Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
July 05, 2023
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-22-002448
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P. 13, as amended
Appellant:
Corsetti Meat Packers & Realties Ltd. & 1366686 Ontario Limited
Appellant:
Maple Leaf Foods Inc.
Appellant:
Paletta International Corporation
Subject:
Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 144
Municipality:
City of Toronto
OLT Case No.:
OLT-22-002448
Legacy Case No.:
PL111146
OLT Lead Case No.: Legacy Lead Case No.: OLT Case Name:
OLT-22-002448 PL111146 Corsetti Meat Packers & Realties Ltd. v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended
Appellant:
Corsetti Meat Packers & Realties Ltd. & 1366686 Ontario Limited
Appellant:
Maple Leaf Foods Inc.
Appellant:
Paletta International Corporation
Subject:
By-law No. 1170-2011
Municipality:
City of Toronto
OLT Case No.:
OLT-22-002449
Legacy Case No.:
PL111147
OLT Lead Case No.: Legacy Lead Case No.: OLT Case Name:
OLT-22-002448 PL111146 Corsetti Meat Packers & Realties Ltd. v. Toronto (City)
Heard:
June 19, 2023, by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
City of Toronto
Jason Davidson
Cobalt Developments Limited, Clair West Developments Limited
Naomi Mares Eileen Costello, in absentia
Paletta International Corporation
Mark Flowers
MEMORANDUM OF AN ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. Hardy ON JUNE 19, 2023 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
BACKGROUND AND BRIEF PROCEDURAL HISTORY
1The matter before the Tribunal is a settlement hearing with respect to appeals of the City of Toronto (“City”) Official Plan Amendment No. 144 (“OPA 144”) and City Zoning By-law No. 438-86 (“ZBL 438-86”), as amended by Zoning By-law 1170-2011 (“ZBL 1170-2011”). The appeals are brought pursuant to s. 17(36) and s. 34(19) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”).
2The appeals have had a long history with numerous prior hearing events before Panels differently constituted. The Tribunal will provide a brief history of the appeals for contextual purposes.
3On September 22, 2011, City Council adopted OPA 144 implementing the City-initiated St. Clair West Avenue Study. At the same time, the City passed the corresponding ZBL 1170-2011 which amended the parent ZBL 438-86 to implement the direction of OPA 144.
4OPA 144 and ZBL 1170-2011 were appealed by four affected landowners: Corsetti Meat Packers & Realties Ltd. and 1366686 Ontario Limited (“Corsetti”); Maple Leaf Foods Inc. (“Maple Leaf”); Paletta International Corporation (“Paletta”); and National Rubber Technologies Corporation (“NRTC”). At a Case Management Conference held on November 30, 2021, the Tribunal granted Party status to Clair West Developments Limited (“Clair West”) with respect to its land located at 2221-2231 St. Clair Avenue West (“Clair West Property”). The Tribunal further approved the assumption by Cobalt Developments Limited (“Cobalt”) of Corsetti’s appeal as Cobalt had purchased the Corsetti properties located at 2237, 2255 and 2283 St. Clair Avenue West (together referred to as the “Cobalt Property”).
5NRTC formally withdrew its appeals prior to a partial settlement motion held by the Tribunal on June 21, 2022. Maple Leaf formally withdrew its appeals by letter dated March 6, 2023. As a result, Paletta, Cobalt and Clair West are the remaining Parties to the OPA 144 and ZBL 1170-2011 appeals. The Paletta appeal has been adjourned sine die as further detailed in paragraphs 15 and 16 below.
6The effect of OPA 144 was to redesignate some lands, including the Clair West Property and the Cobalt Property (together referred to as the “Properties”), from Employment Areas to Mixed Use Areas, which was intended to implement the St. Clair West Avenue Study undertaken by the City between 2009 and 2011. Site and Area Specific Policy 357 (“SASP 357”) was introduced to regulate the provision of new residential uses and their compatibility with existing industrial users and lands. SASP 357 allowed a Holding Symbol (H) with respect to residential uses on the Cobalt Property until a satisfactory development proposal was submitted, including the provision of studies demonstrating no material adverse impacts. The corresponding ZBL 1170-2011 re-zoned the Properties from an IC Zone (Industrial Commercial) to an MCR T3.0 C1.0 R2.5 (H) Zone (Mainstreets Commercial Residential).
