation corridors, to support the achievement of complete communities through a more compact built form. Ms. Dale-Harris opined that the settlement Plans will provide a compact, mixed-use development in an area intended for growth and contributing to the efficient use of land and infrastructure, including planned transit.

40Policy 2.2.4 addresses Transit Corridor and Station Areas: planning is to be prioritized for major transit station areas on priority transit corridors and the minimum density for these areas is 160 persons and jobs combined, per hectare. Schedule 5 in the Growth Plan shows the Finch West LRT, which is currently under construction, as “existing higher order transit.” The subject site is located within a “protected major transit station area” (“PMTSA”) (Emery Village PMTSA) as required by Official Plan Amendment 570 (OPA 570) has been approved by City Council and was awaiting the Minister’s approval. The settlement proposal will provide new housing options in a PMTSA.

41Policy 2.2.6(1) requires municipalities to support housing choice through, among other matters, the achievement of minimum intensification and density targets in the Growth Plan by identifying a diverse range and mix of housing options and densities to meet projected needs of current and future residents, including establishing targets for affordable ownership housing and rental housing. Policy 2.2.6(2) states that, in implementing Policy 2.2.6(1), municipalities will support the achievement of complete communities by: planning to accommodate forecasted growth; planning to achieve the minimum intensification and density targets; considering the range and mix of housing options and densities of the existing housing stock; and planning to diversify the overall housing stock across the municipality. It is Ms. Dale-Harris’ opinion that the settlement proposal will help achieve Provincial housing targets.

42Policies 3.2.3(1) and 3.2.3(2), state that public transit will be the first priority for transportation infrastructure planning and major transportation investments, and that decisions on transit planning and investment will be made according to a number of criteria, including prioritizing areas with existing or planned higher residential or employment densities to optimize return on investment and the efficiency and viability of existing and planned transit service levels, and increasing the capacity of existing transit systems to support strategic growth areas. Ms. Dale-Harris opined that the settlement proposal will contribute to the efficient use of transit by providing residential intensification within 100 m of a future transit station.

43The Tribunal finds that the proposal is identified within a PMTSA. The Tribunal is satisfied that the proposed development with the mixed range of residential units and retail fulfills the objectives of the policies of the Growth Plan including the density targets of 160 persons and jobs per hectare.

44The proposal supports the achievement of complete communities with a mix of residential unit sizes that cater for different household sizes and incomes (s.2.2.6(3)). The Tribunal finds that the settlement proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.

City of Toronto Official Plan (“City OP”/“OP”)

45In Ms. Dale-Harris’ opinion, the settlement proposal conforms with the OP. The OP has been amended hundreds of times and she reviewed OPA 570 PMTSA and Official Plan Amendment No. 591 (OPA 591) (Economic Health Policies and Policies for Employment Areas) adopted by City Council on July 19-22, 2022 and are currently with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval.

46Maps 3 and 4 illustrate Finch Avenue West as a Transit Corridor and a Priority Transit Corridor and Map 13 is the applicable Land Use Schedule, which designates the site Mixed Use Areas.

47Ms. Dale-Harris stated that Chapter 2 of the OP outlines the growth management strategy and recognizes that Toronto’s future is one of growth, of rebuilding, of re-urbanizing and of regenerating the city within an existing urban structure that is not easy to change.

48She added that one of the OP’s key policy directions is Integrating Land Use and Transportation (s. 2.2). Growth areas are locations where good transit access can be provided along bus and streetcar routes and at rapid transit stations. Section 2.2(2) provides that “growth will be directed to the Centres, Avenues, Employment Districts and the Downtown” and sets out a number of objectives that can be met by this strategy, including concentrating jobs and people in areas well served by surface transit and rapid transit stations.

49Section 2.4(4) provides that in targeted growth areas, planning for new development is to be undertaken in the context of reducing auto dependency and the transportation demands and impacts of such new development assessed in terms of the broader social and environmental objectives of the OP’s re-urbanization strategy. On sites in areas well serviced by transit, such as locations around rapid transit stations and along major transit routes, consideration is to be given to the establishment of minimum density requirements as well as maximum density limits, minimum and maximum parking requirements and limiting surface parking as a non-ancillary use (s. 2.4(7)). These minimum density requirements are now set out in Council-adopted OPA 570.

