1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc v. Toronto (City), 2025 CanLII 74203

Ontario Land Tribunal / Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: July 16, 2025

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-001100

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc.

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

Description: To permit a 50-storey residential building containing 620 units

Reference Number: 23 232536 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address: 7, 9, 11, 15, 17 Nipigon Avenue

Municipality/UT: Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-001100

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-001100

OLT Case Name: 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc v. Toronto (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc.

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

Description: To permit a 50-storey residential building containing 620 units

Reference Number: 23 232536 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address: 7, 9, 11, 15, 17 Nipigon Avenue

Municipality/UT: Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-001101

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-001100

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 11, Sched. A

Appellant: 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Site Plan

Description: To permit a 50-storey residential building containing 620 units

Reference Number: 23 232941 NNY 18 SA

Property Address: 7, 9, 11, 15, 17 Nipigon Avenue

Municipality/UT: Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000716

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-001100

BEFORE:

WILLIAM MIDDLETON VICE CHAIR

Wednesday, the 16th day of July, 2025

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT:

1. The Procedural Order attached hereto as Schedule "A", shall be in force and effect for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing, which is scheduled to commence on August 11, 2025. The Tribunal has set aside 10 days for the hearing;

2. This Vice Chair shall be seized of the ongoing case management of this matter but shall not be seized of the hearing of this proceeding.

"Matthew D.J. Bryan"

MATTHEW D.J. BRYAN 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.

SCHEDULE "A"

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 Hearing will begin on August 11th, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. Unless otherwise subsequently ordered by the Tribunal, the Hearing shall proceed by videoconference.

3. The Parties' initial estimation for the length of the Hearing is 10 days. The Parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the Hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible.

4. The Parties and Participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1.

5. The issues for the Hearing are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a Party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.

6. The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, direct evidence (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. The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in it are set out in Attachment 4.

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

9. Any person who intends to participate in the Hearing, including Parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal's Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal's website (https://olt.gov.on.ca/tribunals/lpat/).

Requirements Before the Hearing

10. If the applicant / appellant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant / appellant shall provide a copy of the proposed modifications to the other parties on or before Friday, March 21, 2025. The applicant / appellant 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. A Party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other Parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before Friday, June 27, 2025 and in accordance with paragraph 24 below. A Party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness' Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified. Any challenges to the qualifications of a witness should be made by motion in accordance with the Tribunal's Rules and notice of same must be served on the other Parties on or before Wednesday, July 2, 2025.

12. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, July 4, 2025 and try to resolve or reduce the issues for the Hearing. Following the experts' meetings, and if any agreement is reached, the Parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the Case Co-ordinator on or before Thursday, July 10, 2025.

13. 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 16 below. Instead of an Expert 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.

14. Expert witnesses who are under summons and not paid to produce a report do not have to file an Expert Witness Statement; but the Party calling them must file an outline of the expert's evidence as in paragraph 16 below.

15. A Party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a Witness Statement, as in paragraph 16 below.

16. On or before Friday, July 11, 2025, the Parties shall provide copies of their Witness Statements and Expert Witness Statements to the other Parties and to the Case Co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 24 below.

17. On or before Friday, June 20, 2025, a Participant shall provide copies of their written Participant Statement to the Parties and to the Case Co-ordinator in accordance with paragraph 24 below. A Participant cannot present oral evidence or submissions at the Hearing unless ordered by the Tribunal.

18. Parties may provide to all other Parties and the Case Co-ordinator a written response to any Written Evidence on or before Friday, July 25, 2025, and in accordance with paragraph 24 below.

19. On or before Monday, July 28, 2025 the Parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other Parties in accordance with paragraph 24 below. If a model will be used, all Parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the Hearing.

20. The Parties shall cooperate to prepare a Joint Document Book which shall be shared with the Case Co-ordinator on or before Friday, August 1, 2025.

21. A person wishing to change Written Evidence, including Witness Statements, must make a written Motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal's Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the Moving Party provide copies of the Motion to all other Parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the Motion.

22. A Party who provides Written Evidence of a witness to the other Parties must have the witness attend the Hearing to give oral evidence, unless the Party notifies the Tribunal and the other Parties by Friday, August 1, 2025 that the written evidence is not part of their record.

23. The Parties shall prepare and file a preliminary Hearing Plan with the Tribunal on or before Friday, August 1, 2025 with a proposed schedule for the Hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the Parties participating in the Hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in direct, cross-examination and re-direct examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The Parties are expected to ensure that the Hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the Hearing Plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the Hearing Plan at any time in the course of the Hearing.

24. All filing shall be electronic, unless the Tribunal requests a hard copy(ies) of any document. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7.