7In March 2021, Clair West submitted a Zoning By-law Amendment application to the City to facilitate a 12-storey mixed-use building with a total of 302 dwelling units and approximately 21,074 square metres of residential Gross Floor Area (“GFA”) and 428 square metres of retail GFA resulting in a proposed density of 5.49 FSI (“Clair West Application”).
8In September 2021, Cobalt submitted a Zoning By-law Amendment application to the City to facilitate a mixed-use development consisting of two adjoining 12-storey buildings with a proposed party-wall condition along the east lot line with the proposed Clair West building. The Cobalt application proposed a total of 506 dwelling units and approximately 37,320 square metres of residential GFA and 1,006 square metres of retail GFA resulting in a proposed density of 5.06 FSI. The Cobalt application also included a proposed 4.94-metre road widening conveyance along St. Clair Avenue West (“Cobalt Application”).
9The Tribunal issued a settlement motion decision on July 25, 2022 approving an amendment to OPA 144 which was limited to the Properties and without prejudice to the remaining Appellants (“2022 Settlement”). The result of the 2022 Settlement was that the policy language in SASP 357, as it relates to the Properties, was amended. Despite the 2022 Settlement, the Holding Symbol (H) set out in ZBL 1170-2011 continues to apply to the Properties
SUBJECT LANDS AND SURROUNDING AREA
10The Clair West Property is approximately 0.39 hectares and rectangular in shape with frontage of approximately 82 metres along St. Clair Avenue West. It is located immediately east of the Cobalt Property and is currently occupied by a vacant single-storey retail building with surface parking.
11The Cobalt Property is approximately 0.76 hectares and rectangular in shape with frontage of approximately 150 metres along St. Clair Avenue West and 42 metres along Cobalt Avenue. 2237 and 2255 St. Clair Avenue West are currently occupied by a meat packing and distribution facility and 2283 St. Clair Avenue West is currently occupied by a condominium sales centre building. The entire Cobalt Property contains loading and parking facilities.
12The City Official Plan (“City OP”) designates the lands to the north and southwest of the Properties Neighbourhoods and they currently contain residential uses. The lands to the west are designated Mixed Use Areas and currently contain commercial uses. The lands to the south are designated Core Employment Areas and currently contain industrial uses. Finally, the lands to the east are currently designated Employment Areas, to be redesignated to Mixed Use Areas by OPA 144 and currently contain retail uses.
13The Properties are located on St. Clair Avenue West, which is classified as a “Major Arterial” roadway by the City and are well serviced by surface transit.
SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL
14A settlement was proposed by Clair West and Cobalt revising ZBL 1170-2011 to ensure the City’s original intent to allow for mixed-use development along St. Clair Avenue West while at the same time allowing the development of the Properties in a cohesive manner (“Settlement Proposal”). The Settlement Proposal proposes changes to the overall organization of the Properties as well as individual built form changes to each of the Clair West Application and Cobalt Application and if approved, will result in the withdrawal of these applications. The Settlement Proposal can be summarized as follows:
Revisions to the overall organization of the Properties include but are not limited to:
Revision of the boundaries of the Clair West Property to accommodate a 10-metre-wide public road conveyance along the east side lot line;
An east-west six-metre-wide private laneway proposed to extend along the rear of the Properties to accommodate loading and servicing access to the Properties. A public access easement over the laneway, with an option to convey a portion of the laneway, to be secured through Site Plan Control;
Removal of the proposed party wall condition and the proposed increase of the west side yard setback of the Clair West Application and east side yard setback of the Cobalt Application from 0 to 7.4 metres and 7.37 metres respectively. The result will be a total separation distance between the two proposed buildings of 14.8 metres which will accommodate a new pedestrian mid-block connection.
Revisions to the Clair West Application include but are not limited to:
An 11-storey mixed-use building configured in a reverse “U”-shape with the two wings of the building having a separation distance of approximately 19.0 metres;
A minimum front yard setback of 0 metres, minimum rear yard setback of approximately 7.5 metres, minimum side yard setback of 0 metres to the east lot line and minimum side yard setback of 7.4 metres to the west lot line;
A four-storey street wall along St. Clair Avenue West increasing to six-storeys at the northeast corner of the proposed building with a series of stepbacks;
A mix of residential and retail uses at grade;
18,925 square metres of residential GFA and 517 square metres of non-residential GFA resulting in a density of 4.96 FSI;
A total of 292 dwelling units including 89 larger units being two-bedroom or greater with a total of 178 vehicle parking spaces in addition to 296 bicycle parking spaces;
A total of 1,168 square metres of amenity space; and
One Type “G” loading space.