50Ms. Dale-Harris explained that Chapter 3 of the OP sets out the policies which form the basis for building a successful City through the creation of complete communities.

51Section 3.1.1, The Public Realm, emphasizes the importance of creating a built environment that is functional, beautiful, vibrant, safe, inclusive and sets out policies regarding the importance of the public (s. 3.1.1(2)).

52Sections 3.1.1(18) to 3.1.1(20) set out criteria for the provision of parks, open spaces and POPS.

53Built Form policies are set out in s. 3.1.3. Section 3.1.3(1) provides that new development will be located and organized to fit with its existing and/or planned context. Section 3.1.3(5) – Building Shape, Scale and Massing requires that development be located and massed to fit within the existing and planned context, define and frame the edges of the public realm with good street proportion, fit with the character, and ensure access to direct sunlight and daylight on the public realm through providing appropriate streetwall heights and building step backs and massing.

54Policies respecting Built Form - Building Types are set out under s. 3.1.4. Sections 3.1.4.7 – 3.1.4.12 provide direction on tall buildings and the design, orientation, and integration with surrounding areas as well as design objectives, including the creation of buildings with a base, a tower, and a top (s. 3.1.4.10b)), maximizing sunlight access (s. 3.1.4.10 c)), limiting and mitigating pedestrian wind impacts (s. 3.1.4.10 d)) and providing access to daylight (s. 3.1.4.10 e)). The settlement Plans, Ms. Dale-Harris explained, conform to these policies.

55Chapter 4 outlines the City’s land use designations which encourage a broad range of commercial, residential, institutional, industrial, and open space uses. The Mixed Use Areas designation applies to several properties along Avenues of the City and aims to provide flexibility for the future redevelopment of these areas to accommodate population growth and jobs along transit lines.

56Ms. Dale-Harris stated that the subject site is designated Mixed Use Areas. Section 4.5 provides that the Mixed Use Areas designation permits a broad range of commercial, residential and institutional uses in single use or mixed-use buildings, as well as parks and open spaces and utilities. Development in Mixed Use Areas is to create a balance of high quality commercial, residential, institutional and open space uses that reduces automobile dependency and meets the needs of the local community and will provide for new jobs and homes on underutilized lands along the Avenues and elsewhere.

57She noted that Chapter 5, Making Things Happen includes the policies designed to ensure the implementation of the OP in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. Policies with respect to Managing Growth and Change are set out in s. 5.1.1.

58Authorization for the use of Holding By-laws is set out in s. 5.1.2. Section 5.1.2(1) states that a holding provision may be placed on lands where the ultimate desired use cannot yet be achieved until conditions set out in the Plan or by-law are satisfied. Section 5.1.2(2) lists the types of conditions to be met prior to the removal of a holding provision.

59Section 5.2.1, Secondary Plans: Policies for Local Growth Opportunities, provides development policies to guide growth and change in defined areas of the City.

60Secondary Plans are intended to define an area to stimulate and guide development (s. 5.2.1.1). The subject site is located within the boundaries of the EVSP.

61The Tribunal agrees with Ms. Dale-Harris that the settlement proposal as implemented by the draft OPA and draft ZBA supports and conforms with the City’s in-force growth management strategy and Land Use Compatibility policies set out in Chapter 2, the policies with respect to the Public Realm, Built Form, Housing, Parkland and Community Facilities in Chapter 3, the land use policies set out in Section 4, and the Implementation policies set out in Chapter 5.

OPA 570

62In June 2020, City Planning initiated the Growth Plan Conformity and Municipal Comprehensive Review (“the MCR”) which included the delineation of 180+ MTSAs. On July 19-22, 2022, City Council adopted OPA 570, which delineated approximately 57 potential PMTSAs to meet provincial minimum intensification requirements. PMTSAs are a subset of MTSAs, where the Council-approved inclusionary zoning policy framework can be implemented. OPA 570 established a minimum population and employment target of 160 residents and jobs per combined hectare for light rail transit stations.

63The subject site is located within Site and Area Specific Policy 701 (“SASP 701”), the PMTSA for Emery Station which provides that existing and new development is to be planned for a minimum population and employment target of 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare. The subject site has a minimum density of 2.0 FSI. OPA 570 is currently under review by the Province and has yet to be approved.

