TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd. v. Markham (City), 2024 CanLII 101438

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE:

October 10, 2024

CASE NO(S).:

OLT-24-000601

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

Applicant and Appellant:

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd.

Subject:

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

Description:

To facilitate the development of the site with a 36-storey mixed-use residential building with non-residential uses at-grade

Reference Number:

PLAN 23 111529

Property Address:

7115 Yonge Street and 8, 10, 12, 14 Grandview Avenue

Municipality/UT:

Markham/York

OLT Case No.:

OLT-24-000601

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-24-000601

OLT Case Name:

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd. v. Markham (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant:

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd.

Subject:

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

Description:

To facilitate the development of the site with a 36-storey mixed-use residential building with non-residential uses at-grade

Reference Number:

PLAN 23 111529

Property Address:

7115 Yonge Street and 8, 10, 12, 14 Grandview Avenue

Municipality/UT:

Markham/York

OLT Case No.:

OLT-24-000602

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-24-000601

Heard:

September 27, 2024 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd.

M. Laskin

City of Toronto

M. Cheung-Madar

Metrolinx

C. Higgs

1548318 Ontario Inc. and 1548319 Ontario Inc.

R. Barron

C. Tanzola (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. BRAUN ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) to organize the hearing of appeals by TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd. (“Appellant”) against the failure of the City of Toronto (“City”) to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment in relation to the property located at 7115 Yonge Street and 8, 10, 12 Grandview Avenue (“Subject Property”). The Appellant proposes to redevelop the Subject Property with a 36-storey mixed use building with retail uses at grade and 437 residential units.

2The Tribunal was in receipt of the sworn Affidavit of Nancy Borges, dated August 30, 2024, confirming that Notice of this CMC was properly given. No further notice will be required.

STATUS REQUESTS

3In advance of the CMC, the Tribunal received one written request for Participant status from Augustine Au, who resides on Grandview Avenue and is concerned that the proposed development will result in adverse traffic impacts. The prospective participant did not attend the CMC and as such, the Parties were canvassed with respect to any specific concerns or questions requiring clarification which might necessitate a deferral of the request to a future hearing event. The Parties advised that there were no such concerns or questions, and the Tribunal granted the request without objection.

4The Tribunal also received written Party status requests from Metrolinx as well as 1548318 Ontario Inc. and 1548319 Ontario Inc.

Metrolinx

5Metrolinx previously provided written comments on the OPA and ZBA applications. The main concern of Metrolinx is that the development, as proposed, is in direct conflict with the proposed Emergency Exit Building for the Yonge North Subway Extension tunnel alignment and potentially conflicts with proposed subway tunnels. Metrolinx takes the position that detailed coordination is required to address potential structural, drainage, civil and landscape conflicts.

6With no objections from the Parties, the request was granted, with the Tribunal having been satisfied that Metrolinx has a direct interest in the outcome of the proceedings and will assist the Tribunal in making its decision.

1548318 Ontario Inc. and 154319 Ontario Inc.

71548318 Ontario Inc. and 154319 Ontario Inc. (“Numbered Companies”) are the registered owners of 15 Doncaster Avenue and 16 Grandview Avenue (“Skale Lands”) which are located immediately east of the proposed development. The Numbered Companies seek Party status to ensure any form of development on the Subject Property is compatible with the current and future development potential of the Skale Lands including but not limited to: location and height of the proposed tower and the manner in which the proposed development relates to the Skale Lands.

8With no objections from the Parties, this request was also granted, with the Tribunal having been satisfied that the Numbered Companies have a direct interest in the outcome of the proceedings and will assist the Tribunal in making its decision.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT

9Acknowledging the early stages of these proceedings, the Tribunal canvassed the Parties with respect to any opportunities for settlement, including the use of Tribunal-assisted mediation. Counsel advised that, should they wish to avail themselves of Tribunal-assisted mediation at some point in the future, they are aware that they may request a mediation assessment through the assigned Case Coordinator.