Revisions to the Cobalt Application include but are not limited to:
An 11-storey mixed-use building configured as two reverse “U”-shaped building elements adjoined by a central 11-storey element with the various wings of the building having separation distances ranging from 17.0 to 20.0 metres;
A minimum front yard setback of 0 metres, minimum rear yard setback of approximately 7.5 metres, minimum side yard setback of 7.4 metres to the east lot line and minimum side yard setback of 5.3 metres to the west lot line;
A four-storey street wall along St. Clair Avenue West increasing to six-storeys at the corner of St. Clair Avenue West and Cobalt Avenue with a series of stepbacks;
A mix of residential and retail uses at grade;
34,170 square metres of residential GFA and 942 square metres of non-residential GFA resulting in a density of 4.64 FSI;
A total of 537 dwelling units including 161 larger units being two-bedroom or greater with a total of 349 vehicle parking spaces in addition to 538 bicycle parking spaces;
A total of 2,148 square metres of amenity space; and
One Type “G” loading space and one Type “C” loading space.
15The Settlement Proposal is on a site-specific basis and without prejudice to the remaining appeals. The revised ZBL 1170-2011 attached as Schedule “A” to this Decision includes site-specific provisions to permit the Settlement Proposal (“Revised ZBL”). City Council endorsed the Settlement Proposal subject to conditions and agreed to adjourn the Paletta appeals sine die pending the outcome of a conversion request, which was submitted as part of the City’s Municipal Comprehensive Review (“MCR”).
16During the settlement hearing, Counsel for Paletta provided the Tribunal with additional detail explaining that the Paletta lands are designated Employment and through the MCR Paletta has requested that its lands and the adjacent lands be converted from Employment to Mixed-Use to permit a broader range of uses. Paletta and the City have agreed to “wait and see” how the MCR process unfolds and as such, Paletta did not take a position on the Proposed Settlement and attended the settlement hearing as an observer. Counsel for Paletta did request that in the event the Tribunal approves the Proposed Settlement, the approval be without prejudice to Paletta’s remaining appeals.
17The uncontested evidence in support of the Proposed Settlement was provided by Mr. Ryan Doherty, who was qualified as an expert in land use planning. Mr. Doherty’s written evidence, in the form of an Affidavit affirmed June 13, 2023, including numerous attachments, was marked as Exhibit 1.
EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS
18The Tribunal must be satisfied that the Revised ZBL meets all legislative tests. In particular, the Tribunal must be satisfied that the Revised ZBL: (a) has regard to matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 of the Act; (b) is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (“PPS”); (c) conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 as amended (“Growth Plan”); and (d) conforms to the City OP.
19It was Mr. Doherty’s professional opinion that the Revised ZBL met all of the legislative tests. He opined that the Revised ZBL would permit appropriate intensification of the Properties with mixed-use buildings in keeping with the mixed-use character of St. Clair Avenue West while contributing to the provision of new housing options in a way that promotes the use of transit and active transportation.
20Mr. Doherty further opined that the proposed development facilitated by the Revised ZBL has been carefully organized, sited and massed in keeping with the area, the City OP’s built form policies and the City’s urban design guidelines.
21Mr. Doherty testified that both the Clair West Application and the Cobalt Application would be withdrawn if the Tribunal approves the Revised ZBL. He recommended that the Tribunal approve the Revised ZBL in principle, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 39 below, and without prejudice to the remaining appeals.
Matters of Provincial Interest
22Mr. Doherty opined that the Revised ZBL is consistent with matters of Provincial interest as the proposed modifications to the Revised ZBL promote the orderly development of safe and healthy communities, provide a full range of housing, are supportive of public transit and promote a well-designed built form. In particular, he noted that the Properties are located along a major arterial road and propose to be developed with buildings that will provide a range of housing and retail uses to meet the needs of current and future residents.
PPS 2020
23In his Affidavit, Mr. Doherty noted that the Revised ZBL is consistent with the PPS, in particular policies related to residential intensification and the efficient use of land and infrastructure. He explained that the PPS emphasizes the promotion of transit-supportive development, an increase in the mix and supply of housing, the protection of the environment and the support of the economy and job creation.
