du territoire
Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement
ISSUE DATE: April 17, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004109
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant and Appellant: Midtown West Residences Ltd.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit the development of a 40-storey mixed use tower with 360 Residential Units
Reference Number: 22 110042 NNY 08 OZ
Property Address: 699-711 Lawrence Avenue West
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No: OLT-22-004109
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004109
OLT Case Name: Midtown West Residences Ltd. v. Toronto (City)
Heard: March 1, 2024, in Writing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Midtown West Residences Ltd.
Aaron Platt
City of Toronto
Mark Crawford
DECISION DELIVERED BY D. CHIPMAN AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1Midtown West Residences Ltd. (“Appellant”) applied to the City of Toronto (“City”) for a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) for the property municipally known as 699-711 Lawrence Avenue West (“Subject Property”). The City failed to render a decision within the statutory timelines respecting the Application, and the Appellant appealed to this Tribunal pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Act”).
2On February 2, 2022, the Applicant submitted a ZBA application to amend the former City of North York Zoning By-law No. 7625 and the City-Wide Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 to permit the redevelopment of the Subject Property into a 40-storey mixed-use tower with a building height of approximately 126 metres (“m”) (excluding the mechanical penthouse). The Proposed Development consists of 360 residential units with a proposed gross floor area of approximately 22,905 square metres (“m2”) (“Original Proposal”).
3The Application was deemed complete by City staff on March 23, 2022. On July 7, 2022, the Appellant appealed the City’s failure to render a decision on the Application.
4The Tribunal held its first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) on February 9, 2023, at which it addressed procedural matters, status requests, opportunities for settlement or mediation, and how the appeal will proceed to adjudication. A second CMC was held on April 13, 2023.
5Two days of mediation were held in September 2023, which resulted in a Settlement in principle between the Parties.
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
6Briefly summarized, the Original Proposal has been revised to permit a 38-storey, 122.56 m tower building (plus a 6 m mechanical penthouse) containing 22,980.62 m2 of gross floor area, 388 new residential units consisting of 128 studio units (33%), 162 one-bedroom units (41.8%), 59 two-bedroom units (15.2%), and 39 three-bedroom units (10%).
7The Settlement Proposal offers a total of 1,434.31 m2 of amenity space, which is provided across the ground floor and seventh-floor level, comprising of 587.75 m2 of indoor amenity space and 846.56 m2 of outdoor amenity space, which exceeds the amount of outdoor amenity space required by By-law No. 569-2013.
8Vehicular access to the Subject Property is proposed to be via Lawrence Avenue West. The driveway access will connect to the interior loading area and the underground parking ramp. The Settlement Proposal contains 118 resident parking spaces (of which eight are accessible spaces) and six visitor parking spaces, along with 351 long-term bicycle parking spaces. At the ground floor level, there will be one retail parking space and 43 short-term bicycle parking spaces.
9The Parties jointly requested that the Tribunal allow the appeal in part and approve the ZBA in principle, as set out in Attachment 1. Further, the Parties jointly requested that the Tribunal withhold the Final Order pending confirmation from the City that the conditions set out in paragraph [19] below are satisfied.
EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS
10The written materials before the Tribunal were the Affidavit of Eldon Theodore sworn Thursday, February 15, 2024, which was marked as Exhibit 1. Mr. Theodore is a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners and a Registered Professional Planner with the Ontario Professional Planners Institute. He has over 21 years of land use planning and urban design experience and the Tribunal qualified him to provide written opinion evidence on land use planning on consent of the Parties.
11In his affidavit, Mr. Theodore provided a comprehensive contextual and planning rationale in support of the Proposed Development. He opined that the ZBA, which will facilitate the Proposed Development, satisfies all requisite legislative tests and overall, is representative of good planning and urban design and is in the public interest.
12It is Mr. Theodore’s opinion that the proposed ZBA will facilitate additional residential units to be developed while optimizing existing infrastructure. The Proposed Development is transit-supportive and compatible with the surrounding residential area, which will contribute to the creation of complete communities. The proposed ZBA will facilitate the Proposed Development, which will assist in the provision of additional housing choices for existing and future residents and support the Province and the City in meeting their housing objectives.
13Mr. Theodore attested that the Proposed Development establishes an appropriate transition to surrounding lower-scale buildings, incorporates appropriate setbacks, and reduces shadow impacts and overlook, all of which meet the design objectives established by the City.
