Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: June 05, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001693
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: BET Realty Limited and 3420 Hurontario Street Incorporated
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of City of Mississauga to adopt the requested amendment
Existing Designation: Residential High Density” and “Office”
Proposed Designated: Residential High Density – Special Site
Purpose: To permit residential, retail and office uses
Property Address/Description: 3420 and 3442 Hurontario Street
Municipality: City of Mississauga
Approval Authority File No.: OZ 20/022 W7
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001693
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001693
OLT Case Name: BET Realty Limited v. Mississauga (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: BET Realty Limited and 3420 Hurontario Street Incorporated
Subject: Application to amend - Zoning Bylaw 0225-2007, as amended and neglect of City of Mississauga to make a decision
Existing Zoning: “RA-3-20 – Residential Apartment 3 Zone Exception 20” and “0-10” – Office Exception Zone 10”
Proposed Zoning: “RA5-XX”
Purpose: To permit residential, retail and office use
Property Address/Description: 3420 and 3442 Hurontario Street
Municipality: City of Mississauga
Municipality File No.: OZ 20/022 W7
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001694
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001693
Heard: March 27, 2023 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| BET Realty Ltd. & 3420 Hurontario Street Inc. | Jonathon Cheng |
| City of Mississauga | Lia Magi |
DECISION DELIVERED BY KURTIS SMITH AND K.R. ANDREWS AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Final Order
INTRODUCTION
1This is a Settlement Hearing with respect to an appeal filed by BET Realty Ltd. & 3420 Hurontario Street Inc. (“Appellants”) regarding the failure of the City of Mississauga (“City”) to make a decision within the timeframe prescribed in the Planning Act (“Act”). The subject Applications concern proposed Official Plan (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law (“ZBA”) amendments relating to the property municipally known as 3420 & 3442 Hurontario Street (“Subject Property”).
2The Subject Property is a rectangular shaped parcel, 1.61 acres in size, located at the southwest corner of Hurontario Street and Central Parkway West. Currently there is a 3-storey medical office building at the south end of the site with a large parking field in front of the building extending north to Central Parkway West. Vehicular access is available via a restricted right-in/right-out access from Hurontario Street and a full moves access from Central Parkway West.
3The original proposed development was designed to build two high-rise towers, 30 and 36 storeys atop a five (5) storey shared podium. The total gross floor area (“GFA”) was 48,435 square metres with 680 residential units and a total floor space index (“FSI”) of 7.4.
4Following two Case Management Conferences, a settlement was reached as a result of two (2) days of Tribunal led mediation.
HEARING
5To support the proposal, the sole witness called was Jim Levac, a land use planner who, upon review of his Curriculum Vitae and Acknowledgement of Expert’s Duty form, was qualified by the Tribunal to provide opinion evidence in land use planning.
6Mr. Levac explained that the revised proposal addresses the comments and concerns of the City and community, which includes a reduction in the tower heights to 33 storeys (106 m) and 30 storeys (97.5 m) and altered the structures design to create a preferred transition.
7Mr. Levac reviewed the Act with regard to the matters of provincial interest set out in section 2. Specifically, he opined that the proposal would achieve the adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems (s. 2.f), the orderly development of safe and healthy communities (s. 2.h), the adequate provision and distribution of educational, health, social, cultural and recreational facilities (s.2.i), the protection of public health and safety (s.2.o), and the appropriate location of growth and development (s.2.p).
8As it relates to the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (“PPS”), Mr. Levac opined that the proposed development is consistent with PPS policy objectives, including healthy, livable and safe communities that are sustained by promoting efficient development and land use patterns and avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns. In his opinion, the revised proposed OPA and ZBA are consistent with sections 1.1.1.e, 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2, 1.1.3.2.f, 1.1.3.3, and 1.1.3.4 of the PPS.
9In Mr. Levac’s opinion, the proposed instruments will permit development in compact form, while maximizing existing under-utilized lands in a built-up settlement area which maximizes existing infrastructure and promotes efficient land use and development patterns. Additionally, the proposed development will promote transit use along a major transit and intensification corridor.
10Mr. Levac is further of the opinion that the proposed development conforms with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (“Growth Plan”) as it supports the achievement of complete communities designed to support healthy and active living and to meet people’s needs for daily living (s 1.2.1), directs growth to settlement areas that have a delineated built boundary, have existing or planned municipal water and wastewater systems (s 2.2.1), and the proposed development represents a form of intensification within the delineated built-up area, and prioritizes infrastructure that supports intensification (s 2.2.2.3).
11Mr. Levac testified that the Subject Property is part of the Downtown Mississauga Urban Growth Centre as identified in s.2.2.3.2.b of the Growth Plan. Additionally, the Subject Property is situated within an area planned to support significant population and employment growth and be a focal area for transit (s.2.2.3.1).
12Mr. Levac also testified that s.2.2.4 of the Growth Plan states that the Subject Property is within a designated protected Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) in the Region of Peel Official Plan (“Region OP”) and is similarly proposed for a protected MTSA designation in the Mississauga Official Plan (“City OP”). The Downtown Fairview protected MTSA is directly located on the Hurontario LRT line and is able to maximize the area and number of potential transit users within walking distance. s.5.6.19 of the Region OP contains the Region’s MTSA policies which apply to the subject lands and promote higher densities to support funded and planned transit infrastructure.
13The Region OP designates the Subject Property as Urban System. In Mr. Levac’s opinion, the proposed development supports the designation of the Region OP as it is compact, transit supportive intensification in an area that efficiently utilizes land, services, infrastructure and public finances while respecting the character of existing communities.
14The City OP provides a number of policies that relate to the City encouraging compact mixed-use development that is transit supportive. Mr. Levac testified that the Subject Property is within the “Downtown”. The Downtown area is directed to be a focal point for growth and density and support higher order transit. Furthermore, the City OP identifies “Corridor” policies which are meant to evolve to attract mixed use development while becoming public places as part of the broader public realm. Corridors within Downtown areas are identified as Intensification Corridors which will be supported by high order public transit, namely the Hurontario LRT, and support mixed uses and higher residential densities while providing appropriate transition of height and density.
15Mr. Levac summarily concluded that the proposed OPA and ZBA are consistent with the PPS, conform with the Growth Plan, Region OP and City OP, have sufficient regard for matters of provincial interest under s.2, and represent good land use planning.
FINDINGS
16The Tribunal accepts the uncontroverted planning evidence and opinions of Mr. Levac and is satisfied that the proposed OPA and ZBA are consistent with the PPS, and conform with the Growth Plan, Region OP and City OP. The Tribunal is satisfied that the proposed development represents good planning in the public interest and has appropriate regard for matters of Provincial interest, specifically as the development is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians.
ORDER
17THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:
The appeal is allowed in part and the Official Plan for the City of Mississauga is amended as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order; and
The appeal is allowed in part, and By-law 0225-2007 is hereby amended as set out in Attachment 2 to this Order. The Tribunal authorizes the municipal clerk of City of Mississauga to assign a number to this by-law for record keeping purposes.
“Kurtis Smith”
Kurtis Smith
Member
“K.R. Andrews”
K.R. ANDREWS
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.
ATTACHMENT 1 – OPA
ATTACHMENT 2 – ZBA