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

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

BEFORE: Name of Member: Date:

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

SUMMARY OF PROCEDURAL DATES

DATE	EVENT
Friday, March 21, 2025	Delivery and filing of revised proposal, if applicable
Friday, June 27, 2025	Exchange of list of witnesses and the order in which they will be called
Wednesday, July 2, 2025	Last date to challenge expert witnesses
Friday, July 4, 2025	Meeting of expert witnesses in the same field
Thursday, July 10, 2025	Filing of agreed statement of facts
Friday, July 11, 2025	Exchange of expert reports/expert witness statements/written evidence, evidence outlines for witnesses under summons (if any), participant statements
Friday, July 25, 2025	Exchange of responding evidence
Monday, July 28, 2025	Exchange of visual evidence
Friday, August 1, 2025	Filing of Joint Document Book
Friday, August 1, 2025	Filing of Hearing Plan
Monday, August 11, 2025	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT "1"

LIST OF PARTIES/ PARTICPANTS

PARTIES

Party: 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc Counsel / Representative: Jason Park /Sarah Kagan Kagan Shastri DeMelo Winer Park LLP 188 Avenue Rd, Toronto, ON M5R 2J1 Email: jpark@ksllp.ca /skagan@ksllp.ca Tel: (416) 645-4572 / (437) 781-9551

Party: City of Toronto Counsel / Representative: Sarah O'Connor/ Amrit Sandhu City of Toronto Legal Services Metro Hall 55 John St Toronto, Ontario M5V 3C6 Email: Sarah.OConnor@toronto.ca / amrit.sandhu@toronto.ca Tel: (416) 397 5378 / (416) 338 1617

Party: Ghasem Karbasi/Gus Corporation Inc. Counsel / Representative: Shabnam Riazi Friedmans LLP 150 Ferrand Drive Suite 800 Toronto, ON, M3C 3E5 Email: sr@friedmans.ca Tel: (416) 496-3340 x 130

Participants

Participant: N/a Email: N/a

Attachment "2"

Issues List

City of Toronto

Issue 1 – Height Is the development's proposed height appropriate and does it represent good planning? In particular: a. Does the proposed height conform to Official Plan policies: 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 (Built Form), and 4.5 (Mixed Use Areas)? b. Does the proposed height have appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? Does the proposed height have appropriate regard for the applicable City of Toronto Tall Building Design Guidelines?

Issue 2 – Massing Is the development's proposed massing, including setbacks, stepbacks, separation distances, scale, tower floor plate size, podium design, tower design and density appropriate and does it represent good planning? In particular: a. Does the proposed massing conform to Official Plan policies: 3.1.1 (Public Realm), 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 (Built Form) and 4.5 (Mixed Use Areas)? b. Does the proposed massing have appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? Does the proposed massing have appropriate regard for the applicable City of Toronto Tall Building Design Guidelines? Does the proposed development represent an over-development of the site?

Issue 3 – Site Organization & Public Realm Is the proposed site organization, impact on the public realm, and relationship to adjacent properties appropriate and does it represent good planning? In particular: a. Does the proposed site organization conform to Official Plan policies: 3.1.1 (Public Realm), 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 (Built Form) and 4.5 (Mixed Use Areas)? b. Does the proposed site organization have appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? c. Does the proposed development provide an appropriate contribution to the future mid-block pedestrian connection to be developed with appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? d. Are the proposed at-grade conditions, including but not limited to land use and location of servicing features appropriate and does it have appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? e. Does the proposed site organization have appropriate regard for the applicable City of Toronto Tall Building Design Guidelines? f. Does the proposed development preclude the orderly development of the block?

Issue 4 – Shadow & Wind Impacts Does the proposed development locate and mass new buildings to minimize wind and shadow impacts and maximize sunlight access? In particular: a. Does the proposed development conform to Official Plan policies: 3.1.1 (Public Realm), 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 (Built Form) and 4.5 (Mixed Use Areas)? b. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for the applicable policies of the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? c. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for the applicable City of Toronto Tall Building Design Guidelines?

Issue 5 – Housing Does the proposed development provide an appropriate mix of dwelling unit types? In particular: a. Does the proposed development conform to Policy 3.2.1 of the Official Plan with respect to providing a full range of housing to meet the needs of current and future residents? b. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615) with respect to achieving a balanced mix of residential unit types and sizes? c. Does the proposed unit mix, sizes and layouts meet the intent of the Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities Guidelines?

