Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: December 31, 2024
CASE NO.: OLT-22-002465 (formerly PL130592)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Appellants: Multiple Appellants
Subject: By-law No. 569-2013
Municipality: City of Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002465
Legacy Case No.: PL130592
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002465
Legacy Lead Case No.: PL130592
OLT Case Name: Bahardoust v. Toronto (City)
BEFORE:
C. I. MOLINARI MEMBER
Tuesday, the 31st day of December, 2024
THIS MATTER having come before the Tribunal regarding appeal No. 232 by Arrowdale Development Ltd., Arrowdale In Trust and Loring Development Ltd. under subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, against the approval by the City of Toronto of Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, (“By-law 569-2013”) as it applies to the properties known municipally as 40 and 70 Dali Crescent, 196 Dean Park Road, 4 Gaudi Road, and 7 and 15 Sudbury Hall Drive (“Property”);
AND THE TRIBUNAL having been advised by the Parties that a full, uncontested settlement had been reached (“Settlement”);
AND THE TRIBUNAL having qualified Aidan Pereira to provide the Tribunal with expert opinion evidence on the Settlement in the area of land use planning;
AND THE TRIBUNAL being in receipt of, and having reviewed and considered, the uncontested opinion evidence contained in the Joint Affidavit of Mark Yarranton and Mr. Pereira, sworn on November 14, 2024, that the appeal should be allowed, in part, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as submitted as part of the Settlement should be approved;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having reviewed the draft Zoning By-law Amendment instrument submitted by the Parties to implement the Settlement;
AND THE TRIBUNAL recognizing that the Zoning By-law Amendment implements Draft Plan of Subdivision 55T-85008, approved by the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto on May 1, 1995, with no lapsing date, which includes a condition that the Property be appropriately zoned to implement and regulate the use of the land;
AND THE TRIBUNAL having accepted the uncontroverted opinion evidence of Mr. Pereira and being satisfied that the Settlement:
i. has regard to the relevant matters of provincial interest in section 2 of the Planning Act including the adequate provision of a full range of housing, and the appropriate location of growth and development;
ii. is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 as it provides for development within a settlement area on lands which have been designated for residential development under the Neighbourhood designation;
i. conforms with the City of Toronto Official Plan as the Neighbourhood designation permits the residential uses contemplated by the approved Draft Plan of Subdivision;
ii. represents good land use planning; and
iii. is in the public interest.
NOW THEREFORE
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that appeal No. 232 against By-law 569-2013 of the City of Toronto is allowed in part and the By-law is amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order and is in full force and effect as of the date of this Order. In all other respects, the Tribunal Orders that the appeal is dismissed;
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the City Clerk is authorized to assign a number to the Zoning By-law Amendment attached hereto as Attachment 1 and insert dates as required for record keeping purposes;
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the coming into effect of the amendment to By-law 569-2013 set out in Attachment 1 to this Order:
(a) shall be without prejudice to the rights of any party for their proposed exceptions or modifications to By-law 569-2013 in an issue-specific or site-specific appeal. For greater certainty and without limiting the foregoing, this Order shall not have any effect on the Tribunal's authority to grant issue-specific, category-specific, organizational or site-specific exceptions or modifications to By-law 569-2013, as amended, regardless of whether the proposed exceptions or modifications deviate from, or result in the repeal or replacement of, portions of By-law 569-2013 that the Tribunal has already approved;
(b) shall not have the effect of limiting existing or future resolutions of any appellant's appeal;
(c) shall not limit any party's right to seek to amend portions of By-law 569-2013 and does not limit the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to consider and approve amendments to the By-law including the addition of permitted uses and building types, and site specific exceptions or modifications to By-law 569-2013 that may deviate from portions of the By-law that the Tribunal has already approved; and
(d) shall not apply to any portion of By-law 569-2013 that remains in issue in the appeals;
AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that it may be spoken to in the event a matter should arise in connection with the implementation of this Order.
“Euken Lui”
EUKEN LUI ACTING REGISTRAR
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: Ontario Land Tribunal Decision issued on [date] and Ontario Land Tribunal Order issued on [date] in Tribunal File OLT-22-002465
CITY OF TORONTO
BY-LAW [Clerks to insert By-law number]
To amend Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, with respect to the lands municipally known in the year 2023 as 40 and 70 Dali Crescent, 196 Dean Park Road, 4 Gaudi Road, and 7 and 15 Sudbury Hall Drive.
Whereas the Ontario Land Tribunal, by its Decision issued on [date] and its Order issued on [date], in respect of Tribunal File OLT-22-002465, upon hearing an appeal under Section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P13, as amended, determined to amend Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, with respect to the lands municipally known in the year 2023 as 40 and 70 Dali Crescent, 196 Dean Park Road, 4 Gaudi Road, and 7 and 15 Sudbury Hall Drive; and
Whereas the Ontario Land Tribunal has the authority pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, as amended, to pass this By-law; and
The Ontario Land Tribunal Orders:
The lands subject to this By-law are outlined by heavy black lines on Diagram 1 attached to this By-law.
The words highlighted in bold type in this By-law have the meaning provided in Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, Chapter 800 Definitions.
Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by amending the zone label on the Zoning By-law Map in Section 990.10 respecting the lands outlined by heavy black lines from a zone label of RD (f30.0; a2730) (x1451) to zone labels of: RD (f8.75; a274) (x1316), RD (f9.0; a274) (x1316), RD (x600), RD (f9.0; a279) (x601), RD (f9.0; a270) (x603) and RD (f12.0; a370) (x604), as shown on Diagram 2 attached to this By-law.
Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by amending the Height Overlay Map in Section 995.20 for the lands subject to this By-law, from a height and storey label of HT 9.0, ST 2, to a height and storey label of HT 10, ST 2, as shown on Diagram 3 attached to this By-law.
Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by adding Article 900.3.10 Exception Number 1316 so that it reads:
(1316) Exception RD 1316
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) Despite Clause 10.20.30.40, the permitted maximum lot coverage is 50%.
(B) Clause 10.20.40.20 regarding the permitted maximum building length does not apply.
(C) Clause 10.20.40.30 regarding the permitted maximum building depth does not apply.
(D) Regulation 10.20.40.40(1) regarding the permitted maximum floor space index does not apply.
(E) Despite Regulations 10.5.40.70(1) and 10.20.40.70(1), the required minimum front yard setback is 3.0 metres.
(F) Despite Regulation 10.20.40.70(1), and (E) above, the required minimum front yard setback for a vehicle entrance through the front main wall of a residential building is 6.0 metres.
(G) Despite Regulation 10.20.40.70(2), the required minimum rear yard setback is 7.5 metres.
(H) Despite Regulation 10.20.40.70(3), the required minimum building setback from a side lot line is 1.0 metres on one side and 0.5 metres on the other side.
(I) Despite Regulation 200.5.10.1(1) and Table 200.5.10.1, parking spaces must be provided in accordance with the following:
(i) a minimum of 1 residential occupant parking space for each residential building; and
(ii) the parking space required in (i) above must be located in the residential building.
Prevailing By-laws and Prevailing Sections: (None Apply)
Ontario Land Tribunal Decision issued on [date] and Ontario Land Tribunal Order issued on [date] in Tribunal File OLT-22-002465