64In Ms. Dale-Harris’s opinion, the settlement proposal conforms with OPA 570 as it will provide appropriate intensification in proximity to Emery Station and within a PMTSA.

OPA 591

65OPA 591, which was part of a phased MCR and Growth Plan Conformity Exercise, was adopted by City Council, with amendments, at its meeting on July 19-22, 2022.

66Among other policies, OPA 591 amends Official Plan Economic Health and Employment Area policies to include revisions necessary to accommodate the projected population and employment growth to 2051. Section 2 of the OP is amended to include the following growth forecasts:

The City of Toronto is forecast to grow to 3.65 million residents and 1.98 million jobs by the year 2051. The Growth Plan forecast represents 831,000 additional residents and 371,000 additional jobs after 2016. This Plan takes the current Growth Plan forecast as a minimum expectation.

67OPA 591 is currently with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval. Ms. Dale-Harris opined that the settlement proposal conforms to OPA 591.

Emery Village Secondary Plan (“EVSP/ “Secondary Plan”)

68The site is located within the EVSP, which was adopted by Council in November 2002. Ms. Dale-Harris stated that the key objectives of the EVSP include to:

1. Re-urbanize the Emery Village Community by providing new mixed-use development on an incremental basis consistent with the capacity of existing or planned infrastructure;

2. Create a balance of high quality commercial, residential, institutional and open space uses that reduce automobile dependency and meets the needs of the local community;

3. Locate and mass new buildings to emphasize the intersection of Finch Avenue and Weston Road, and provide transitions between areas of different development intensity and scale;

4. Enhance and extend the existing open space network;

5. Provide a connected, attractive, safe and comfortable system of pedestrian bicycle routes;

6. Improve streetscapes to create an attractive pedestrian environment; and

7. Develop a new system of roads, to provide alternative routes to the Finch/Weston intersection, to create new development parcels and provide access to an enhanced open space network.

69Map 26-1 designates the subject site as Mixed Use Areas “C1”. In Mixed Use Areas “C1”, subject to fulfillment of density and height incentive policies in s. 3.5, building heights will generally range from 2 to 18 storeys in height, and a maximum density of 2.97 times the lot area will be permitted. Section 3.5 further provides that identified density incentives for the provision of community benefits in the form of specific uses and facilities are exempted from the calculation of densities to the extent provided in the Figure 3.5, to a maximum development density of 3.0 times the lot area and maximum height of 18 storeys.

70The EVSP urban design policies are intended to promote a high-quality built form and a safe, comfortable and attractive public realm, based generally on the Structure Plan included in the Secondary Plan. The EVSP’s Structure Plan, Map 26-2, identifies existing and potential building edges along existing roads and area for streetscape improvement along Toryork Drive Road. The subject site’s Toryork Drive frontage has been identified as an area for streetscape improvement.

71Section 4.2 of the EVSP sets out a number of built form principle which are to be incorporated into new development. Section 4.3 includes policies on physical amenity and provides that streetscape improvements should promote a healthy and vibrant pedestrian environment. Section 9 includes transportation policies and section 10 includes policies regarding municipal servicing.

72The Tribunal agrees with Ms. Dale-Harris that the settlement proposal implements the EVSP vision of re-urbanization of this underutilized area with the attendant appropriate massing, intensification and improved streetscapes with connected and attractive bicycle and pedestrian routes. The proposed increases in heights and densities are appropriate considering the PPS and Growth Plan policies on the importance of integrating land use plans and investment in transit infrastructure; the need to optimize the use of land within established urban areas to limit expanding urban boundaries, and the need to accommodate the significant demand for housing. These PPS and Growth Plan policies were adopted after the approval of the EVSP and represent recent policy mandates for optimization and residential intensification on sites such as the subject property.

Tall Building Design Guidelines (TBDG)

73On May 7, 2013, City Council adopted the City-wide Tall Building Design Guidelines (“TBDG”) (March 2013), which update and replace the Design Criteria for the Review of Tall Building Proposals (2006) and consolidate the Downtown Tall Building Guidelines, which were originally adopted by Council in July 2012. While Ms. Dale-Harris reviewed these Guidelines against the settlement proposal, she noted that they are not policy.

74The TBDG include sections related to site context, site organization, tall building massing and pedestrian realm. Among other matters, the Guidelines recommend that tower floor plates be limited to 750 sq m and that towers be set back 12.5 m from side and rear property lines and provide a separation distance of 25 m between towers on the same site.

