Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: December 17, 2021

CASE NO(S).: PL210135, PL200157

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

Applicant and Appellant: 1386073 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of City of Toronto to adopt the requested amendment

Existing Designation: Neighborhoods, General Employment Areas, and Core Employment Areas

Proposed Designated: Neighborhoods, General Employment Areas, and Core Employment Areas

Purpose: To permit a new road to be developed as a private road

Property Address/Description: 2650 St. Clair Avenue West

Municipality: City of Toronto

Approval Authority File No.: 20 196724 WET 05 OZ

OLT Case No.: PL210135

OLT File No.: PL210135

OLT Case Name: 1386073 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: 1386073 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 - Refusal or neglect of the City of Toronto to make a decision

Existing Zoning: Commercial Employment (CE) under former City of York Zoning By-Law No. 1-83

Proposed Zoning: Residential 3 (R3) and Commercial Employment (CE)

Purpose: To permit the construction of 98, 4-storey back-to-back townhouse units to the rear of the existing 2-storey commercial building

Property Address/Description: 2650-2672 St. Clair Avenue West

Municipality: City of Toronto

Municipality File No.: 18 208427 WET 11 OZ

OLT Case No.: PL210135

OLT File No.: PL200157

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: 1386073 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision - Failure of the City of Toronto to make a decision

Purpose: To permit the creation of 4 Blocks to facilitate a road widening along St. Clair Avenue West, a widening of the public lane, to create 2 development parcels, and a new public street

Property Address/Description: 2650-2672 St. Clair Avenue West

Municipality: City of Toronto

Municipality File No.: 18 208431 WET 11 SB

OLT Case No.: PL210135

OLT File No.: PL200158

Heard: November 29, 2021 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
1386073 Ontario Inc.	Daniel Artenosi Natalie Ast
City of Toronto	Jesseca Jakubowski

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY STEVEN COOKE AND T. PREVEDEL AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1This was a settlement hearing conducted with respect to appeals filed by 1386073 Ontario Inc. (“Applicant”). The appeals fall under several subsections of the Planning Act, s. 22(7) for the City of Toronto’s (“City”) failure to make a decision on a proposed Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”), s. 34(11) for the City’s failure to make a decision regarding Zoning By-law Amendment applications to it’s Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 and the former City of York Zoning By-law No. 1-83, and s. 51(34) for the failure of the City to make a decision on a proposed plan of subdivision, for the lands municipally known as 2650-2672 St. Clair Avenue West (“the subject site”).

Background

2The subject site has historically been designated as an Employment Area. With the adoption of Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) No. 231, the subject site was converted in part to give the northern portion of the property a Neighborhoods designation that is in line with the existing surrounding area. The lands that include the existing structure that was formerly used as a Danier leather facility are designated as General Employments Areas.

3In a Preliminary Report by City staff dated December 14, 2018, the original applications proposed the development of five (5) blocks of back-to-back townhouses having a total of 98 three-bedroom units. Each block was proposed to be four (4)-storeys in height with an additional pop-up access to a rooftop private amenity space. The proposed residential floor area of 14,334 square metres (“sq m”) would result in a residential density of 0.73 times the area of the lot.

4There is an existing two (2)-storey building fronting onto St. Clair Avenue West which has been renovated for commercial and office uses. This building has a gross floor area of 6,500 sq m resulting in an overall density of 1.07 times the area of the lot. The building is ready for occupancy but is untenanted yet due to the pandemic situation.

5Each of the townhouses were originally proposed to have two parking spaces and 29 residential visitor parking spaces. There are 166 parking spaces proposed for the commercial building to be located primarily under the residential portion of the site with some spaces located at grade on the west side of the site, connecting to St. Clair Avenue West. Also, a new two (2)-way public road was proposed to be located on the west portion of the site from St. Clair Avenue West to the existing public lane to the north.