Issue 6 – Amenity Area Does the proposed development provide appropriate indoor and outdoor amenity area? In particular: a. Do the proposed amenity areas conform to Official Plan policies: 3.1.3 (Built Form) and 4.5 (Mixed Use Areas)? b. Does the proposed development meet the minimum Zoning By-law 569-2013 requirement of 4 square metres of amenity space per unit, including 2 square metres of indoor amenity space per unit? c. Is the location of the proposed amenity area appropriate to ensure the spaces are usable, comfortable, and functional?

Issue 7 – Parking Does the proposed development provide sufficient vehicle parking? In particular: a. Is the development's proposed pick-up drop-off space adequately justified through the applicant's Parking Justification Report? b. Is the proposed development's visitor parking rate adequately justified through the applicant's Parking Justification Report?

Issue 8 – Soil Volumes Are the proposed tree removals, tree plantings and soil volumes appropriate? In particular: a. Does the proposed development conform to Policies 3.1.1 (Public Realm), 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 (Built Form), and 3.4.1 (The Natural Environment) of the Official Plan? b. Does the proposed development meet the applicable Toronto Green Standards?

Issue 9 – Servicing Is there sufficient hard infrastructure to accommodate the proposed development? In particular: a. Has the applicant demonstrated adequate municipal services are in place to support the development, including but not limited to the availability of adequate sanitary sewage capacity? b. Have appropriate stormwater management measures and groundwater management measures been proposed?

Issue 10 – Policy Tests Does the proposed development satisfy the applicable legislative and policy tests? In particular: a. Does the proposed development have regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, including subsections 2 (f), (h), (j), (p), (q) and (r)? b. Would a decision to approve the proposed development have appropriate regard for the decision of City Council as required by Section 2.1 of the Planning Act? c. Would a decision to refuse the proposed development be consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) as required by Section 3(5) of the Planning Act? d. Does the proposed development conform with the applicable policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan and have appropriate regard for the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615)? e. Would approval of the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments represent good planning and good urban design? Would it be in the public interest? f. Would the proposed development meet the intent and purpose of the following City guidelines:

• Tall Building Design Guidelines;
• Growing Up: Planning for New Children in Vertical Communities;
• Pet Friendly Design Guidelines for High Density Communities;
• Design Guidelines for Privately-Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces; and
• Toronto Green Standard: Mid to High-Rise Residential & Non-Residential Version 4 (the "TGS")?

Issue 11 – Implementation In the event the appeals are allowed, in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the City Solicitor has indicated that the following conditions have been satisfied: a. The proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are in a form and content satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and City Solicitor; b. The owner has addressed outstanding issues in relation to site servicing and has submitted a revised Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, Hydrological Report and Geotechnical Study providing confirmation of water, sanitary and stormwater capacity to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; c. The owner has made satisfactory arrangements with the City and has entered into the appropriate agreement(s) for the design and construction of any improvements to municipal infrastructure, should it be determined that upgrades and/or road improvements are required to support the development, according to the accepted Engineering Reports and Traffic Impact Study accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, and the General Manager, Transportation Services; d. The owner has provided a revised Parking Study and a revised Transportation Impact Study, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services; e. The owner has provided an updated pedestrian level wind study and sun shadow study, and their recommendations have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; f. The owner has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Urban Forestry, Tree Protection and Plan Review and a soil volume plan and tree planting plan has been accepted by the Supervisor, Urban Forestry, Tree Protection & Plan Review; g. The owner has provided an acceptable Tenant Relocation and Assistance Plan to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning for Eligible Tenants of the existing rental dwelling units proposed to be demolished, addressing financial compensation and other assistance to lessen hardship, including the provision of rent gap payments; and h. The owner has provided a legal undertaking to the City, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, securing the implementation of the Tenant Relocation and Assistance Plan?

Ghasem Karbasi/Gus Corporation Inc.

1. Is the proposed development and are the Planning Applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2024 ('PPS 2024'), including, but not limited to the following sections of PPS 2024: Chapter 1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3.1.2, 2.3.1.3, 2.3.1.4, 2.4.1.2, 2.4.2.2, 2.4.2.3, 2.4.2.6, 2.9.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2.a), 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.6.1, 3.6.2, 3.6.8, and 3.7.1.

2. Do the proposed development and the Planning Applications conform with the Toronto Official Plan ('Toronto OP'), including, but not limited to the following sections and policies of the Toronto OP: 2.2, 2.2(2), 2.2.3, 2.2.9, 2.3.1, 2.3.1.1, 2.3.1.3, 2.3.1.4, 2.3.1.7 2.3.1.3, 3.1.1, 3.1.1.2, 3.1.1.3, 3.1.1.4, 3.1.1.5, 3.1.1.6, 3.1.1.10, 3.1.1.11, 3.1.3, 3.1.3.1, 3.1.3.3, 3.1.3.4, 3.1.3.5, 3.1.3.6, 3.1.3.7, 3.1.3.9, 3.1.3.10, 3.1.3.13, 3.1.4.10, 3.1.4.11, 3.2.1, 3.2.1.13, 4.1, 4.5, 4.5.2, and, 4.5.3.