75With regard to the settlement proposal, the podiums have been located to create a connected public realm and designed to provide a consistent, pedestrian-oriented streetwall that is animated with active uses. A 2 m setback is provided at grade to the north lot line on Toryork Drive to create an urban edge lined with retail uses. Internal to the site, the setbacks at grade are expanded along the Public Road and the Public Park. These setbacks will provide appropriate transition between the private entrances to at-grade residential units and the public realm and create a generous pedestrian environment internal to the subject site.

76The tower locations and heights of the settlement proposal will provide transition in scale to adjacent properties to the south and create appropriate tower separation within the subject site as well as separation from adjacent sites. The minimum tower separation distance is 27.5 m, which exceeds the 25 m distance suggested in the TBDG. The towers have a 750 sq m floorplate, as encouraged in the TBDG, and step backs are incorporated above the streetwall to limit visual impacts.

77It is Ms. Dale-Harris’s opinion that the settlement Plans respect the performance standards for Tall Buildings regarding the public realm, floorplate sizes, tower separation distances and tower setbacks as recommended in the TBDG.

Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities (Growing Up Guidelines)

78On July 28, 2020, City Council adopted Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities urban design guidelines (“Growing Up Guidelines”) to provide for a better integration of family supportive design into the planning of new multi-unit residential developments. These guidelines seek to achieve a minimum of 25% two- and three- bedroom units, comprising 15% two-bedroom units and 10% three-bedroom units. The draft ZBA requires that 30% of the units are 2-bedroom and 10% of the units are three bedroom. While all the units within the settlement proposal do not meet the unit size ranges in the Growing Up Guidelines, the settlement Plans reflect an agreement with City Staff that all two bedroom units will be between 61 and 87 sq m (average unit size: 66.5 square metres) in size and all three bedroom units will be between 82 and 102 sq m (average unit size 92 square metres) in size.

79It is Ms. Dale-Harris’s opinion that the settlement proposal, as reflected in the settlement Plans, respects the intent of the Growing Up Guidelines with respect to unit mix and size.

FINDINGS

80The Tribunal agrees with Ms. Dale-Harris that the settlement proposal has regard for matters of provincial interest in the Planning Act, is consistent with the 2020 PPS, conforms with the 2020 Growth Plan, and conform with the Mixed Use Area policies set out in Chapters 2 and 3 of the OP.

81The settlement proposal as implemented by the draft OPA and draft ZBA will result in a development which is compatible with the existing, approved and proposed development in the surrounding area. The proposed development is at an appropriate level of mixed use intensification of the subject property which is in proximity to existing transit services and planned higher-order transit.

82The Tribunal finds that strong policy directions exist that seek to optimize the efficiency and viability of transit investment by facilitating new housing developments proximate to new and planned transit stations. The subject property is located less than 100 m from the planned Emery Station on the Finch West LRT line. It is thus well positioned to provide, in this area intended for intensification, additional housing, targeted retail, required open space, park and a new public street. This is in keeping with the applicable Mixed Use Areas policies in the OP and the EVSP.

83The proposal will result in a complete mixed-use development that is transit supportive within a Council-approved PMTSA. The Tribunal finds that optimizing the use of land and infrastructure represent good planning and in the public interest.

84The Tribunal finds that the tower and podium design is appropriate in the neighbourhood context, maintain a consistent streetwall and pedestrian visual experience. The public realm is improved with potential retail at grade and the planned landscaping of Toryork Drive area is compliant with the public realm policies of the OP.

85The Tribunal agrees that the settlement proposal contributes to a liveable community. The streetscape improvements and amenity spaces will benefit residents. There is an increase of a range of housing unit sizes for residents at different affordability levels.

86The Tribunal finds that the proposed development conforms to the City OP and respects the intent of the TBDG as well as the Growing Up guidelines. The proposal’s height, density and massing are in keeping with the policies in the Mixed-Use Area designation. The design and built form will be a harmonious fit for the existing and planned context of the area. The podiums and towers siting and setbacks have been carefully thought out to reduce negative visual impact, enhance skyviews and sunlight, thus limiting undesirable impacts on the surroundings.