Area Context

6The subject lands are located on the north side of St. Clair Avenue West, east of Scarlett Road and west of Jane Street. They form an irregularly shaped parcel having a total site area of 1.94 hectares and a frontage of approximately 191 metres (“m”) on St. Clair Avenue West. The lands are generally flat with a slight incline of approximately 1.25 m towards the north property line. As noted earlier, the subject lands contain a two-storey building that has undergone a significant and well-designed renovation on the southern portion of the lands fronting St. Clair Avenue West. The remainder of the subject lands are currently vacant. The site formerly contained a surface parking area and large employment building occupied by the Danier Leather head office and retail outlet. The northern (rear) portion of the building has since been demolished.

7Abutting the subject lands to the north is a residential neighbourhood comprised of one (1) to two (2)-storey single detached dwellings, including those on Bernice Crescent, which have garages backing onto the public lane to the north of the site. Further north is the Marie Baldwin Park and trail along the hydro corridor.

8On the south side of St. Clair Avenue West is the Canadian Pacific Railway corridor and supporting rail storage. Adjacent to the east of the rail storage is the outdoor vehicle storage area for the Old Mill GMC dealership located on Jane Street.

9To the east of the subject site is a one (1)-storey commercial building (2360 St. Clair Avenue West), with an entrance at the corner of St. Clair Avenue West and Florence Crescent. Further to the north along Florence Crescent is a low-rise Neighbourhoods area.

10To the west of the subject site is a two (2)-storey multi-unit commercial/office building at 2696 St. Clair Avenue West. Further west are predominantly one (1)-storey retail and industrial buildings at 2700 and 2710 St. Clair Avenue West.

The Settlement Proposal

11Following a series of comments received through the circulation process, discussions with City Staff, and a formal mediation process, a revised proposal was submitted on October 14, 2021. This proposal was further modified in response to the City’s confirmation that it would not be seeking an onsite parkland dedication and a requirement to incorporate additional pedestrian walkways and crosswalks in various locations on the site.

12The revised proposal has been accepted unofficially by the City, as confirmed by Ms. Jakubowski, Counsel for the City, and is summarized as follows:

• The Proposal will contain a total of 96 units, with 1 parking space per unit, and a total site Gross Floor Area of 15,422 square metres, arranged in Blocks A, B, C, D, E and F.
• The proposal will provide a private north-south road to connect St. Clair Avenue West to the existing public laneway to the north, consistent with the OPA application.
• The provision of a vehicular and pedestrian public access easement over the private north-south road.
• The Proposal will provide a centrally located Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible Space (“POPS”) in the same location as the proposed park shown as originally proposed on the October 14th Proposal (with a public access easement in favour of the City).
• The provision of a public access easement for pedestrian access to the proposed POPS from Esposito Crescent through walkways.
• The building envelope of the easterly blocks have been setback further from the east property line to accommodate a 2.1 metre walkway. Specifically, a 2.1 metre wide pedestrian connection will run as a "loop" along the entire perimeter of the Site, between the southeast and southwest sides of St. Clair Avenue West.
• This connection provides additional pedestrian circulation from Esposito Crescent (at the north), to the commercial building and St. Clair Avenue West (to the south) on the south-east side of the commercial building.
• This connection includes a cross walk between the south-east corner of Block C to the pedestrian connection on the east side of the commercial building.
• The buildings will be further setback from the curbs adjacent to the fire route, specifically units 16 and 33 to provide a minimum 0.5 metre separation between the building and the curb in these locations.
• A north-south 1.5-metre-wide pedestrian connection along the west side of the fire route between Blocks B, C, D and E will be incorporated to provide connectivity to the POPS north of the fire route.

The Sketch below outlines the proposed development, as noted above, in a graphical manner.

Planning Evidence

13With the consent of both Parties, the Tribunal qualified Eldon Theodore as an Expert Witness in Land Use Planning and Urban Design.

14Mr. Theodore provided the Tribunal with an extensive visual overview of the proposed development and its context with the surrounding area.

15Mr. Theodore also provided the Tribunal with a chronological history of OPA 231, re-designating the northern portion of the subject site to Neighbourhoods, with the provision that a public road be provided to connect St. Clair Avenue West to the existing public laneway to the north.

16He further explained how the Site and Area Specific Policy (“SASP”) 540 was developed to provide development guidelines and criteria for both the residential and commercial portion of the subject site.