PROCEDURAL ORDER/ISSUES LIST

10The Parties all worked diligently to provide a draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and detailed Issues List (“IL”), which they submitted to the Tribunal in advance of the CMC. A discussion ensued with respect to the new Provincial Planning Statement, which comes into effect on October 20, 2024 and the uncertainty surrounding transition provisions (if any) and how that might affect the IL as currently drafted.

11The Parties agreed that, if necessary, only those issues affected by the new policy document and any transition provisions would be revised accordingly, with the updated IL submitted for the Tribunal’s review and approval no later than 30 days from October 20, 2024.

12The PO and IL contained in Schedule 1 to this Decision and Order are approved and shall govern the proceedings up to and including the hearing, subject to any required revisions described above at paragraph [11].

HEARING

13The Parties requested the Tribunal schedule a 13-day hearing. Accordingly, a 13-day video hearing will commence at 10 a.m. on May 21, 2025. Parties are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:

GoTo Meeting: https://meet.goto.com/348282861

Access code: 348-282-861

14Parties 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 GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html

15Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (toll free) 1 888 299 1889. The access code is: 348-282-861.

16Individuals 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 event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.

OTHER MATTERS

17The Tribunal inquired as to whether there were any other matters to be addressed which might assist in the fair, just and expeditious resolution of this matter. The Parties indicated there were none.

ORDER

18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS:

• Metrolinx and 1548318 Ontario Inc. and 1548319 Ontario Inc. are Parties to this proceeding;

• Augustine Au is a Participant to the proceeding;

• The case management directives above are so ordered.

19There will be no further notice and this Member is not seized but, if necessary, may be available for case management subject to availability in the Tribunal’s calendar.

“s. Braun”

S. Braun

VICE-CHAIR

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.

SCHEDULE 1

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000601

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

Applicant and Appellant:

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd.

Subject:

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

Description:

To facilitate the development of the site with a 36-storey mixed-use residential building with non-residential uses at-grade

Reference Number:

PLAN 23 111529

Property Address:

7115 Yonge Street and 8, 10, 12, 14 Grandview Avenue

Municipality/UT:

Markham/York

OLT Case No.:

OLT-24-000601

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-24-000601

OLT Case Name:

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd. v. Markham (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant:

TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd.

Subject:

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

Description:

To facilitate the development of the site with a 36-storey mixed-use residential building with non-residential uses at-grade

Reference Number:

PLAN 23 111529

Property Address:

7115 Yonge Street and 8, 10, 12, 14 Grandview Avenue

Municipality/UT:

Markham/York

OLT Case No.:

OLT-24-000602

OLT Lead Case No.:

OLT-24-000601

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 May 21, 2025 at 10 a.m.

3. The estimated length of the hearing is thirteen (13) 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.

4. The parties and participants are set out in Attachment 1. See Attachment 4 for the meaning of these terms.

5. The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. Subject to a party’s right to modify or supplement issues that directly arise from a revised proposal contemplated in paragraph 10, there will be no changes to this list, other than a party’s right to remove or narrow issues, 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 3 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 shall provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible. Any person who retains 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. 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, the expert witness(es)' curriculum vitae and Acknowledgment of Expert Duty form(s), and the order in which the witnesses will be called. This list must be delivered on or before February 20, 2025. For expert witnesses, a party is to identify the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified.

10. 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 January 20, 2025. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have at least one meeting before the hearing to try to resolve or reduce issues for the hearing on or before March 7, 2024. The experts may prepare a list of any agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing and provide this list to all of the parties and the Tribunal on or before May 6, 2025 if agreement is reached.

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 13. 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 they intend 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 parties at the same time as the delivery of witness statements, as in paragraph 13.

13. A witness (including any expert witness) or participant must provide to the Tribunal and the parties a witness statement or participant statement, respectively, on or before March 21, 2025 or the witness may not give oral evidence at the hearing. Participants are only permitted to provide written evidence to the Tribunal, except as permitted by the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021 and the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

14. Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in paragraph 13.

15. The parties may provide to all other parties a written response to any written evidence within ten (20) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 22.

