Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 01, 2024 CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000369

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Condor Properties Ltd. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: OPA to permit the development of a 35-storey mixed-use building on the Lands that includes 373 residential units Reference Number: 22 221903 NNY 15 OZ Property Address: 1779-1787 Bayview Avenue Municipality/UT: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000369 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000369 OLT Case Name: Condor Properties Ltd. V. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, C. 11 Sched A.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: SP to permit the development of a 35-storey mixed-use building on the Lands that includes 373 residential units Reference Number: 22 221902 NNY 15 SA Property Address: 1779-1787 Bayview Avenue Municipality/UT: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000370 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000369

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Subject: City of Toronto Site Plan Approval Description: ZBA to permit the development of a 35-storey mixed-use building on the Lands that includes 373 residential units Reference Number: 22 221903 NNY 15 SA Property Address: 1779-1787 Bayview Avenue Municipality/UT: City of Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000371 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000369

Heard: April 19, 2024 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel/Representative*
Condor Properties Ltd.	Meaghan McDermid and Liam Valgardson
City of Toronto	Amanda Hill and Amrit Sandhu
Metrolinx	Christie Gibson
Metro Ontario Real Estate Limited	Conner Harris
Leaside Residents’ Association	Geoff Kettel*

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY HUGH S. WILKINS ON APRIL 19, 2024 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

Introduction

1These proceedings arise from appeals brought by Condor Properties Ltd. (“Appellant” or “Owner”) regarding the failure of the City of Toronto (“City”) to make decisions on the Appellant’s applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Approval. The proposed instruments are to facilitate a proposed development on the properties located at 1779-1787 Bayview Avenue (“subject lands”).

2On October 26, 2023, the Tribunal held a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in these proceedings at which it granted Added Party status to Metrolinx, Metro Ontario Real Estate Limited, and the Leaside Residents’ Association. It also granted Participant status to the Leaside Baseball Association and several individuals. Subsequent to the CMC, the Parties engaged in mediation in an effort to resolve the appeals.

3On March 26, 2024, the City informed the Tribunal that it had reached a proposed settlement of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment appeals with the Appellant. On April 17, 2024, the Appellant informed the Tribunal that the proposed settlement was on consent of all Parties.

4On April 19, 2024, the Tribunal convened a hearing to address the proposed settlement of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment appeals. It also held a further CMC to map out next steps for the Site Plan Approval appeal proceeding.

Background

5The Appellant seeks to build a 35-storey residential building on the subject lands. It would contain 436 residential units and be located directly above the newly constructed Leaside station on the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit corridor.

6The northern portion of the subject lands is currently designated as Mixed Use Areas in the City’s Official Plan and the southern portion is designated as Neighbourhoods. The proposed Official Plan Amendment would designate the entirety of the subject lands as Mixed Use Areas. The northern portion of the subject lands is located within the Bayview Focus Area of the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan and the southern portion is located within the Bayview-Leaside Village Area of the Secondary Plan. Under the proposed Official Plan Amendment, the entirety of the subject lands would be identified as Bayview Focus Area.

7The northern portion of the subject lands is zoned under the City-wide Zoning By-law No. 569-2013 as CR 2.2 (c.2.2, r1.5) SS2 (X1163) and the southern portion is zoned RM (f30.0; a930; d1.25). The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment would rezone the subject lands to a site-specific Commercial Residential (CR) zone, subject to a series of site-specific development standards.

SETTLEMENT HEARING FOR THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPEAL PROCEEDINGS

Evidence and Submissions

8On behalf of the Appellant, Alex Savanyu provided opinion evidence regarding the proposed revised Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments. He was qualified by the Tribunal to provide opinion evidence in the discipline of land use planning.

9Mr. Savanyu described the proposed development and the revisions that had been made to the Appellant’s original proposal. He stated that the proposed revised development would have increased setbacks from the adjacent Howard Talbot Park (“Park”), a reduced number of balconies overlooking the Park, increased setbacks from Bayview Avenue for the main tower, stepbacks from the lower density residential area to the south, pedestrian access to the Park, the replacement of rental units lost from the demolition of existing rental housing, and the retention of the façade of 1783-1785 Bayview Avenue, which has a heritage property designation.

10Mr. Savanyu opined that the proposed revised Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments address the matters of provincial interest set out in s. 2 of the Planning Act, including those on the conservation of features of significant architectural or historical interest, the adequate provision of a full range of housing, and the appropriate location of growth and development. He opined that the proposed instruments facilitate the efficient use of land and infrastructure, are transit supportive, and are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”). He opined that the proposed instruments facilitate the maintenance of a complete community, optimize the use of land and infrastructure, and conform with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (“Growth Plan”). Mr. Savanyu also opined that the proposed revised Zoning By-law Amendments conform with the City’s Official Plan and the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan. He opined that they facilitate development that properly transitions to the neighbourhood area to the south, complies with the City’s housing policies, and has proper regard to the City’s Tall Building Design Guidelines and Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities Guidelines. He stated that the proposed development complies with the City’s rental housing policies and the proposed demolition of the heritage building at 1783-1785 Bayview Avenue (and retention of its façade) is not opposed by the City or other Parties. He said that shadowing issues and issues relating to overlook towards the Park and any conflicts with the established uses of the Park for baseball and other activities have been addressed.

11Mr. Savanyu recommended that the Tribunal approve the proposed revised Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments subject to conditions.

12All of the Parties supported the proposed settlement and revised Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments.