CONCLUSION

87The Tribunal finds that the settlement proposal is consistent with the PPS. It makes effective use of the subject property and the municipal infrastructure and services. The three mixed use buildings of 27, 36 and 38 storeys, and the 29 storey residential tower represent a mix of uses that are transit supportive and support active transportation. The optimization of the subject site will lead to the development of a complete community.

88The proposed development located on an underutilized subject site, will be well served by existing and planned infrastructure. The subject property is well-placed for land optimization and intensification. The proposal will provide additional supply to the housing stock in a range of sizes and types for the municipality in conformity to the Growth Plan.

89The settlement proposal conforms to the City OP in particular the growth management strategy and land use compatibility policies of Chapter 2. The urban built form design follows that of the TBDG and is compatible with the existing and planned mixed use and residential buildings around the Toryork Drive and Finch Avenue West neighbourhood area.

90The applications relate to a proposal in an area intended for intensification, near a Higher Order Transit/the Emery PMTSA, where the compact urban form may be located and intensification is prioritized. The proposed development optimizes land use, takes advantage of the existing and planned services infrastructure, beautifies the streetscape, adds and creates more amenities and open spaces, and enhances the neighbourhood character. The proposed development of 1,275 residential units will assist the City in meeting the residential supply and housing stock target consistent with municipal and provincial objectives.

91The Tribunal accepts Ms. Dale-Harris’s opinion evidence and finds that the draft OPA and draft ZBA are substantially in accordance with the architectural Plans found in her Affidavit, Exhibit 1 at Exhibit E. The applications have regard to matters of provincial interest found in s. 2 of the Planning Act, are consistent with the PPS, conform to the Growth Plan, the City OP, and the EVSP. The Tribunal finds that the settlement proposal represents good land use planning and is in the public interest.

92The documentary evidence and oral testimony of Ms. Dale-Harris are uncontested. The Tribunal will allow the appeal in part and withhold final order subject to conditions, as requested by the Applicant and the City.

93The case management for the DPS matter is scheduled on Monday, February 5, 2024 by video hearing at 10.a.m.

94Parties 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/979388733

Access code: 979-388-733

95Parties 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

96Persons 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) 497-9373 or Toll Free 1-888-299-1889. The access code is 979-388-733.

97Individuals 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.

INTERIM ORDER

98Accordingly, the Tribunal Orders that:

1. The appeals of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications are allowed in part;

2. The amendment to the City of Toronto Official Plan filed as Exhibit “R” to the Affidavit of Lindsay Dale-Harris (Exhibit 1) and attached hereto as Attachment 1 is approved in principle;

3. The amendment to the City of Toronto Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 filed as Exhibit “S” to Exhibit 1 and attached hereto as Attachment 2 is approved in principle;

4. The settlement proposal as generally depicted on the plans prepared by Giannone Petricone Associates Inc. in association with Giovanni A. Tassone Architect Inc. dated April 14, 2023 filed as Exhibit “E” to Exhibit 1 is approved in principle;

5. The Final Order on the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment be withheld until the Tribunal is advised by the City Solicitor that:

a. the Owner has entered into satisfactory arrangements with the City and R.V. Anderson Associates to fund the engineering design work associated with Road 2A as itemized in Paragraph 1 of Exhibit “J” to Exhibit 1;

b. the Owner has submitted a supplementary Functional Servicing Letter Report which addresses the revised water servicing intent for Block 2 to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services;

c. the Zoning By-law Amendment has been revised in order to incorporate a Holding Provision for Block 1 and/or Block 3, if deemed necessary by the Parties based on the final Functional Servicing Report referred to in b. above.;

d. the Owner has provided an updated Pedestrian Level Wind Study based on wind tunnel analysis with recommendations, as may be necessary, implemented as part of the Zoning By-law Amendment to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

e. the Land Use Compatibility reports have been received and have been deemed acceptable by the third party peer reviewer, with recommendations implemented as part of the Zoning By-law Amendment all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

f. the Owner has updated the Transportation Impact Study Addendum to justify the proposed residential parking rate of 0.4 spaces/unit satisfactory to the General Manager, Transportation Services. The Transportation Impact Study Addendum shall provide for transportation demand management measures satisfactory to the General Manager, Transportation Services, which measures shall be secured as part of the Site Plan Approval process for the relevant Block;

g. the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are in a content satisfactory to the Owner, the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, including any required revisions, changes or amendments thereto;

99The Tribunal be furnished a copy of the final draft Official Plan Amendment and draft Zoning By-law Amendment for review and approval for attachment to the Final Order.

