Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: February 14, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004353
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Park Central GP Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit a thirteen-storey, 417 Unit Mixed-Use Development
Reference Number: 21 250500 ESC 25 OZ
Property Address: 4630 Kingston Road
Municipality: City of Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004353
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004353
OLT Case Name: Park Central GP Inc. v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S. O. 2006, c. 11 Sched A
Applicant/Appellant: Park Central GP Inc.
Subject: Site Plan Approval
Description: To permit a thirteen-storey, 417 Unit Mixed-Use Development
Reference Number: 21 250500 ESC 20 SA
Property Address: 4630 Kingston Road
Municipality: City of Toronto
OLT Case No: OLT-22-004354
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004353
Heard: September 25, 2023 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Park Central GP Inc. | R. Gill |
| City of Toronto | M. Hardiejowski / A. Ward |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. TUCCI AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1A merits hearing was scheduled to commence on September 25, 2023, for a period of four days. However, prior to that date, the Parties advised the Tribunal that they had reached a settlement and requested that all hearing days be released except for September 25, 2023, which they proposed to be convened as a settlement hearing, and the Tribunal agreed to do so.
2The matter before the Tribunal was with respect to the appeals of the non-decision of the City of Toronto (“City”) regarding applications to amend the Zoning By-law (“ZBLA”) and for Site Plan Approval (“SPA”), all pertaining to 4630 Kingston Road, Toronto.
3The ZBLA and SPA are required to give effect to the Appellants’ proposal to develop a thirteen-storey residential mixed use building fronting along the north side of Kingston Road, with three wings that step down at the rear to the north.
4In support of the settlement, the Tribunal was presented with the Affidavit of Ian Graham, a Registered Professional Planner which was marked as Exhibit 1.
EVIDENCE / ANALYSIS / CONCLUSIONS
5Counsel for the Appellant, with the consent of all Parties, called Mr. Graham to provide evidence in support of the proposed settlement. Mr. Graham was qualified by the Tribunal to provide expert opinion evidence on land use planning.
6In his Affidavit and in his oral testimony, Mr. Graham provided the following evidence:
He was retained in 2021 by Park Central Limited Partnership (“Applicant”) to assist in the preparation of both a zoning by-law amendment application and site plan approval application and associated studies for a proposed mixed-use development located at 4630 Kingston Road, in the City of Toronto (“subject site”).
Applications for a zoning by-law amendment and site plan approval were submitted to the City of Toronto on December 29, 2021, and were deemed complete by the City of Toronto on January 27, 2022.
His evidence would be limited to zoning by-law amendment application noting that Park Central Limited Partnership is still working with the City of Toronto on finalizing the SPA and associated development agreement.
The proposal contemplates:
A thirteen‐storey, plus mechanical penthouse, mixed-use building fronting along the north side of Kingston Road, with three wings that step down at the rear to the north;
Containing 1,043.4 square metres of retail space on the ground floor adjacent to Kingston Road and 512 residential units;
A total of 274 parking spaces for automobiles;
A total of 388 parking spaces for bicycles (36 short-term spaces and 352 long-term spaces);
A total of 2,056.8 square metres (“sq m”) of amenity space comprised of 1,357.2 sq m of outdoor amenity space (965.5 sq m on the ground floor and 391.7 sq m on the 8th floor) and 699.6 square metres of indoor amenity space (660 sq m on the ground floor and 39.5 sq m on the 8th floor). Recent changes to the site plan drawings are considering the addition of a pool to the 8th floor amenity terrace; and,
Privatized commercial space fronting Kingston Road, comprised of 304 square metres of the total retail space in the development.
In Mr. Graham’s opinion, the design of the development respects and responds to City’s Mid-Rise Building Guidelines and Performance Standards by providing the appropriate 45-degree angular plan relationship to surrounding streets and neighbourhood areas to the north and east of the site. The angular plane along Kingston Road commences at 34.4 metres above the front lot lines. The angular plane along the rear of the property commences at 4.0 metres above the rear lot line. The angular plane along Manse Road, north of Kingston Road, for 32.7 metres commences at 34.4 metres above the side lot line. The angular plane along the rear 28.8 metres portion of the building’s Manse Road frontage commences 16 metres above the side lot line. These angular planes are all set out in the site-specific zoning by-law for the development.
The original proposal involved the dedication of an unencumbered public park to the City of Toronto at the west end of the subject site, which had frontage on Orchard Park Drive. The proposed park had an area of 749.9 square metres (0.075 hectares), representing approximately 10% of the total site area. However, based on the City’s Preliminary Report in May 2022, it was determined by the City that they did not want a public park at this location and instead required that the Applicant satisfy the parkland dedication requirement for the subject development by providing cash-in-lieu. The proposed public park was removed from the plans and was replaced by a third wing of the proposed development.
Mr. Graham reviewed the current proposal for conformity and consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (“PPS”), Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (“GPGGH”), City of Toronto Official Plan, March 2022 Consolidation (“City OP”), Kingston Road Avenue Study (“Avenue Study”), and Urban Design Guidelines (UDGs) and Zoning Regulations as they apply to the subject proposal and provided the following opinions:
The Proposal is consistent with the PPS, as it;
Aids in the creation of healthy, livable, and safe communities;
Directs growth and development to settlement areas through intensification;
Is an efficient use of land and resources, existing infrastructure, and public services facilities, and supports transit and active transportation;
Encourages compact, mixed-use development and promotes economic development and competitiveness;
Provides a range and mix of housing options and densities to meet current and future residents and projected market-based and affordable housing needs; and,
Supports long term economic prosperity by encouraging residential uses that respond to market-based needs and the housing needs of a diverse workforce.