16. On or before April 16, 2025, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

17. On or before May 1, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties. The Tribunal and all parties shall be notified if a model will be used, and all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the scheduled commencement of the hearing.

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. On or before May 14, 2025, the parties shall prepare and file a detailed Work Plan that identifies the following, at a minimum: the identified parties participating in the Hearing Event, preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the date a witness is intended to attend the Tribunal, the identified witness name/expertise, and the approximate time allotted for Examination in Chief, Cross Examination and any re-examination (if any) (the “Work Plan”). The Work Plan should be adhered to guide the Hearing Event to the best ability of all the parties, and any and all witnesses shall be available on the identified date(s), unless otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the Work Plan throughout the Hearing Event.

21. The parties shall prepare a Joint Document Book on or before May 12, 2025, and which, if requested by the Tribunal, one (1) hard copy will be filed with the Tribunal as soon as practicable in advance of the Hearing. All parties must be served with the Joint Document Book in paper or an accessible electronic format in accordance with paragraph 22.

22. All filing of documents and materials shall be electronic to the Tribunal, the parties and participants (if any). The Tribunal will be provided a hard copy of documents and materials in advance of the hearing event as soon as practicable should it request same. 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. 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, or as may be amended. Paragraph 22 applies regardless of if the hearing event is in-person or electronic.

23. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness or as permitted in paragraph 10. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.

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

25. The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in this Procedural Order are set out in Attachment 4.

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE

EVENT

January 20, 2025

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

February 20, 2025

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

March 7, 2025

Experts’ Meetings

March 21, 2025

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

April 11, 2025

Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)

April 16, 2025

Parties to Advise Tribunal if any hearing dates are to be released from the hearing calendar (if any)

May 1, 2025

Exchange of visual evidence (if any)

May 6, 2025

Agreed Statement of Facts

May 12, 2025

Finalize Joint Document Book

May 14, 2025

Final Work Plan filed with the Tribunal

May 21, 2025

Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 1 PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS

Parties

1. TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd. Max Laskin (416) 849-6938 mlaskin@goodmans.ca

2. City of Markham Maggie Cheung-Madar (905) 477-7000 x 3583 MCheung-Madar@markham.ca

3. 1548318 Ontario Inc. & 1548319 Ontario Inc.

Christopher Tanzola and Rowan Barron (416) 428-7493 / (647) 678-7727 ctanzola@overlandllp.ca / rbarron@overlandllp.ca

4. Metrolinx

Christel Higgs (416) 947-6701 christel@mhlawyers.ca

Participants

1. Augustine Au

(647) 514-3309 wkau63@gmail.com

ATTACHMENT 2 ISSUES LIST

NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the Tribunal or any Party that the issue is either relevant or appropriate. 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 Tribunal have jurisdiction over such matters in each circumstance. Accordingly, no Party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the Tribunal.

City of Markham

Planning Policy

1. Does the Proposed Development have appropriate regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, including subsections (f), (h), (i), (j), (m), (p), (r)?

2. Is the Proposed Development consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) as required by Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, including but not limited to sections: 1.1.1, 1.1.3, 1.2.1, 1.4.1, 1.4.3, 1.6.6, and 1.6.8?

3. Does the Proposed Development conform to and not conflict with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), as required by Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, including but not limited to sections policies 2.2.1.3, 2.2.1.4, 2.2.4.11, 2.2.6.1.a, 2.2.6.b and 3.2.8.1?

4. Does the Proposed Development conform to the 2022 York Region Official Plan, including but not limited to the following sections:

a. 2.3.41, 2.3.43 – The Foundation for Complete Communities;

b. 4.4.1, 4.4.5, 4.4.10, 4.4.11, 4.4.17, 4.4.19, 4.4.21, 4.4.24, 4.4.25, and 4.4.42 – An Urbanizing Region – Intensification;

c. 6.2.3, 6.4.3, 6.5.7 – Servicing our communities.