17Mr. Theodore explained to the Tribunal why an OPA was required by the Applicant for the subject site, as it was necessary to revise the requirement for a public north-south road through the site to a private laneway. This would provide greater flexibility in design standards and allow an optimum development of the site.

18In his oral testimony, Mr. Theodore provided a thorough review of the proposed OPA, the proposed ZBLAs and the proposed plan of subdivision.

19Mr. Theodore also provided the Tribunal with a thorough review of the Planning Context, making specific references to the Planning Act, the PPS, the Growth Plan (2020), the City’s OP, SASP 540 and the Townhouse and Low-Rise Building Guidelines.

20In his professional opinion, Mr. Theodore stated that the settlement proposal appropriately addresses the matters of provincial interest in s. 2 of the Planning Act, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, satisfies the criteria in s. 51(24) and 51(25) of the Planning Act for draft plan approval, conforms with the City’s OP and is in compliance with SASP 540.

21Mr. Theodore further opined that, in his opinion, the conditions of draft plan approval as contained in the settlement proposal reflect standard requirements and are very reasonable.

22Ms. Jakubowski, on behalf the City, after some minor clarifications regarding at-grade parking and fire access, advised the Tribunal that the City adopted the planning evidence as presented by Mr. Theodore.

Participant Statements

23Participant Statements were received from four individuals: Laurie Lepp, Arthur Gron, Lucas Hannahson and Jessica Stanton.

24The concerns raised by the Participants are summarized as follows:

1. Location of waste collection and associated noise
2. Laneway is still too narrow
3. Laneway access could become a major thoroughfare
4. Perceived lack of green space for neighbourhood
5. Concern regarding shadow impacts
6. Concern regarding potential for light penetration
7. Concern regarding potential flooding
8. Request for brick or concrete wall for privacy fencing
9. Not enough soft landscaping

25Mr. Theodore advised the Tribunal that the waste collection would be located internally to the site, and the waste pickup would occur on a regular schedule similar to the rest of the neighbourhood. As a result, no adverse impact to the surrounding neighbourhood is anticipated.

26Addressing the public laneway width, Mr. Theodore stated that, with the proposed widening, the laneway would be increased to a total width of 6 m, which will accommodate vehicular movement in both directions.

27Mr. Theodore opined that most vehicle movements from the proposed development would occur to the south, with egress and ingress at St. Clair Avenue West. The new private laneway would also improve access to the rear yards of the existing houses.

28With respect to green space, the intent and purpose of the proposed POPS is to provide public open space for the entire neighbourhood.

29With respect to shadow impacts, Mr. Theodore reminded the Tribunal that four storeys are permitted in this zone category as of right. The design of the townhouse blocks, with the short façade facing east and west, reduces shadow impacts. He also noted that the shadows would fall on existing accessory buildings. He opined that the proposal has minimized shadow impacts to an acceptable level.

30Mr. Theodore addressed the lighting concerns by stating that this detail would be addressed at the Site Plan stage and that the City has specific design criteria regarding the provision of downlighting and reducing adverse impacts outside of the development.

31With respect to storm drainage, Mr. Theodore stated that the City design criteria requires that post-development flows from the development shall not exceed or even be reduced from pre-development flows. This requirement is captured in the conditions of Draft Plan approval.

32With respect to privacy fencing, the proposed development shows a 1.8 m board on board wood fence along the northern and eastern boundaries, which should provide adequate screening. The requirement for brick or concrete walls is generally limited to situations where noise attenuation is required, thus this would not be appropriate in this location.

33Finally, the proposed infill development has 30 percent of the site reserved for soft landscaping.

Disposition

34Based on the uncontested planning evidence provided by Mr. Theodore, the Tribunal finds that the proposed settlement for the residential infill development appropriately addresses the matters of provincial interest in s. 2 of the Planning Act, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, satisfies the criteria in s. 51(24) and 51(25) of the Planning Act for Draft Plan approval, conforms with the City’s OP and is in compliance with SASP 540.