24In his written Affidavit, Mr. Doherty focused his evidence on PPS policies that direct planning authorities to:
Promote opportunities for transit-supportive development and economic development and competitiveness;
Encourage a range and mix of housing types; and
Focus growth and development to settlement areas.
25Mr. Doherty testified that the Revised ZBL is consistent with the PPS as it will facilitate residential intensification through the efficient use of land and infrastructure. He re-iterated that the Properties are located along a major arterial road in close proximity to existing surface transit, being the St. Clair streetcar line and also in close proximity to planned transit, being the St. Clair-Old Weston GO Station. He further opined that the Revised ZBL is consistent with the revised language in OPA 144 and SASP 357 which were approved by the Tribunal though the 2022 Settlement.
Growth Plan
26It was Mr. Doherty’s opinion that the Revised ZBL conforms with the Growth Plan as a whole and in particular, the policies focused on the creation of complete communities and optimizing use of land and infrastructure. For reasons similar to those noted above regarding the provision of a range of housing types and transit-supportive development, Mr. Doherty was satisfied that the Revised ZBL met the guiding principles of the Growth Plan and conformed with same.
27Mr. Doherty testified that the proposed development of the Properties facilitated by the Revised ZBL optimized the use of land and infrastructure. The Properties are located within a built-up area along a major arterial road and located within walking distance to both surface and planned transit. This is supportive of complete communities, which is one of the objectives of the Growth Plan.
City OP
28In his written Affidavit, Mr. Doherty opined that the Revised ZBL conforms with the City OP. As noted above, the Properties are located on an Avenue and Mr. Doherty opined that the growth management policies of the City OP direct growth to Avenues where transit services and existing infrastructure are available. He further opined that the developments facilitated by the Revised ZBL are appropriate and desirable from a built form and urban design perspective and will fit within the existing and planned built form context.
29OPA 144 redesignated the Properties as Mixed Use Areas which permits a broad range of commercial, residential, and institutional uses in single use or mixed-use buildings. Mr. Doherty explained that the City OP supports intensification in areas designated Mixed Use Areas along Avenues. These areas are intended for growth and, in this case, the developments that will be facilitated by the Revised ZBL will provide additional residential dwellings and combined residential and non-residential GFA designed in a transit-supportive and pedestrian-oriented design thereby reducing automobile dependency.
30OPA 144 introduced several Site and Area Specific Policies, including SASP 357 which applies to the Properties and contains policies to ensure compatibility with specific existing industrial users and lands in the area. As set out in Mr. Doherty’s written Affidavit, the policies in SASP 357 require 100 metres from any residential units on the Properties to the lot line of any industrial facility that either slaughters animals or renders animals or processes dead animal stock for animal feed. With respect to the Cobalt Property, residential units could be within the 100-metre limit providing a peer-reviewed compatibility study demonstrated that future residents would not experience material adverse noise, vibrations, traffic, odour or other emission effects generated from any nearby industrial facility. As an enforcement measure, SASP 357 allowed a Holding Symbol (H) on the Cobalt Property until a satisfactory development proposal was submitted and the above-noted study produced.
31As noted previously, the 2022 Settlement updated the compatibility policies of SASP 357 and Mr. Doherty opined that the Revised ZBL conforms to the revised compatibility/mitigation criteria for sensitive uses in proximity to Employment Areas, as set out in the Tribunal-approved amendment to OPA 144 arising from the 2022 Settlement. He explained that the Settlement Proposal was supported by the appropriate compatibility/mitigation studies which concluded that the St. Clair Application and the Cobalt Application are compatible with surrounding land uses subject to mitigation measures which will be addressed by the City during the Site Plan Approval process. Mr. Doherty relied upon the conclusions set out in the studies.
Zoning By-law
32In his written Affidavit, Mr. Doherty reviewed the in-force zoning and amendments and concluded that the Revised ZBL is appropriate and implements the mid-rise vision for the area where the Properties are located. The Settlement Proposal is site-specific, however Mr. Doherty opined that the built form and massing proposed in the Clair West Application and the Cobalt Application were informed by the development standards set out in ZBL 1170-2011. As stated by Mr. Doherty, the “…site-specific relief (will) ensure functional developments that fully optimize the use of the land and infrastructure…” on the Properties.