3. Do the proposed development and the Planning Applications have adequate regard to the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan ('YSNSP') (OPA 615), including, but not limited to the following section and policies of the YSNSP: Section 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, Section 2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, Section 3, 3.2, 3.5, 3.6, 3.9, 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 3.26, 3.29, Section 5, 5.2, 5.10, 5.17, 5.18, 5.26, 5.27, 5.28, 5.29, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.5, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, 8.9, 8.10, 8.11, 8.12, 8.13, 8.14, 8.16, 8.17, 8.18, 8.21, 8.35, 8.36, 8.37, 8.38, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.11, 9.12, and 9.13.

4. Do the proposed development and the Zoning By-law Amendment Application provide for adequate measures relating to the following: a. Building setbacks to 5 Nipigon Avenue; b. Tall building separations; c. Vehicular and Bicycle Parking; d. Landscape, open space and amenity areas; e. Loading.

5. What conditions for removal of the Holding Symbol / Provision should be included in the proposed Zoning By-law, if approved?

6. Do the proposed development and the Planning Applications have adequate regard to the City of Toronto's Tall Building Design Guidelines, including but not limited to the following Sections, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.1.5, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4?

7. Does the proposed development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue take into consideration the existing built-form and context on 5 Nipigon Avenue?

8. Does the proposed development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue take into consideration the planned context for 5 Nipigon Avenue and does it inhibit the development of a tall mid-rise building on 5 Nipigon Avenue? Specifically: a. Does 7-17 Nipigon Avenue plan for an appropriate height, massing and intensity, and fit within the existing and planned context? b. Are the setbacks and separation distances, including relationship to, and impacts on, adjacent properties, appropriate? Specifically, doe 7-17 Nipigon Avenue take into consideration the future development of 5 Nipigon Avenue? c. Has the proposed development sufficiently assessed the impacts to the public realm and adjacent properties, including shadow and wind and pick-up/drop-off parking? i. Has the inclusion of 5 Nipigon Avenue to the development framework for 7-17 Nipigon Avenue been considered, including, but not limited to, a shared access off the city-owned laneway west of 5 Nipigon Avenue and a planned development that combines both 5 Nipigon Avenue and 7-17 Nipigon Avenue through vehicular access via the city-owned laneway?

9. What impact does 7-17 Nipigon Avenue have on the existing / planned transit and transportation system for the area? Does the proposed development have an impact on the existing and planned context for 5 Nipigon Avenue?

10. Has consideration been given to including 5 Nipigon Avenue as part of the development framework at 7-17 Nipigon Avenue, i.e., consolidation of vehicular accesses, inclusion of a tall mid-rise or a tall building on 5 Nipigon Avenue?

11. Does the proposed development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue consider the impact on existing and future servicing and has sufficient capacity been identified or confirmed to facilitate the proposed development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue and 5 Nipigon Avenue? Is a Municipal Infrastructure Agreement ('MIA') being entered into with the landowner of 7-17 Nipigon Avenue, and have the necessary upgrades to municipal infrastructure to support the development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue and the area, including costs and timelines for upgrades been completed?

12. Has 7-17 Nipigon Avenue undertaken sufficient consultation with the general public and has there been sufficient due course to coordinate the proposed development and collaborate with 5 Nipigon Avenue?

13. Has the applicant discussed with City Staff respective responsibilities regarding coordination, provision, cost-sharing, front ending and / or phasing infrastructure, including, servicing, to support the proposed development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue?

14. What agreements are contemplated in consideration of coordinating the existing development / building on 5 Nipigon Avenue and to facilitate the proposed development on 7-17 Nipigon Avenue?

15. Has the applicant evaluated the cumulative impacts of 7-17 Nipigon Avenue's proposed development alongside other planned developments in the area, particularly regarding transportation, public services, and infrastructure? How does this affect future development on 5 Nipigon Avenue?

16. Why does the Block Context Plan prepared by Goldberg Group submitted as part of Planning Applications: 23232941NNY18SA and 23232536NNY18OZ, not identify / consider the existing or planned development context for 5 Nipigon Avenue and 8 Abitibi Avenue?

Attachment "3" Order of Evidence

1. 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc.
2. City of Toronto
3. Ghasem Karbasi/Gus Corporation Inc.
4. 1000807336 Ontario Inc. & 1000692389 Ontario Inc. (Reply, if any)

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 authorization 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.