35In determining this matter, the Tribunal accepts and adopts the uncontested land use planning evidence and expert opinions provided by Mr. Theodore. The Tribunal is persuaded by the evidence that the proposal promotes efficient development of land, accommodates a range of appropriate mixed uses, intensifies uses within the settlement area, and contributes to the range of housing options, as desired by the City.

36The Tribunal has considered the concerns raised by the Participants but was persuaded that the concerns they have raised have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Tribunal and that the proposed settlement represents good land use planning.

37The Tribunal finds that the proposal is consistent with the policy direction established by the PPS and conforms to the relevant directives established by the GP, and as maintained by the OP and is in compliance with SASP 540.

38The Tribunal is further satisfied that the proposal has due regard for matters of Provincial interest, is consistent with the principles of good land use planning and is in the greater public interest. More significantly, the proposal furthers the goals and objectives of the Provincial planning regime to increase housing and employment opportunities

39The Tribunal will accordingly make the necessary Orders in accordance with the provisions of Sections 22(11), 17(50), 34(26), 51(56) and 51(56.1) of the Planning Act and Section 9 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act.

INTERIM ORDER

40The Tribunal Orders that on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph 40 below. The appeal by 1386073 Ontario Inc (“Dunpar”) of its application for an amendment to the City of Toronto Official Plan, is allowed, in part;

ii. City of Toronto Official Plan Chapter 7, Site and Area Specific Policies is amended by adding to Site and Area Specific Policy No. 540, permission to develop the planned but unbuilt road from St. Clair Avenue West to the existing public lane as a private road, generally in accordance with the draft Official Plan Amendment entered as Exhibit 9 at the hearing.

iii. The appeal by Dunpar of its application to amend the former City of York Zoning By-law No. 1-83 and City of Toronto Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 as amended, in respect of the lands municipally known as 2650-2672 St. Clair Avenue West in the City of Toronto (the “Subject Site”) is allowed, in part;

iv. City of Toronto Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 and former City of York Zoning By-law No. 1-83 are amended to permit the form of development set out in the architectural plans and drawings dated November 16, 2021 and November 26, 2019 and entered as Exhibits 7 and 8 at the hearing, generally in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendments entered as Exhibits 10 and 11 at the hearing (the “Zoning By-law Amendments”);

v. The appeal by Dunpar of its application for draft plan of subdivision approval for the Subject Site, is allowed, in part;

vi. The Draft Plan of Subdivision is approved in principle, in accordance with the draft plan of subdivision entered as Exhibit 12 at the hearing (the “Draft Plan of Subdivision”), subject to draft plan of subdivision conditions that are generally in accordance with the draft plan conditions entered as Exhibit 13 at the hearing (the “Draft Plan Conditions”);

vii. Authority to administer final approval of the Final Draft Plan of Subdivision for the purposes of subsection 51(58) of the Planning Act and authority to clear the conditions of draft plan approval pursuant to subsection 51(56.1) of the Planning Act is given to the City of Toronto; and,

41The Tribunal’s Final Order shall be withheld, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of the following pre-requisite matters:

a. the Tribunal has reviewed and approved the final form of the Official Plan Amendment in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor;

b. the Tribunal has reviewed and approved the final form of the Zoning By-law Amendments in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor;

c. The Tribunal has reviewed and approved the final form of the Draft Plan of Subdivision and Draft Plan Conditions in a form satisfactory to the City;

d. The Tribunal has been advised by the City Solicitor that the owner of the Subject Site has:

i. submitted a revised Functional Servicing Report, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;

ii. filed revised landscape plans to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Parks, Forestry and Recreation.

42A satisfactory resolution has been achieved between the parties in respect of the matter of whether a community benefits requirement should be required in this instance, and if so, whether it should be secured through the implementing Zoning By-law Amendment or determined in accordance with the future community benefits charge by-law.

43AND THE TRIBUNAL FURTHER ORDERS that the Panel may be spoken to should a matter arise in connection with the implementation of this Interim Order and 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.

“Steven Cooke”

Steven cooke MEMBER

“T. Prevedel”

t. prevedel MEMBER

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.