Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: January 16, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002334 (Formerly PL210236)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Madison Raglan Limited
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, 438-86 and 1-83 – Refusal or neglect of City of Toronto to make a decision
Existing Zoning: The properties at 10-12 Raglan Avenue are zoned R (d0.6), which permits a maximum height of 12.0 metres and a maximum floor space index of 0.6 The properties at 14-32 Raglan Avenue are zoned RA (x777)
Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (To be determined)
Purpose: To permit a 28-storey residential building with 399 dwelling units
Property Address/Description: 10-32 Raglan Avenue
Municipality: City of Toronto
Municipal Number: 20 155716 STE 12 OZ
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002334
OLT File No.: OLT-22-002334
Legacy Case No.: PL210236
OLT Case Name: Madison Raglan Limited v. Toronto (City)
Heard: June 6, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Madison Ragland Limited | David Bronskill |
| City of Toronto | Marc Hardijowski |
| 538 St. Clair Avenue Ltd. | Jennifer Evola |
| Merkur Realty (1993) Limited | Matthew Helfand |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY CARMINE TUCCI ON JUNE 6, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1Prior to the commencement of the hearing, the Parties confirmed that a settlement had been reached and the settlement was presented for the consideration of the Tribunal.
2The matter before the Ontario Land Tribunal (the “Tribunal”), was with respect to the appeals of the refusal of the City of Toronto to make a decision regarding an application to amend Zoning By-law Nos. 569-2013, 438-86 and 1-83.
3Uncontested opinion evidence was given to supplement the Affidavit sworn by Mike Dror, on June 6, 2022. Mr. Dror was qualified to assist the Tribunal with opinion evidence in areas of land use planning. Mr. Dror provided extensive oral, written and visual evidence as contained in his Affidavit.
4Mr. Dror explained how:
The Settlement Proposal consists of a mixed-use residential building with a height of 28 storeys with a height of 95.65 metres (“m”), or 101.65 m to the top of the mechanical penthouse.
The Settlement Proposal includes a total Gross Floor Area (“GFA”) of approximately 29,343.6 square metres (“sq m”), resulting in a gross density of 10.79 Floor Space Index (“FSI”) (slight increases over the 27,990.26 square metres of GFA and 10.24 FSI in the Original Proposal). Of that GFA, approximately 9.3 sq m is proposed as a “micro café along” to be located the south façade of the lobby, with a service window to the building’s exterior. Also, an approximately 252.4 sq m community space is proposed for municipal purposes, to be located along the north edge of the ground floor.
A total of 389 residential rental units are proposed including 42 three-bedroom units (11%) and 93 two-bedroom units (24%).
A total of 122 parking spaces are to be provided below grade within a two (2)-level underground parking garage with access through an underground garage ramp located off of the north south laneway west of the Subject Site, including 110 residential spaces, six (6) visitor spaces and six (6) car-share parking spaces. Loading and servicing is also accessed from the same laneway with the proposed Type “G” loading space enclosed within the west façade of the building and screened from view.
A total of 406 bicycle parking spaces are proposed (an increase from 400 spaces in the Original Proposal), including 355 long-term spaces and 51 short-term spaces.
5The Settlement Proposal generally maintains the original design intent of the Original Proposal, but with generally increased setbacks and step backs, particularly along Raglan Avenue to provide a wider public realm.
6From the north property line, the building has been set back at grade between approximately 7.8 and 11.8 m, with the wider setback along Raglan Avenue (increased from a relatively equal setback of between 4.4 and 4.6 metres) to facilitate the provision of a new public park with an approximate area of 252.4 sq m , immediately abutting the proposed community space in the ground floor. Above, Floors 2-5 follow similar setbacks except with an overhang of approximately 0.5 m. From the future park, a minimum setback of 3.0 m is proposed at grade, while Floors 2-5 are to be set back 2.5 m.
7To the east (along Raglan Avenue), the podium has been set back approximately 4.2 m at grade (increased from 1.7 metres), resulting in a minimum of 10 m from the curb to the building face for the proposed two (2)-storey townhouses facing the public street. Above, the lower podium (Floors 2-5) is set back 3.2 m (increased from 0 metres).
8To the south, the approximately 5.5 m podium setback to the centreline of the east-west lane to the south is maintained, while the two (2)-storey townhouses below (now proposed as live-work units) are to be set back an additional 1.8 m (a slight decrease from the previous additional setback of 2.5 metres). A 1.48 m stratified laneway conveyance is proposed to the south.
