Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: March 13, 2026 CASE NO.: OLT-25-000154

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

Applicant and Appellant: Graywood CM GP Inc. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request Description: To permit a 48-storey mixed-use development Reference Number: 24 226502 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 506 – 516 Church Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000154 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000154 OLT Case Name: Graywood CM GP 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: Graywood CM GP Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-Law – Refusal of application Description: To permit a 48-storey mixed-use development Reference Number: 24 226502 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 506 – 516 Church Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000155 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000154

BEFORE: “Steven Cooke” VICE-CHAIR Tuesday, the 24th day of February, 2026

THESE MATTERS having come before the Ontario Land Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) for a Case Management Conference on June 18, 2025;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having directed the Parties to submit a draft Procedural Order by July 25, 2025;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having issued the Procedural Order on July 30, 2025, for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to the hearing commencing on March 23, 2026;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having received a request, on consent of the Parties, to amend the procedural timelines and hearing dates contained in the Procedural Order;

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the following Procedural Order in Schedule A be issued, for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to the hearing commencing on June 16, 2026.

“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

ISSUE DATE: <*> CASE NO(S).: OLT-25-000154 & OLT-25-000155

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

Applicant and Appellant: Graywood CM GP Inc. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal of request Description: To permit a 48-storey mixed-use development Reference Number: 24 226502 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 506 – 516 Church Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000154 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000154 OLT Case Name: Graywood CM GP 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: Graywood CM GP Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-Law – Refusal of application Description: To permit a 48-storey mixed-use development Reference Number: 24 226502 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 506 – 516 Church Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000155 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000154

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 Tuesday, June 16, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at https://meet.goto.com/943363669 or by phone via the call-in numbers: +1 (647) 497-9373 or 1 888 299 1889. The Access Code is 943-363-669

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 9 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 2.

5. The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3. 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 4 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 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.

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. 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, updated supporting documents and reports which it intends to rely upon, to all the Parties on or before Friday, March 13, 2026. 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.

10. 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 Thursday, April 22, 2026, and in accordance with paragraph 22 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.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, May 22, 2026, and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Monday, June 1, 2026.

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 below. 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.

13. 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 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in paragraph 13 below.

14. On or before Friday, May 1, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

15. On or before Friday, May 1, 2026, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

16. On or before Tuesday, May 12, 2026, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

17. On or before Friday, May 22, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

18. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within ten (10) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

19. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Friday, June 5, 2026.

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Tuesday, June 9, 2026 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.

23. All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy. 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.

24. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness, and except as contemplated in paragraph 9 of this Order. 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

ATTACHMENT 1

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE	EVENT
Friday, March 13, 2026	Deadline to provide revised plans
Thursday, April 22, 2026	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
Friday, May 22, 2026	Experts meeting prior to this date, if any
Monday, June 1, 2026	Agreed Statement of Facts, if any
Friday, May 1, 2026	Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
Friday, May 15, 2026	Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)
Tuesday, May 12, 2026	Confirm if reserved hearing dates still required
Friday, May 22, 2026	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
Friday, June 5, 2026	Finalize Joint Document Book
Tuesday, June 9, 2026	Hearing Plan filed with the Tribunal
Tuesday, June 16, 2026	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES:

1. Graywood CM GP Inc. Goodmans LLP 333 Bay Street, Suite 3400 Toronto, ON M5H 2S7 Joe Hoffman Tel: 416.597.5168 Email: jhoffman@goodmans.ca

2. City of Toronto 55 John Street, 26th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 Matthew Longo Tel: 416.392.8109 Email: matthew.longo@toronto.ca

3. Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association Inc. Ian Flett Profession Corporation 99 Yorkville Avenue, Unit 200 Toronto, ON M5R 1B9 Ian Flett Tel: 416.932.0136 Email: ian@flettlaw.ca

4. OEF Village Green Nominee Inc. Aird & Berlis LLP Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, ON M5J 2T9 Maggie Bassani & Alex Suriano Tel: 416.865.3401 and 416.880.6108 Email: mbassani@airdberlis.com and asuriano@airdberlis.com

PARTICIPANTS:

Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 1329 David DeAngelis Tel: 519.709.7756 Email: david@deangelis.io

ATTACHMENT 3

ISSUES LIST

NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the OLT or any party that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is either appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing may be discussed prior to, or be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing. 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 OLT having jurisdiction over such matters in each circumstance. Accordingly, no party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the OLT.

