Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 04, 2026

CASE NO.: OLT-25-000072

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

Applicant and Appellant: Pauline Centre Corporation

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

Existing Zoning: C1

Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined)

Description: To permit the redevelopment of the existing one-storey commercial building and replace it with a 8-storey mixed use building with 105 residential units

Reference Number: 16 268010 NNY 15 OZ

Property Address: 3019 Dufferin Street

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000072

Legacy Case No.: PL171221

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000072

Legacy Lead Case No.: PL171221

OLT Case Name: Pauline Centre Corporation v. Toronto (City)

BEFORE:

BITA M. RAJAEE

Thursday, the 2^nd

MEMBER

day of April, 2026

THIS MATTER having come before the Tribunal for a hearing, in writing, and for Case Management Conferences on March 20, 2025 (Decision issued on March 28, 2025) and July 21, 2025 (Decision issued on July 25, 2025);

THE TRIBUNAL, having been advised by the Parties, Pauline Centre Corporation and the City of Toronto (“City”) that a full settlement agreement has been reached between them;

AND THE TRIBUNAL, having received and considered material from the Parties, including but not limited to:

i. A comprehensive Affidavit, affirmed on March 5, 2026 by David Sajecki, a Registered Professional Planner and full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners and the Ontario Professional Planners Institute;

ii. The attached Exhibits to the Affidavit of David A. McKay; and

iii. The draft Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”), provided on April 2, 2026.

AND THE TRIBUNAL having accepted the uncontradicted opinion evidence of David Sajecki, who, based on his experience and knowledge, was qualified by the Tribunal to provide expert opinion evidence in the field of Land Use Planning, with respect to a proposed ZBA for lands known municipally as 3019 Dufferin Street in the City (“Subject Lands”);

AND THE TRIBUNAL finding that the ZBA, as revised by the settlement agreement, is consistent with, conforms to, and is in keeping with applicable policies and guidelines of the Province of Ontario and the City, including:

i. The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 (“Act”);

ii. The Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (“PPS”);

iii. The City of Toronto Official Plan (“City’s OP”);

iv. The City of Toronto Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 (“ZBL”);

v. The City of Toronto Guidelines (“Guidelines”) including the: Tall Building Design Guidelines; Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities Guidelines; and Pet-Friendly Design Guidelines for high-Density Communities.

AND THE TRIBUNAL being satisfied that the ZBA, as revised by the settlement agreement, meets the required legislative tests, represents good planning, and is in the public interest in various ways, including but not limited to the following:

• It has regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in section 2 of the Act, including:

  • sections 2(f) as it allows for the efficient use of transportation, sewage and water services, and waste management systems;
  • section 2(h) as it allows for the orderly development of a safe and healthy community;
  • section 2(j) as it allows for the provision of a full range of housing;
  • section 2(k) as it allows for the adequate provision of employment opportunities;
  • section 2(p) as the proposal is in an appropriate location for growth and development;
  • section 2(q) as the development is designed to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians; and
  • section 2(r) as the built form is (i) well designed, (ii) encourages a sense of place, and (iii) provides for a public space that is of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive, and vibrant.

• It remains consistent, responds to, and conforms with the PPS by making efficient use of land, infrastructure, and public service facilities. It provides compact, transit-supportive development through intensification and offers a range and supply of housing where residents can leverage transit and active transportation options.

• It conforms to the City’s OP as it creates new housing and employment opportunities for a mixed-use designated site located adjacent to an Avenue, proposes a wider sidewalk for a more comfortable pedestrian environment, and provides appropriate transitions to adjacent Neighbourhoods. The building offers residents convenient access to indoor and outdoor amenities and transit services on an underutilized site in a Mixed-Use Area. Shadow and Pedestrian Level Wind Studies concluded that the proposed building does not adversely affect the nearby Neighbourhoods or the pedestrian environment. The Subject Lands are located within a context that merits the consideration of optimizing height and density. Thus, the proposal facilitated by the ZBA is in conformity with the OP.