100The Tribunal may be spoken to on matters arising from this order.

101The Draft Plan of Subdivision (OLT-22-003050) is adjourned to a case management conference on Monday, February 5, 2024 at 10 a.m.

102There will be no further notice and the Member is seized.

“T.F. Ng”

T.F. NG 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

Authority: Etobicoke York Community Council Item ~ as adopted by City of Toronto Council on ~, 2021

CITY OF TORONTO BY-LAW 20

To adopt Amendment No. ~ to the Official Plan of the City of Toronto in respect of the lands known municipally as 15-23 Toryork Drive

Whereas authority is given to the Council of the City of Toronto under the Planning Act, R.S.O 1990, c. P.13, as amended, to pass this By-law; and

Whereas Council of the City of Toronto has provided adequate information to the public and has held at least one public meeting in accordance with the Planning Act;

The Council of the City of Toronto enacts:

1. The attached Amendment No. ~ to the Official Plan is adopted pursuant to the Planning Act, as amended.

Enacted and passed on ~, 2021.

Frances Nunziata, John Elvidge Speaker City Clerk (Seal of the City)

AMENDMENT NO. ~ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN

LANDS MUNICIPALLY KNOWN IN THE YEAR 2021 AS 15 – 23 TORYORK DRIVE

The Official Plan of the City of Toronto is amended as follows:

1. Chapter 6, Secondary Plans, Section 26 (Emery Village Secondary Plan) is amended by adding Site and Area Specific Policy No. ## for lands municipally known as 15 – 23 Toryork Drive.

15 – 23 Toryork Drive

Notwithstanding the Mixed Use Areas “C1” designation respecting the lands shown as ## on Map 26- 3 in Schedule 1, municipally known as 15 – 23 Toryork Drive, and despite maximum density and maximum building height requirements set out in Section 3 of the Emery Village Secondary Plan, by- laws may be passed respecting such lands permitting the following:

(a) A maximum building height of 37 storeys; and

(b) A total gross floor area of 99,000 square metre

ATTACHMENT 2

Draft Zoning By-law Amendment (July 17, 2023)

Authority: Etobicoke York Community Council Item EY~~, as adopted by City of Toronto Council on ~~, 2023

CITY OF TORONTO BY-LAW No. XXXX-2023

To amend City-wide Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, with respect to the lands municipally known in the year 2023 as 15, 19, 21 and 23 Toryork Drive

WHEREAS authority is given to Council by Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, to pass this By-law;

WHEREAS a zoning by-law may include Holding (H) symbol pursuant to Section 36 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as amended; and

WHEREAS the Official Plan for the City of Toronto contains provisions relating to the use of Holding

(H) symbol with conditions in the zoning by-law; and

WHEREAS Council of the City of Toronto has provided adequate information to the public and has held at least one public meeting in accordance with the Planning Act;

The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1. The lands subject to this By-law, municipally known in the year 2023 as 15, 19, 21 and 23 Toryork Drive, are outlined by heavy black lines on Diagram 1 attached to this By-law.

2. The words highlighted in bold type in this By-law have the meaning provided in Zoning By-law 569-2013, Chapter 800 Definitions.

3. Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by amending the zone label on the Zoning By-law Map in Section 990.10 for the lands subject to this By-law to the following: O and CR 2.5(c1.0;r2.5) SS2 (xXXX) as shown on Diagram 2 attached to this By-law;

4. Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by adding Exception CR (xXXX) to Chapter 900.11.10 so that it reads:

Exception CR (xXXX)

The lands, or a portion thereof as noted below, are subject to the following Site Specific Provisions, Prevailing By-laws and Prevailing Sections.

Site Specific Provisions:

(A) On the lands municipally known as 15, 19, 21 and 23 Toryork Drive, if the requirements of By-law [Clerks to insert By-law Number] are complied with, a building, structure, addition or enlargement is permitted to be erected on the lands and used in compliance with (B) to (U) below.