5. Does the Proposed Development conform to and have appropriate regard for the 2014 City of Markham Official Plan, including but not limited to the following sections:

a. 2.2.2.1, 2.2.2.4, 2.4.3, 2.4.9 and 2.4.11;

b. 4.1.1.1, 4.1.2.4, 4.1.3.1, 4.1.3.5, 4.2.1.1, 4.3.1.1, 4.3.1.4, 4.3.5.1, 4.3.5.6;

c. 6.1.8.2, 6.1.8.4, 6.1.8.5, and 6.1.8.10;

d. 8.1.5, 8.3.4.1, 8.3.4.4, and 8.3.4.5 d), f);

e. 9.18.2 a), 9.18.3, 9.18.6, 9.18.7, 9.18.8.1 c), 9.18.8.2, 9.18.8.3, 9.18.8.4; and

f. 10.2.3.1, 10.2.2.3?

Built Form & Urban Design, Parkland

6. Is the Proposed Development compatible and appropriate in terms of the following: height, density, scale, massing and built form, setbacks, transition, and siting of the proposed building, given the established residential communities surrounding the subject lands, the anticipated development in the area, and future development planned in the area?

7. Does the Proposed Development appropriately address the Markham Built Form, Height and Massing Study Built Form Principles, in particular guidelines TB.04 and TB.05 with respect to Tall Buildings?

8. Has sufficient information been provided to address compatibility with future residential development on adjacent properties as it relates to, but not limited to the following:

a. Appropriate transition;

b. Scale and massing;

c. Wind comfort and safety;

d. Setbacks (both above and below grade);

e. Separation distances;

f. Unencumbered landscape buffers; and,

g. Community amenities to support the proposed residential population including but not limited to, equally accessible communal open spaces, outdoor amenity, parks? Is there an opportunity for an off-site public park?

9. Does the Proposed Development represent good planning and urban design and is it in the public interest?

10. Does the Proposed Development provide sufficient parkland dedication to accommodate the proposed density?

Transportation and Servicing Engineering

11. Does the Transportation Impact Assessment Study submitted by the Appellant in December 2022 satisfactorily address transportation impacts to the Proposed Development including but not limited to:

a. The traffic assessment must include scenarios for different study horizons, with and without the Yonge North Subway Extension (YNSE). This includes an interim condition prior to YNSE. The assumption for analysis will need to be updated based upon different horizons.

b. A review of the pedestrian and cycling needs on Grandview Avenue and the broader local road network in the area.

c. Coordination of design of the subject site, including the north-south connection between Grandview Avenue and Doncaster Road, with the ongoing Yonge Street Corridor Secondary Plan process and the Council approved Yonge Corridor Land Use and Built Form Study

d. An enhanced TDM plan provided to support travel needs for residents and visitors prior to the completion of the subway. The enhanced TDM plan shall include, but not limited to:

• Bike-share program

• Ebike voucher

• Car-share service

• Parking surveys

• Other technical comments included the City’s comments dated April 21, 2023.

12. Can the Proposed Development be appropriately serviced in terms of water, wastewater and stormwater management infrastructure capacity and allocation?

13. Is it appropriate to apply a holding provision to the Zoning By-law Amendment to address:

a. servicing infrastructure, including appropriate water and sanitary sewage capacity and allocation to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Engineering; and

b. transportation improvements to support mid-block connections to provide access opportunities for all travel modes for the properties which have only Yonge Street frontage to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Engineering.

Other

14. Does the Proposed Development include an appropriate amount of affordable housing?

15. Is it premature or good planning to approve the Proposed Development until –

a. A comprehensive block plan is completed in accordance with sections 9.18.9.3 and 10.1.4 of the Official Plan?

b. The Appellant provides updated studies and/or reports to confirm the servicing infrastructure and capacity can be evenly and appropriately distributed for the entire Yonge Street Corridor Secondary plan area; and

c. Third parties’ comments, including those required by Metrolinx and York Region, have been addressed satisfactorily?