14Overall, Mr. Theodore opined that the proposed ZBA is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”) and conforms to the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 (“Growth Plan”), and the City of Toronto Official Plan (“OP”). Further, it provides appropriate regulations and performance standards to conform with the intent of the in-force policies of the OP.
15Mr. Theodore recommended to the Tribunal that the proposed ZBA be approved in principle and the Final Order be withheld pending satisfaction of the conditions set out in paragraph [19] below, which Mr. Theodore opined are typical and appropriate in this circumstance.
16On the strength of the uncontradicted expert opinion evidence of Mr. Theodore, and upon a review of the applicable provisions of the Act, the PPS, the Growth Plan, and the OP, the Tribunal is satisfied that the proposed ZBA represents an efficient use of land, resources and infrastructure, and it achieves important local, regional, and provincial policy objectives.
17Further, the Tribunal is of the view that the Settlement reached by the Parties is fair and reasonable and that the resulting ZBA represents good planning and is in the public interest. The Tribunal commends the Parties in working collaboratively and engaging in productive mediation in order to reach a settlement in these proceedings.
INTERIM ORDER
18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeal against the City-Wide Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 of the City of Toronto is allowed in part and the Tribunal directs the City to amend By-law No. 569-2013 as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order. In all other respects, the Tribunal orders the appeal to be dismissed.
19The Tribunal will withhold issuance of its Final Order until the Tribunal receives confirmation from the City Solicitor that the conditions set out in the Settlement Proposal have been satisfied, and in particular that:
(i) The final form and content of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment is to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;
(ii) The Owner has satisfactorily addressed matters related to Transportation Services and Engineering and Construction Services as outlined in the City’s Engineering and Construction Services Memorandum, dated April 21, 2022; and provided updated technical reports and studies related to transportation matters, if required, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;
(iii) The Owner has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Urban Forestry, Tree Protection and Plan Review as they relate to the Application, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation and the City Solicitor;
(iv) The Owner has provided written confirmation that the final design plans provide space within the Settlement Proposal for the installation of maintenance access holes and sampling ports on the private side, as close to the property line as possible, for both the storm and sanitary service connections, in accordance with the Sewers By-law Chapter 681.10;
(v) The Owner has submitted architectural plans reflecting the Settlement Proposal as approved in whole or in part, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;
(vi) The Owner has submitted a Rental Housing Demolition and Conversion Declaration of Use and Screening Form; and confirmed in writing that if there are any affected rental housing units and/or dwelling rooms with existing tenants, the Owner will submit a tenant relocation and assistance plan to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the City Solicitor in accordance with Official Plan Policy 3.2.1.12;
(vii) If applicable, the Owner has provided written confirmation that where a Rental Housing Demolition Application is necessary, that City Council, or the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning where authorized to do so, has authorized the Rental Housing Demolition Application under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code pursuant to Section111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006;
(viii) The Owner has submitted an updated and completed Toronto Green Standards (TGS) Checklist and Statistics Template, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; and
(ix) That the Zoning By-law Amendment includes the use of a holding symbol (“H”) which restricts the uses of the Subject Lands to uses, buildings and structures in existence on the date of passage of the Zoning By-law amendment until the following conditions are satisfied:
The Owner has submitted a revised Functional Servicing Report, which includes the determination of stormwater runoff, sanitary flow and water supply demand resulting from the Settlement Proposal, and whether there is adequate capacity in the existing municipal infrastructure to accommodate the Settlement Proposal, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;
The Owner has made satisfactory arrangements with Engineering and Construction Services to enter into the appropriate agreement with the City for the design and construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure, should it be determined that upgrades are required to the infrastructure to support the Settlement Proposal, according to the accepted Functional Servicing Report accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services;
The Owner has provided financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure identified in the acceptable Functional Servicing Report and Stormwater Management Report, to support the Settlement Proposal, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, and General Manager, Toronto Water, where it has been determined that improvements or upgrades are required to support the Settlement Proposal. In requiring any off-site municipal infrastructure upgrades, the Owner is to make satisfactory arrangements with Engineering & Construction Services for Work on the City’s Right-of-Way
20The 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.
21If the Parties do not submit the final draft of the Zoning By-law Amendment, and provide confirmation that all other contingent prerequisites to the issuance of the Final Order set out in paragraph [19] above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order on or before Friday, January 31, 2025, the Appellant 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.
22The 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 instruments, the satisfaction of the contingent pre-requisites and the issuance of the Final Order.
23The Member may be spoken to should any issues arise with respect to the implementation of this Order.
“D. Chipman”
D. CHIPMAN
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