(B) Despite Regulation 40.5.40.10(1) and (2), the height of a building or structure on Blocks 1, 2 and 3 is the distance between the Canadian Geodetic Datum elevation specified below and the elevation of the highest point of the building or structure:

i. 150.1 metres on Block 1;

ii. 151.4 metres on Block 2;

iii. 148.75 metres on Block 3;

(C) Despite Regulation 40.10.40.10(2), the permitted maximum height of a building or structure on the lot is the numerical value, in metres, following the letters HT on Diagram 3 of By-law [Clerks to insert By-law Number];

(D) Despite Clause 40.5.40.10 and (D) above, the following elements of a building or structure may project above the permitted maximum building heights shown on Diagram 3 of By-law [Clerks to supply By-law Number]:

i. parapets, awnings, fences, guard rails, railings and dividers, pergolas, trellises, balustrades, eaves, screens, stairs, roof drainage, window sills, columns, pillars, chimneys, vents, pipes, terraces, balconies, lightning rods, light standards and fixtures, architectural features, architectural flutes, ornamental elements, art and landscaping features, elements of a green roof, planters, seating areas, wheelchair ramps, retaining walls, canopies and awnings, decorative screens, divider screens and unenclosed structures providing safety or wind protection to rooftop amenity space, to a maximum of 2.5 metres; and,

ii. equipment used for the functional operation of a building including electrical, utility and ventilation equipment, cooling equipment, enclosed stairwells, roof access, elevator shafts and overruns, elevator machine room, maintenance equipment storage, solar panels and related equipment, antennae and satellite dishes, flight warning lights, garbage chutes, site servicing features, mechanical equipment, cooling equipment, decorative screens and any associated enclosure structures, building maintenance units, window washing equipment and crane structures, to a maximum of 6.0 metres;

(E) Regulation 40.10.40.1(1), with respect to the location of residential use portions in a mixed-use building, does not apply;

(F) Despite Regulations 40.5.1.10(3) and 40.10.40.40(1), the total permitted maximum gross floor area permitted on the lot is 99,000 square metres of which a maximum of:

i. 29,500 square metres of gross floor area for residential purposes shall be permitted with Block 1:

ii. 44,500 square metres of gross floor area for residential purposes shall be permitted with Block 2;

iii. 21,000 square metres of gross floor area for residential purposes shall be permitted with Block 3;

(G) Of the total number of dwelling units provided on the lot, each building must include:

i. a minimum of 30 percent two-bedroom dwelling units; and

ii. a minimum of 10 percent three-bedroom dwelling units;

(H) Despite Clause 5.10.40.70, the required minimum building setbacks in metres are as shown on Diagram 3 of By-law [Clerks to supply By-law Number];

(I) Despite Regulation 40.5.40.60(1), Clause 40.10.40.60 and Clause (H) above, the following building elements and structures are permitted to encroach into the required building setbacks on the lands as shown on Diagram 5 of By-law [Clerks to supply By-law Number]:

i. roof overhangs, balconies, balustrades, canopies, chimneys, cornices, eaves, guardrails, parapets, landscape and green roof elements, waste storage and loading space enclosures, lighting fixtures, ornamental elements, public art features, railings, window washing equipment, terraces, decorative architectural features, privacy screens, stair enclosures, stairs, trellises, underground garage ramps, vents, wheelchair ramps, wind mitigation features and windowsills, to a maximum of 2.0 metres;

(J) Regulation 40.10.50.10(2), with respect to landscaping does not apply;

(K) Regulation 200.5.1.10(12)(C), with respect to vehicle access to a building, does not apply;

(L) Despite Regulations 200.5.10.1(1) and (2) and Table 200.5.10.1, vehicle parking spaces shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the following:

i. Resident requirement for a dwelling unit in an apartment building or

mixed-use building:

a. a minimum of 0.4 parking spaces for each dwelling unit;

ii. Visitor requirement for a dwelling unit in an apartment building or

mixed-use building:

a. a minimum of 0.01 parking spaces plus two for each dwelling unit;

b. a maximum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for the first five

dwelling units; and

c. a maximum of 0.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit for the sixth and subsequent dwelling units;

(M) Despite Regulation 200.5.1.10(10) and 200.10.1(1) and (2), the parking spaces for residential visitors to a dwelling unit required by L(ii) above and the parking spaces for non-residential gross floor area, may be shared on a non- exclusive basis;

(N) Despite Regulation 200.5.1.10(2)(A) and (D), Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, including electrical vehicle supply equipment, does not constitute an obstruction to a parking space;