16. If the requested Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications are approved by the Tribunal, should the Tribunal's final Order be withheld until the Tribunal has been advised by the City that:

a. The proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are in forms satisfactory to the City; and

b. The Appellant has provided the necessary studies, reports, and/or confirmations, to satisfy matters as set out in Issue #15, above, and

c. The Appellant has entered into any agreements required to secure any required upgrades or improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure, should they be required, all to the satisfaction of the City.

Metrolinx

1. Do the proposed Official Plan amendment (OPA) and zoning amendment (ZBA) have regard to the matters of provincial interest as required by section 2 of the Planning Act as described in section 1.1(c)?

2. Are the proposed OPA and ZBA consistent with the transit supportive and infrastructure protection policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, as required by the Planning Act (3(5)) including 1.1.1.e, 1.1.1.g, 1.2.1.a and d, 1.2.6.1, 1.6.1, 1.6.7.1, 1.6.8.1, 1.6.8.2, 1.6.8.3, 1.6.8.5, 1.6.9.1.a (and associated definitions)?

3. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA conform with the transit supportive and infrastructure protection policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020, as required by the Planning Act and Places to Grow Act (14(1)) including 2.2.4(11), 3.2.1(1), 3.2.3(3) and 3.2.5(1b)?

4. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA conform with the transit policies of the York Region Official Plan including 2.3.2, 6.3.11, 6.3.12, 6.3.13, 6.3.14, 6.3.15, 6.3.16, 6.3.17, 6.3.18, 6.3.18, 6.3.19, 6.3.20, 6.3.21, 6.3.22, 6.3.23, 6.3.24?

5. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA conform with the transit policies of the City of Markham Official Plan including 7.1.1.4, 7.1.2.1, 7.1.2.2, 7.1.2.3, 7.1.2.7, 7.1.2.9, 7.1.7.6?

6. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA consider the Yonge North Subway Extension Updated Environmental Project Report Addendum April 14, 2022?

7. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA and technical reports accurately reflect and incorporate the Yonge North subway extension project as it relates to the appellant’s lands?

8. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA consider and are compatible with the planned advance tunnel works and Emergency Exit Building requirements?

9. To what extent, if at all, do the OPA and ZBA provide for the construction and/or use of the properties for transit-oriented purposes?

10. Do the proposed OPA and ZBA represent good land use planning?

1548318 Ontario Inc. & 1548319 Ontario Inc.

Built form and Density

1. Is the proposed height and density generally appropriate, having regard to the surrounding context?

2. Is the proposed built form appropriate with respect to: tower location, setbacks, stepbacks and floorplate size?

3. How will the height, massing and location of balconies impact adjacent properties, particularly with regard to shadows and privacy?

Compatibility and Impact on Adjacent Properties

4. Has an appropriate block planning exercise or other assessment of the development potential of the block bounded by Yonge Street to the west, Doncaster Avenue to the north, Dudley Avenue to the east and Grandview Avenue to the south (the “Block”) been undertaken, taking into account the input of all Parties and property owners on the Block?

5. Does the Proposed Development provide for an appropriate interface with adjacent properties to the north and east?

6. Does the Proposed Development provide for efficient development and land use patterns for the site and surrounding lands?

7. Does the Proposed Development negatively impact the existing uses and/or the ability for surrounding lands to develop to their planned potential?

Infrastructure, Servicing and Transportation

8. Does the Proposed Development appropriately address issues related to the provision of municipal infrastructure and community services and facilities?

9. Will the Proposed Development create unacceptable traffic and parking infiltration into the existing residential neighbourhood to the east?

10. Is the proposed location of loading and parking access acceptable given the proximity of the residential uses to the east?

Planning Principles

11. Does the Proposed Development represent good planning?

12. In the event of approval of the OPA and ZBA for the Proposed Development, should the Tribunal’s order be withheld or alternatively, should a Holding Symbol “H” be applied to the property to provide for the orderly development of the lands within the Block and/or the completion of any required technical studies?

ATTACHMENT 3 ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd.

2. City of Markham

3. 1548318 Ontario Inc. & 1548319 Ontario Inc.

4. Metrolinx

5. TerraBona 7115 Yonge Ltd., in reply (if any)

Attachment 4 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.