A. City of Toronto

note: the parties agree that the associated site plan appeal will be adjourned sine die and determined through another phase of hearing, if required.

Provincial Statutory & Policy Requirements

Planning Act

1. Does the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-Law Amendment, and proposed development have regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, (d), (h), (j) (n), (q), and (r)?

2. Would approval of the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-Law Amendment, and proposed development by the Tribunal have regard to the decision of City Council and the information and material that City Council considered in making its decision as required by Section 2.1 of the Planning Act?

Provincial Planning Statement (2024)

3. Are the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-Law Amendment, and proposed development consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024) as required by Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, and in particular policies 2.1.6, 2.2.1, 2.3.1, 2.4.1.2, 2.4.1.3, 2.4.2, 6.1.5, 6.1.6, and 6.1.11?

City of Toronto Official Plan

4. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, as modified, and in particular the policies related to:

a. Chapter One – Making Choices b. Downtown: The Heart of Toronto (2.2.1) c. The Public Realm (3.1.1) d. Built Form – (3.1.3) e. Built Form – Building Types (3.1.4) f. Creating a Cultural Capital (3.5.2.3, 3.5.2.5) g. Mixed Use Areas (4.5.2) h. Secondary Plans: Policies for Local Growth Opportunities (5.2.1); and i. Interpretation (5.3.2.1, 5.6)

City of Toronto Official Plan Amendment 406 – Downtown Secondary Plan

5. Does the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and proposed development conform to the Downtown Secondary Plan, and in particular sections:

a. How to Read This Plan (1.6) b. Goals – Complete Communities (3.1, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5) c. Directing Growth (4.2) d. Mixed Use Areas (6.18, 6.19, 6.20, 6.22) e. Mixed Use Areas 3 – Main Street (6.28, 6.29, 6.30) f. Development in Proximity to Existing and Planned Rapid Transit Stations (6.34 – 6.36, 6.38); g. Parkas and Public Realm (7.3); h. Mobility – Parking and Curbside Management (8.27); i. Built Form – Improving the Public Realm (9.1, 9.3, 9.8, 9.9); j. Built Form – Physical Determinants of Intensity and Scale (9.11, 9.13 – 9.15 inclusive); k. Built Form – Creating a Comfortable Microclimate (9.17, 9.18, 9.20, 9.21 inclusive) l. Built Form – Transition (9.22, 9.23, 9.24.1, 9.24.2, 9.25 – 9.27 inclusive); m. Built Form – Mid-Rise Buildings (9.28); n. Built Form – Amenity Space (9.30-9.34 inclusive) o. Culture – Retention and Expansion of Cultural Spaces and Cultural Industry (12.1, 12.4) p. Live Music (12.10, 12.11) q. Interpretation (15.1)

City of Toronto Official Plan Amendment 183, SASP 382 – North Downtown Yonge Plan

6. Does the proposed development conform with the Goals of the North Downtown Yonge SASP in policy 1.1,1.2, and1.5?

7. Does the proposed development conform with the Objectives of the North Downtown Yonge SASP in policy 2.2, 2.4 and 2.10?

8. Does the proposed development conform with the Church Street Character Area policies and in particular 5.7.1, 5.7.2, and 5.7.3?

9. In particular, does the proposed built form respect and contribute to the unique physical, cultural and village character of the cultural identity of the Church Street Village Character Area as a destination for the LGBTQ2+ community, as envisioned by Section 5.7 and reflected in the related policies?

10. Does the proposed development conform with the Sun and Shadow Policies and in particular 6.A and 6.A.1?

11. Does the proposed development conform with the Urban Design policies and in particular policies 6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3, 6.3.4, and 6.3.6?

12. Does the proposed development conform to Interpretation policy 6.5.1, 6.5.2, and 6.5.4?

City of Toronto Official Plan Amendment 524 Downtown Protected Major Transit Station Areas and, SASP 602 – Protected Major Transit Station Areas – Wellesley Station

13. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for the policies of SASP 602?