The Proposal conforms to the GPGGH, as it will;
Direct growth within built up areas with existing or planned transit and public service facilities;
Support the achievement of complete communities; and,
Support economic development and competitiveness through the integration of retail uses in locations that support active transportation and have existing or planned transit.
The Proposal conforms to the intent of the OP by:
Directing growth by proposing a mixed-use development, ton an Avenue;
Addressing the larger context through a design that is sensitive to, and does not adversely impact, the adjacent Neighbourhood designated lands;
Supporting active transportation and bicycle parking;
Incorporating a public realm and is designed to preserve trees;
Incorporates the policies concerning Privately Owned Spaces (POPS);
Being designed to fit with the existing and planned context by adhering to the Built Form policies;
Incorporating setbacks, step backs, and an appropriate street wall height to protect privacy and fit with the existing and planned context;
Incorporating parking, loading, and servicing in a way that minimizes impact and improves safety and the attractiveness of the public realm;
Being designed to transition well between neighbouring properties;
Considering the scale, proportion, materiality, and rhythm of the façade;
Incorporating indoor and outdoor shared amenity spaces that are high quality, well designed, and consider the age and ability range of residents, year-round;
Providing outdoor amenity spaces that are designed at and above grade (floor 8), with access to daylight, and sunlight, where possible, providing comfortable window, shadow, and noise conditions, away from and separated from loading and servicing areas, with a generous and well-designed landscape, to accommodate existing and mature tree growth and for use in all seasons;
Providing a mid-rise building, designed with appropriate heights, street proportion, angular planes and stepbacks;
Providing a range of housing that meets the needs of current and future residents;
Providing retail opportunities that that are compatible with the existing and planned context, appropriately located, and that promote local shopping opportunities and pedestrian and transit use;
Integrating retail on an Avenue, and replaces existing retail uses to meet the needs of the local community; and,
Meeting the land use requirements of a Mixed-Use Area, by providing a range of commercial, residential and publicly accessible space.
The Proposal supports the Avenue Study by;
Identifying the development potential and intensification of vacant and underutilized lands along Kingston Road;
Meeting the concept plan for the Old Kingston Road Sub-Area, which envisions a tree-lined street with density located along Kingston Road, including where the subject site is located;
Incorporating angular planes into the building’s design, meeting the built form direction outlined in the Avenue Study, which highlights 45-degree angular planes and aims to ensure building heights transition to and respect the existing character of the predominantly low-scale development surrounding Kingston Road; and,
Providing a high-quality architectural design and incorporating public space that establishes a sense of place and offers a comfortable, safe pedestrian condition and attractive public realm, as outlined in the Urban Design Guidelines established by the Avenue Study.
7Mr. Graham explained that the site is subject to the former City of Scarborough West Hill Community Zoning By-law 10327, as amended by 597-2003.
8Under By-law 10327, as amended, the subject site is zoned Commercial Residential (CR), which permits residential, a range of retail, personal service, office, and day nursery uses. Performance standards for the subject site permit a building height between two-storeys and eight-storeys; and the building envelope is required to fit within a 45-degree angular plane projected from the lot line abutting the Single-Family Residential Zone to the north.
9The subject lands are currently not part of city-wide Zoning By-law 569-2013. The ZBLA is intended to bring the subject site into the current citywide regulatory framework by rezoning the lands under Zoning By-law 569-2013. Mr. Graham explained that the approach includes two zoning by-law amendments prepared for this site. The first amendment would repeal the existing zoning on the subject site, removing these lands from Zoning By-law 10327, as amended by By-law 597-2003. The second zoning by-law amendment would bring the lands into Zoning By-law 569-2013 and is designed to establish the new provisions to permit the proposed development on the subject site.
10Mr. Graham concluded that the Settlement is appropriate, reasonable, and represents good planning, is consistent with the PPS, and conforms to the Growth Plan and the City’s OP.
11Upon review of Mr. Graham’s affidavit and his oral testimony, the Tribunal accepts his expert opinions and is satisfied that the Parties’ Settlement is consistent with the relevant provisions of the PPS, conforms with the GPGGH; conforms with the City’s OP.
INTERIM ORDER
12THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS:
13That the appeal is allowed, in part, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph 14 below, and the Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Attachment 1 to this Interim Order is hereby approved in principle.
14The final Order is withheld by the Tribunal contingent upon confirmation by the Parties of the following prerequisite 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; and,
b. The Tribunal is advised that:
i) The applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Study and Transportation Demand Management Plan to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services, and the Program Manager, District Transportation Planning Unit, Scarborough District;
ii) The applicant has addressed comments raised in the March 29, 2022, memorandum from the Toronto Transit Commission to the satisfaction of the Toronto Transit Commission;
iii) The applicant has included, in the site-specific by-law, a requirement to provide space within the development for the installation of maintenance access holes and sampling ports on the private side of the property, as close to the property line as possible, for both the storm and sanitary service connections, in accordance with the Sewers By-law, Chapter 681;
iv) The applicant has submitted to the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, for review and acceptance, a Site Servicing Review to determine the storm water runoff, sanitary flow, and water supply demand resulting from this development and demonstrate how this site can be serviced and whether the existing municipal infrastructure is adequate;
v) The applicant has entered into a financially secured Development Agreement for the construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure, should it be determined that upgrades are required to the infrastructure to support this development, according to the Site Servicing Review accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and,
vi) The applicant has submitted revised plans/reports/documentation with respect to parts b, d, e, and f above, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services.
15The appeal pursuant to subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, is adjourned sine die.
16The Member will remain seized, and the Tribunal may be spoken to in the event that there are difficulties in satisfying the above conditions for the issuance of the Tribunal's final Order in respect of the above-mentioned appeal.
“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.
ATTACHMENT 1