Guidelines
33Mr. Doherty explained that the Mid-Rise Building Guidelines are not determinative as policy, however, the Revised ZBL has been drafted to respond to the intent of these Guidelines. The Mid-Rise Building Guidelines provide Performance Standards to guide the design of mid-rise buildings with the intent to ensure development proceeds in an appropriate and context-sensitive manner. Mr. Doherty opined that the Revised ZBL has regard for the Mid-Rise Building Guidelines as it addresses a number of their key provisions such as the provision of appropriate transition in scale, wide sidewalks to accommodate pedestrians and trees and the provision of the stepbacks outlined above.
34It is Mr. Doherty’s opinion that the Revised ZBL has appropriate regard for the St. Clair West Design Guidelines. There will be an appropriate transition to the Neighbourhood designated lands adjacent to the Properties and the Revised ZBL provides for loading and parking at the rear of the Properties. These, along with other aspects of the Revised ZBL, have regard for the vision for this section of St. Clair Avenue West which emphasizes intensification of existing low-rise areas and major retail sites and the improvement of the streetscape and pedestrian conditions.
35Mr. Doherty explained that the importance of the stepbacks discussed above is that the buildings permitted by the Revised ZBL will have regard for the 45-degree angular plane along St. Clair Avenue West and along Cobalt Avenue which has regard for the Mid-Rise Building Guidelines. In his opinion, the result will be good proportions, limited unwanted visual massing impacts and the provision of a comfortable pedestrian environment.
CONCLUSION
36In conclusion, the Tribunal accepts the uncontested evidence of Mr. Doherty in its entirety and agrees with his reasoning which was provided in his written Affidavit and in his viva voce evidence. The Tribunal finds that the Revised ZBL: has regard to matters of provincial interest pursuant to s. 2 of the Act; is consistent with the PPS; conforms to the policies of the Growth Plan and the City OP; and is consistent with the non-statutory guidelines, including the Mid-Rise Guidelines and the St. Clair West Design Guidelines. The proposed development constitutes good planning.
37As requested by the Parties, the Tribunal approves the Revised ZBL subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 39 and without prejudice to Paletta’s remaining appeals as set out in the Interim Order below. The Tribunal applauds the Parties for achieving a settlement that is supportive of Provincial initiatives and policy directives focused on compatible intensification that will result in the creation of new housing and retail opportunities for current and future residents.
ORDER
38THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed in part, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph 39 below, and the Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Schedule A to this Interim Order, is hereby approved in principle as it applies to the lands located at 2221-2231 St. Clair West and 2237, 2255 and 2283 St. Clair West and without prejudice to the appeals of the remaining Appellant, Paletta International Corporation, to this matter.
39The Tribunal will withhold the issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation of the City Solicitor, of the following pre-requisite matters:
a. The Tribunal has received, and approved, the Zoning By-law Amendment submitted in a final form, confirmed to be satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor;
b. The Tribunal is advised that Clair West Developments Limited and Cobalt Developments Limited have provided confirmation of water, sanitary and stormwater capacity to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, or if the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services has determined that holding provisions are required in the Zoning By-law Amendment, that the final form of Zoning By-law Amendment includes same;
c. The Tribunal is advised that Clair West Developments Limited and Cobalt Developments Limited have submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study, including an updated Parking and Loading Study and Transportation Demand Management strategy to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and that such matters arising from such study have been secured, if required;
d. The Tribunal is advised that Clair West Developments Limited and Cobalt Developments Limited have provided an updated pedestrian level wind study based on wind tunnel analysis and the Toronto Green Standard template and statistics, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; and
e. The Tribunal is advised that Clair West Developments Limited and Cobalt Developments Limited have appropriately addressed comments from Urban Forestry respecting the tree preservation and soil volume requirements for the Properties.
40The 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.
41If 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 39 above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order, by October 16, 2023, Clair West Developments Limited, Cobalt Developments Limited 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. In the event the Tribunal fails to receive the required status report, and/or in the event the contingent pre-requisites are not satisfied by the date indicated above, or by such other deadline as the Tribunal may impose, the Tribunal may then dismiss the Appeal.
42The 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 pre-requisites and the issuance of the Final Order.
43The Tribunal may be spoken to if the Parties require any further assistance with respect to the Order.
“C. Hardy”
C. Hardy
MEMBER
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: www.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”