• It has appropriate regard for and meets the intent of the Guidelines, including:

  • The Tall Building Design Guidelines: There are a number of requirements pertaining to Tall Buildings in the City. The development facilitated by this ZBA complies with those requirements. For example, it is designed to fit contextually with development in the surrounding area, while framing the streetscape and placing well-defined entrances on public streets.
  • The Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities Guidelines: The proposed development contains elements that reflect the intent of these Guidelines by accommodating a range of household types within a high-density, tall building context. For example, the proposed development is to contain a total of 345 dwelling units, with a significant proportion of larger unit types, including 127 two-bedroom units and 37 three-bedroom units, representing almost 50 percent of the total unit mix.
  • The Pet-Friendly Design Guidelines for high-Density Communities: The configuration of indoor and outdoor amenity spaces in the proposed development, together with clearly defined residential circulation and direct access to outdoor areas, supports responsible pet ownership in a 33-storey residential building. The provision of durable common areas and the separation of residential and retail access further minimizes potential conflicts between pets, residents, and the public realm, consistent with the intent of these Guidelines.

• The Subject Lands are zoned Commercial Residential (CR 1.0 (c1.0; r1.0) SS3) with Site-Specific Exception CR 2620. The ZBA is required to permit additional height and density, and to establish appropriate performance standards for the proposed development. The ZBA will include regulations to permit heights up to 33 storeys; retail uses; and other built form standards to permit the proposed development.

• It responds to the issues and concerns raised by the Participant, which included building height and massing, compatibility with the surrounding context, potential shadow and overlook impacts, traffic and parking considerations, and construction-related effects. In describing how the proposal complies with the various policy requirements, Mr. Sajecki addressed these concerns and how the proposal resolves those issues.

• It is appropriate and desirable from a land use planning and urban design perspective.

• It represents good planning, is in the public interest, and should be approved in principle on an interim basis.

AND THE TRIBUNAL finding that, based on the above and on the material submitted, the ZBA, as revised by the settlement agreement, warrants approval in principle on an interim basis subject to certain conditions;

NOW THEREFORE,

THE TRIBUNAL MAKES THE FOLLOWING INTERIM ORDER:

1. The appeal by Pauline Centre Corporation (“Owner”), pursuant to section 34(11) of the Planning Act, is allowed, in part, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph [2] below, and the Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Attachment 1 to this Interim Order, is hereby approved in principle.

2. The Tribunal will withhold the issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation by the City Solicitor of completion of the following pre-requisite matters:

a. The final form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment is satisfactory to the Executive Director, Development Review Division, the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division, and the City Solicitor;

b. The Owner has submitted a revised Functional Servicing Report, Stormwater Management Report, and Hydrogeological Review, including sanitary and service connection locations and the Foundation Drainage Report or addendums ("Engineering Reports"), to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;

c. The Owner has submitted a Sanitary or Combined Sewer Tributary Catchment Area Plan, including population values and trade flow values utilized in the model, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water

d. The Owner has secured the design and provision of financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure identified in the accepted Engineering Reports, to support the development, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Toronto Water, should it be determined that improvements or upgrades are required to support the development, according to the accepted Engineering Reports, accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Toronto Water;

e. The Owner has submitted an updated Pedestrian Level Wind Tunnel Study, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

f. The Owner has submitted an updated complete Toronto Green Standards Checklist and Statistics Template, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

g. The Owner has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Urban Forestry, Tree Protection & Plan Review and a soil volume plan and tree planting plan has been accepted by the Supervisor, Urban Forestry, Tree Protection & Plan Review; and

h. The Owner has submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study, including Vehicle Maneuvering Diagrams and a functional road plan, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services.

3. The Panel Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final draft of the Zoning By-Law Amendment and the issuance of the Final Order.

4. The Tribunal may be spoken to in the event that some matter should arise in connection with the implementation of this Order.

5. If the Parties do not submit the final drafts of the Zoning By-law Amendment, and provide confirmation that all other contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order set out in paragraph [2] above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order, by Friday, April 30, 2027, the Owner and the City shall provide a written status report to the Tribunal by that date, as to the timing of the expected confirmation and submission of the final form of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment and issuance of the Final Order by the Tribunal.

6. The Tribunal may, as necessary, arrange the further attendance of the Parties by Telephone Conference Call to determine the additional timelines and deadline for the submission of the final form of the instrument(s), the satisfaction of the contingent prerequisites, and the issuance of the Final Order.

“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.

ATTACHMENT 1