(O) Despite Regulation 200.15.10.5 and Table 200.15.10.5, a minimum of 0.009 accessible parking spaces per dwelling unit will be provided on the lands of By-law [Clerks to supply By-law #];

(P) Despite Regulations 200.15.1(1) and 200.15.10(1) accessible parking spaces

will comply with the following minimum dimensions:

i. Length of 5.6 metres;

ii. Width of 3.4 metres;

iii. Vertical clearance of 2.1 metres; and,

iv. The entire length of an accessible parking space must be adjacent to a

1.5 metre wide accessible barrier free aisle of path;

(Q) Regulations 200.15.1(4) with respect to the location of accessible parking spaces, does not apply;

(R) Despite Clause 220.5.10.1(1), loading spaces must be provided and maintained on the lot as shown on Diagram 3 in accordance with the following:

i. a minimum of one (1) Type G loading space for Block 1;

ii. a minimum of two (2) Type G loading spaces for Block 2; and,

iii. a minimum of one (1) Type G loading space for Block 3;

(S) Despite Regulation 230.5.1.10(9), long-term bicycle parking spaces are permitted to be located on all levels of the building and parking garage both above and below average grade;

(T) Despite Clause 230.5.1.10 and 230.30.1.20(1), bicycle parking spaces may be provided in any combination of vertical, horizontal or stacked positions, and may be located in a secured room or in a locker;

(U) Despite Regulation 230.5.1.10(10), long-term bicycle parking spaces and short-term bicycle parking spaces may be located in a stacked bicycle parking space;

(V) Regulation 230.5.1.10(12) with respect to bicycle maintenance facilities does not apply;

(W) None of the provisions of this Exception or By-law 569-2013 will apply to prevent the erection or use of a temporary a sales office or temporary construction office on the lot;

5. Holding Provisions

(a) The lands zoned with the "(H)" symbol delineated by heavy lines on Diagram 2 attached to and forming part of this By-law must not be used for any purpose other than those uses and buildings existing on the site as of date of passing this By-law on the lands shown on Diagram 1 attached to this By-law until the "(H)" symbol has been removed.

(b) An amending by-law to remove the "(H)" symbol may be enacted by City Council with respect to each building or block when the following conditions have been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, the General Manager, Toronto Water and Council:

i) Where the final and accepted Functional Servicing Report confirms that the infrastructure improvements within Road 2A which are being relied upon for the development of Block 1 and/or Block 3, the following shall be satisfied:

a. The City has tendered and executed the construction contract associated with Road 2A, which includes the provision of the servicing infrastructure sufficient to support the building(s) or Block to which the Holding Provision applies, which includes;

1. A 250 mm diameter sanitary sewer (approximately 61 metres in length) from the intersection of the new public road to Toryork Drive as well as a 250 mm diameter sanitary sewer stub (approximately 10 metres in length) to convey drainage from the new public road to Road 2A;

2. A 200 mm diameter watermain from the southern property line

of the Site to Toryork Drive, a 200 mm diameter watermain stub (approximately 6 metres in length) to connect the new public road to Road 2A, and two 150 mm diameter secondary fire service connections, one for Block 1 & one for Block 3, respectively; and

3. A storm sewer (currently 1200 mm diameter) from the new public road to the existing culvert crossing at Toryork Drive, which sewer size is subject to engineering review including the additional site drainage, as well as a 375 mm diameter storm sewer stub (approximately 12 metres in length) to convey drainage from the new public road to Road 2A; and

b. Appropriate arrangements as between the City and the Owner have been made to secure the costs associated with the addition of water and sanitary services (and storm upsizing) as part of the construction of Road 2A; or

ii) Where the Owner submits a revised Functional Servicing Report which proposes servicing infrastructure, including the Public Park, that does not rely on the infrastructure improvements being located in Road 2A, such revised FSR shall be the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and the Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services.

Prevailing By-laws and Prevailing Sections: (None apply).

5. Despite any existing or future consent, severance, partition or division of the lands as shown on Diagram 1 of By-law [Clerks to supply by-law #], the provisions of this Exception and By-law 569-2013 shall apply to the whole of the lands as one lot, as if no consent, severance, partition or division occurred.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , 2023.

, JOHN ELVIDGE

Mayor City Clerk

(Corporate Seal)