Official Plan Amendment 352, Site and Area Specific Policy 517: Downtown Tall Buildings Setback Area Specific Policy

14. Does the proposed development conform to Official Plan Amendment 352 (SASP 517)?

Tall Building Design Guidelines

15. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for and achieve the intent and purpose of the applicable Tall Building Design Guidelines and Downtown Tall Building Vision and Supplementary Design Guidelines?

North Downtown Yonge Urban Design Guidelines

16. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable North Downtown Yonge Urban Design Guidelines and in particular sections 4.5 and 5.0?

Site Specific Issues

Built Form

17. Is the proposed development compatible with its physical context? Does the proposed development fit appropriately within the existing and planned context and Church Street Village Character Area?

18. Does the proposed built form conform with applicable planning policies and urban design guidelines, with respect to massing, scale, height, density, setbacks, step backs, and compatibility with adjacent and abutting properties?

19. Would a mid-rise building be more appropriate for the site and conform to the overall objectives of the Official Plan?

20. Does the proposed development enhance and provide an attractive and vibrant public realm, including public open spaces?

21. Does the proposed development provide adequate access to sunlight and sky-view from the public realm?

Amenity

22. Does the proposed development provide adequate indoor and outdoor amenity space?

Parking and Loading

23. Has the proposed development demonstrated that sufficient parking and loading facilities are included in the development, or should the proposed development be revised to include a minimum of two accessible parking spaces in accordance with the requirements of By-law No. 579-2017?

Public Interest and Good Planning

24. Does the proposed development represent good land use planning, and urban design, and is approval of the proposal in the public interest?

Conditions Prior to Tribunal Issuing Final Order

25. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied and the Tribunal receive confirmation from the City Solicitor that:

a. The final form of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review and the City Solicitor; b. The owner has submitted a Functional Servicing Report and other documentation to address all comments of Development Review in the memorandum dated December 6, 2024, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Development Review; c. Should it be determined that upgrades and road improvements are required to support the development, the owner has entered into a financially secured agreement for the construction of said improvements, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Development Review and the City Solicitor; d. All applicable comments from Urban Forestry contained in their December 5, 2024 memorandum are addressed to the satisfaction of the Supervisor, Tree Protection and Plan Review.

B. Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association Inc.

Matters of Provincial Interest

1. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest set forth in section 2 of the Planning Act, and in particular sections 2 (d), (h), (j), (n), (o), (q) and (r) and section 2.1 of the Planning Act?

2. Is the proposed development consistent with the policies of the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, 2.2.1, 2.4.1.2, 2.4.1.3, 2.4.2, 6.1.5, 6.1.6, and 6.1.11?

City of Toronto Official Plan Conformity

3. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, as modified, and in particular the policies related to:

a. Chapter One – Making Choices; b. Downtown: The Heart of Toronto (2.2.1.4); c. The Public Realm (3.1.1); d. Built Form (3.1.3); e. Built Form – Building Types (3.1.4); f. Housing (3.2.1.1); g. Housing (3.2.1.5; 3.2.1.6; and 3.2.1.12); h. Parks and Opens Spaces (3.2.3.1; 3.2.3.3); i. Creating a Cultural Capital (3.5.2); Creating a Strong and Diverse Civic Economy (3.5.1.2 (e)); j. Mixed Use Areas (4.5.2); k. Secondary Plans: Policies for Local Growth Opportunities (5.2.1); and l. Interpretation (5.6)?

Downtown Secondary Plan Conformity

4. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the Downtown Secondary Plan being Section 6, Chapter 41 of the Official Plan, and in particular the policies related to:

a. How to Read This Plan (1.6); b. Goals – Complete Communities (3.1; 3.3; 3.5); c. Directing Growth (4.2); d. Land Use and Economy – Mixed Use Areas (6.18; 6.19; 6.20; 6.22); e. Land Use and Economy – Mixed Use Areas 3 – Main Street (6.28; 6.29; and 6.30); f. Development in Proximity to Existing and Planned Rapid Transit Stations (6.34 – 6.36 6.38); g. Parks and Public Realm (7.1; 7.4); h. Mobility – Laneways (8.11); i. Mobility – Parking and Curbside Management (8.27);6.37.3 j. Built Form – Improving the Public Realm (9.1; 9.8; 9.9; 9.10); k. Built Form – Physical Determinants of Intensity and Scale (9.11; 9.13 – 9.15 inclusive); l. Built Form – Creating a Comfortable Microclimate (9.17; 9.18; 9.20; 9.21 inclusive); m. Built Form – Transition (9.22– 9.24.1, 2, 4, to 9.27 inclusive); n. Built Form – Mid-Rise Buildings (9.28); o. Housing – 11.1; and p. Interpretation (15.1; 15.2; 15.3; 15.6) [relevance of which is the interpretation of policies above and not intended as standalone issue for conformity]?