Analysis and Findings

13Based on the uncontroverted opinion evidence presented by Mr. Savanyu, the Tribunal finds that the proposed revised Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments have regard to the matters of provincial interest set out in s. 2 of the Planning Act, are consistent with the PPS, and conform with the Growth Plan. It also finds that the proposed revised Zoning By-law Amendment conforms with the City’s Official Plan and the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan, as amended. The Tribunal finds that the proposed instruments facilitate development that properly transitions to the nearby neighbourhood area, provides setbacks from the street and the Park, and helps maintain a complete community in the area. The Tribunal also notes that concerns raised by local community groups have been addressed, including those of the Participant, Leaside Baseball Association, which plays an important longstanding role in the community and has established uses of the Park for baseball. The Tribunal notes that the proposed conditions that must be satisfied before the Final Order is issued include the requirement that the Appellant provide the City with confirmation from Metrolinx that the Metrolinx’s Technical Reviews have been completed to its satisfaction.

CMC FOR THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPEAL

14The Appellant and the City stated that settlement discussions regarding the Site Plan Approval appeal proceeding are ongoing. They stated that it is intended that the Site Plan will reflect aspects of the Zoning By-law Amendment, which will need to be finalized before a settlement of the Site Plan Approval appeal can be reached. They stated that they intend to circulate the draft Site Plan to the Parties to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment appeal proceedings. The Appellant and the City requested that a further CMC be scheduled for the Site Plan Approval appeal proceeding for late June 2024, at which they will be in a position to provide an update so that a pathway forward for that proceeding can be mapped out.

15The next CMC for the Site Plan Approval appeal proceeding will proceed by Telephone Conference Call on Friday, June 21, 2024 at 9 a.m.

16Individual(s) are directed to call 416-212-8012 or (Toll Free) 1-866-633-0848 on the assigned date at the correct time. When prompted, enter the code 4779874 to be connected to the call. It is the responsibility of the person(s) participating in the call to ensure that they are properly connected to the call at the correct time. Questions prior to the call may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

17This Member is not seized in regard to the Site Plan Approval appeal proceeding and there will be no further notice regarding the next CMC for that proceeding.

INTERIM ORDER

18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment appeals are allowed in part, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph [19] below, and the draft Official Plan Amendment set out in Attachment 1 to this Interim Order and the draft Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Attachment 2 to this Interim Order, are approved in principle. As set out below, the attached instruments are subject to review by the City and may be substantially revised before being submitted to the Tribunal for final approval.

19The Tribunal will withhold the issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation of the Appellant and the City that the following conditions are satisfied:

a. the final form and content of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment are to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

b. the Owner has satisfactorily addressed the Engineering and Construction Services matters in the Engineering and Construction Services Memorandum, dated December 13, 2023, or as may be updated, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director;

c. the Owner has satisfactorily addressed Transportation Services matters in the Transportation Services memo, dated July 31, 2023 (as updated), or as may be updated in response to further submissions filed by the Owner, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director;

d. the Owner has submitted a revised Transportation Demand Management Plan acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the General Manager, Transportation Services and that matters arising from such Plan be secured, if required;

e. the Owner has satisfactorily addressed matters from the Parks, Forestry and Recreation (“PFR”) memorandum, dated November 28, 2023, or as may be updated in response to further submissions filed by the Owner, all to the satisfaction of PFR;

f. the Owner has submitted a Subsurface Investigation for the possible presence of methane gas on the property and any required mitigation measures are to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

g. the Owner has satisfactorily addressed matters from the Urban Forestry memorandum, dated December 16, 2022, or as may be updated in response to further submissions filed by the Owner, all to the satisfaction of Urban Forestry;

h. the Owner has submitted an updated complete Toronto Green Standards Checklist and Statistics Template, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

i. the Owner has provided the City with confirmation from Metrolinx that the Metrolinx Technical Reviews have been completed to the satisfaction of Metrolinx;

j. the Owner has secured replacement of the existing rental housing, including the same number of units, bedroom type and size and with similar rents, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

k. the Owner has secured an acceptable Tenant Relocation and Assistance Plan addressing the right for existing and former tenants to return to a replacement rental unit on the Lands at similar rents, the provision of alternative accommodation at similar rents, and other assistance to mitigate hardship, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

l. City Council has approved the Rental Housing Demolition Application No. 22 224403 NNY 15 RH in accordance with Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, which allows for the demolition of the 10 existing rental dwelling units at 1779-1787 Bayview Avenue and the Owner has entered into, and registered on title to the lands, one or more agreements with the City to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor, securing all rental housing-related matters necessary to implement City Council’s decision; and

m. The Owner has entered into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City and provided a Conservation Plan for the property at 1783-1785 Bayview Avenue as set out in item (i) and (ii) below:

i. The Owner has entered into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 1783-1785 Bayview Avenue, substantially in accordance with the revised architectural plans prepared by Arcadis Architects (Canada) Inc., dated February 16, 2024, submitted with the Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd. Architects, dated February 16, 2024 (the “HIA”), subject to and in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in item ii below, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor; and

ii. The Owner has provided a detailed Conservation Plan prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the HIA, and details all future conservation efforts as part of this application, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

20This Panel Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final draft of the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendments and the issuance of the Final Order regarding those instruments.

21If the Appellant and the City do not submit the final drafts of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and provide confirmation that all other contingent pre-requisites 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 by Friday, June 21, 2024, the Parties 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 Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and issuance of the Final Order by the Tribunal.

22The Tribunal may, as necessary, arrange the further attendance of the Parties to determine additional timelines for the submission of the final form of the instruments, the satisfaction of the contingent pre-requisites, and the issuance of the Final Order.

“Hugh S. Wilkins”

HUGH S. WILKINS VICE-CHAIR

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

ATTACHMENT 2