9To the west, given that integral townhouses are no longer proposed fronting the north-south lane, only a 5.5 m setback is provided from the centreline of the laneway, a reduction from the previously proposed 6.8 m setback. A 1.98 m stratified laneway conveyance is now proposed to the south.
10Above, the shape of the upper podium (Floors 6-12) has been slightly squeezed by the revisions to the lower podium, and its shape has been modified from a trapezoid to a parallelogram shape, generally following the revised shape of the lower podium along the north edge of the building. Floors 6-12 are stepped back 2.5 m along the north, between 2.0 and 3.5 m along the east (towards Raglan Avenue), an average of 3.4 m to the south at the midpoint of the upper podium façade, and between 2.5 and 3.0 m to the west.
11Further above, Floors 26 to 28 of the tower have been shifted from the north to the south end of the tower. Floors 13 to 25 have been set back an average of 15.6 m from the north property line (to the midpoint of the façade), a significant increase from the previous average tower setback of approximately 10.9 m. Floors 26 to 28 are set back an additional an average of 3.2 m (to the midpoint of the façade).
12From the east, the tower is set back 6.7 m, an increase from the previously proposed 5.3 m in the Original Proposal.
13Along the south, the tower is set back an average of 12.5 m from the centreline of the east-west laneway (at the midpoint of the south tower façade), a reduction from the approximately 17 m average setback previously proposed, but fully in keeping with the 12.5 m tower setback recommended by the Tall Building Design Guidelines.
14From the west, the tower is set back 12.5 m from the centreline of the north-south laneway, generally in line with the previously proposed 12.52 m setback.
15With the revised tower setbacks, the proposed tower floorplate has been reduced from 841.5 to 840.0 sq m (Gross Construction Area, or “GCA”) and 793.6 to 788 sq m GFA on Floors 14-24. Above, the upper floors are further stepped back, with Floor 25 reduced from 806.3 to 789.2 s m GCA and 758.4 to 737.2 sq m GFA, and Floors 26-28 reduced from 786.1 to 783.8 sq m GCA and 738.2 to 731.8 sq m GFA.
16With respect to the ground floor and site plan, the proposed residential lobby has now been relocated from the northeast corner of the building to the southeast corner, the service areas have been relocated from the northwest corner to the west façade, and vehicular access has been relocated to be completely via the public laneway system, with a curb cut no longer proposed along Raglan Avenue as in the Original Proposal. Integrated two (2)-storey townhouses continue to be proposed along Raglan Avenue and along the south façade, except that the four townhouses along the south are now proposed to be live-work units. A new pet amenity (dog wash station) is proposed within the ground floor whereas previously none was proposed.
17In addition, whereas the Original Proposal was fully residential, the Settlement Proposal is mixed-use as it will include the micro café which will be accessible via both the building’s lobby and through a service window along the south façade, and the community space proposed to abut the future park.
18It was further noted that the April 2022 resubmission was made to respond to technical circulation comments and included a number of updated materials including updated architectural drawings, landscape architectural drawings, civil engineering drawings, geohydrology assessment, traffic impact study and pedestrian level wind study. Through these technical updates, a number of minor changes to the building stats were made as well, including a 194 sq m increase in GFA from 29,343.6 to 29,538 sq m .
19Mr. Dror submitted:
- The Zoning By-law Amendment as reflected in the Settlement Proposal represents good planning and the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (the “PPS”) and conforms with the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 as amended (the “Growth Plan”), the City of Toronto Official Plan (the “Official Plan) and Site and Area Specific Policy No. 38 (“SASP 38), and is consistent with the directions set out in the St. Clair-Bathurst Planning Framework (“Planning Framework"), all of which support mixed-use intensification on sites well served by municipal infrastructure, particularly higher-order public transit.
FINDINGS
20The Tribunal accepts the uncontroverted evidence of Mr. Dror in support of the settlement.
21The Tribunal finds that the Settlement Proposal is consistent with the PPS 2020, conforms with the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 as amended, the City of Toronto Official Plan and Site and Area Specific Policy No. 38.
ORDER
22THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Zoning Appeal is allowed and that Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 of the City of Toronto, and former City of York Zoning By-law No. 1-83, as amended, are hereby amended in the manner set out in Attachment 1 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk to format, as may be necessary, and assign a number to these by-laws for record keeping purposes.
“Carmine Tucci”
CARMINE TUCCI
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.