North Downtown Yonge SASP 382

5. Does the proposed development conform with the Goals of the SASP in policy 1.1;1.2; and 1.5?

6. Does the proposed development conform with the Objectives of the SASP in policy 2.2; 2.4 and policy 2.10?

7. Does the proposed development conform with the Church Street Character Area policies and in particular 5.7.1; 5.7.2, 5.7.3, 5.7.6?

8. Does the proposed development conform with the Urban Design policies and in particular policies 6.3.1; 6.3.2; 6.3.4, and 6.3.6?

9. Does the proposed development conform with Interpretation policy 6.5.1; 6.5.3; and 6.5.4?

SASP 602 – Protected Major Transit Station Areas - Wellesley Station

10. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of SASP 602?

Official Plan Amendment 352/SASP 517

11. Does the proposed development conform with Official Plan Amendment 352 (SASP 517)?

12. Does the proposed development maintain and reinforce the unique built form and fine-grained character of the Church Street Village, in a manner that supports its established role as a culturally significant and inclusive destination for the LGBTQ2+ community, as articulated in the area’s planning policies and texts in section 5.7?

Tall Building Design Guidelines

13. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for and achieve the intent and purpose of the applicable Tall Building Design Guidelines and Downtown Tall Building Vision and Supplementary Design Guidelines?

Other Design Guidelines

14. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable North Downtown Yonge Urban Design Guidelines, and in particular sections 4.5, 5.0, 8.0, and 11.0?

Site Specific Issues

15. Does the proposed development represent good land use planning, and urban design, having appropriate regard for matters such as:

a. The existing and planned context of the Church Street Character Area; b. The proposed built form, massing and scale, building setbacks and stepbacks, heritage retention, building height, floor plate size, and design; and, c. The built form relationship to the adjacent and abutting properties, including Parks, regarding the proposed setbacks, stepbacks, base building heights, overall building height, and separation distances?

C. OEF Village Green Nominee Inc.

City of Toronto Official Plan

1. Does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, as modified, and in particular, the policies related to:

a. Built Form (3.1.3.3; 3.1.3.5, 3.1.3.6, 3.1.3.7) b. Built Form – Building Types (3.1.4.11)

City of Toronto Official Plan Amendment 406 – Downtown Secondary Plan

2. Does the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and proposed development conform to the Downtown Secondary Plan, and in particular policies:

a. Built Form – Physical Determinants of Intensity of Scale (9.14) b. Built Form – Transition (9.23, 9.24, 9.25, 9.26)

City of Toronto Official Plan Amendment 183, SASP 382 – North Downtown Yonge Plan

3. Does the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and proposed development conform to the SASP 382, and in particular policies:

a. Objectives (2.10) b. Church Street Village Character Area (5.7.1(a); 5.7.2) c. Urban Design (6.4.5; 6.4.7)

Tall Building Design Guidelines

4. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for and achieve the intent and purpose of the applicable Tall Building Design Guidelines and Downtown Tall Building Vision and Supplementary Design Guidelines?

North Downtown Yonge Urban Design Guidelines

5. Does the development have appropriate regard for the applicable North Downtown Yonge Urban Design Guidelines, and in particular Section 5.0 (built form framework)?

Official Plan Amendment 352/SASP 517

6. Does the proposed development conform with Official Plan Amendment 352 (SASP 517)?

Site Specific Issues

7. Does the proposed development fit appropriately within the existing and planned context, with respect to the built form, massing and scale, building height and building setbacks and stepbacks?

8. Does the proposed development represent good land use planning?

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

Graywood CM GP Inc. City of Toronto Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association Inc. OEF Village Green Nominee Inc. Graywood CM GP Inc. (in reply, if necessary)

ATTACHMENT 5

PURPOSE OF THE PROCEDURAL ORDER AND MEANING OF TERMS

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.

1410-1217-0007