Ontario Land Tribunal
ISSUE DATE: May 01, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004882
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Eastway International Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment
Description: To permit a residential development containing mid-rise buildings, low-rise buildings, and townhouses ranging from three to 11 storeys with a total of 496 residential units
Reference Number: 21 124969 NNY 18 OZ
Property Address: 172, 176, 180 Finch Avenue West, 1-33 Grantbrook Street and 303-313 Hendon Avenue
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No: OLT-22-004882
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004882
OLT Case Name: Eastway International Inc. v. Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Eastway International Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit a residential development containing mid-rise buildings, low-rise buildings, and townhouses ranging from three to 11 storeys with a total of 496 residential units
Reference Number: 21 124969 NNY 18 OZ
Property Address: 172, 176, 180 Finch Avenue West, 1-33 Grantbrook Street and 303-313 Hendon Avenue
Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto
OLT Case No: OLT-22-004883
OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004882
Heard: March 7, 2024 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Eastway International Inc. | Max Reedijk Katarzyna Sliwa |
| City of Toronto | Matthew Longo |
| Toronto Catholic District School Board | Julie Lesage Andrew Baker (in absentia) |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. BOBKA on MARCH 7, 2024 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1These appeals arise following the refusal by the City of Toronto (“City”) regarding applications by Eastway International Inc. (“Applicant”) for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) with respect to lands municipally known as 172, 176, 180 Finch Avenue West, 1-33 Grantbrook Street & 303-313 Hendon Avenue (“Subject Lands”) in the City.
2This matter has come before the Tribunal as a Settlement Hearing. The Tribunal confirms that it has received, reviewed and considered the following materials and submissions:
a) the uncontested expert opinion evidence of Chris Pereira, a land use planner retained by the Applicant, provided in his oral testimony and his comprehensive Affidavit, sworn February 26, 2024;
b) the Participant statements filed with the Tribunal in the names of: i. Steven Roth ii. Daryl Watts iii. Jackie Grossi iv. Alfonso Grossi v. Shirin Kabani vi. Jacinta Kanakaratnam vii. Ron Waine and viii. Amin Sheivari;
c) the Parties’ oral submissions in support of the Settlement;
d) the draft instruments, submitted by the Parties, on consent; and
e) the draft Order, submitted by the Parties, on consent.
CONTEXT
3The proposal is for a residential development with mid-rise buildings, low-rise buildings, and townhouses. There is an existing designated heritage building at 172 Finch Avenue West which would be relocated on the site.
4The Subject Lands are:
a) located along the north side of Finch Avenue west, between Bathurst Street and Yonge Street;
b) 21,060.64 square meters in area and maintain 130.30 meters of frontage onto Finch Avenue West, 188 meters of frontage along Grantbrook Street, and 98 meters of frontage along Hendon Avenue;
c) partly designated Mixed Use Areas A and B under the City’s Official Plan (“OP”), as amended by the Central Finch Secondary Plan, and partly designated Neighbourhoods by the OP;
d) currently zoned General Commercial One (C1), (C1) (53) and R4. The commercial zoning permits a variety of commercial uses including retail, restaurants, personal service shops and offices. The residential zoning permits single detached residential uses;
e) on a segment of Finch Avenue West which is identified as a Transit Corridor and a Transit Priority Segment, and where surface transit is available; and,
f) directly adjacent on the east side to St. Antoine Daniel Catholic School.
5The Subject Lands are in an established part of the City which generally consists of a mixture of residential, institutional and commercial uses. The residential uses in the area are mostly one and two-storey single-detached dwellings including a mix of old and new housing stock with recent approvals for three-storey townhouses along the Finch Avenue West corridor.
EVIDENCE
6Upon review of his Curriculum Vitae and Acknowledgement of Expert’s Duty Form, the Tribunal qualified Mr. Pereira to provide expert opinion evidence in Land Use Planning.
7Mr. Pereira outlined the key differences between the Revised Development Concept and the Original Proposal which includes:
a) Reduction of the overall FSI from 2.34 to 2.20 and an increase in the total number of units comprising the proposed development from 495 to 524.
b) A change in height of Block A from 11 to 13 storeys that includes building stepbacks to mitigate views from the Public Road. An additional wing has been introduced, resulting in an L-shaped building while providing appropriate transitions to Block B and Grantbrook Street with a minimum building separation and a series of stepbacks on the north elevation of the wing.
c) An increase in the non-residential gross floor area from 426 square meters to 1,000 square meters to contribute to complete communities. This includes a total of six retail units across the entire Finch frontage that also wrap around the corners at Grantbrook Street and at the Public Road to provide place making opportunities.
d) The elimination of the original Block B and reorganization of Blocks C and D with 55 units in each block to new Blocks B and C, with 67 and 65 units, respectively. Reconfiguring of “Blocks B, C and D” to accommodate new building locations and ensure appropriate building separation (15.65 meters) from Block B and Block C and a minimum building separation (11 meters) between Block D from Block B and Block C.
e) The creation of larger rear yard setbacks (a minimum of 5 meters) at Blocks E and F in accordance with requests from the City and the School Board.
f) The creation of a midblock connection (currently contemplated to be POPS) which creates a connection from Grantbrook Street and the Public Road to the relocated heritage dwelling in addition to a prominent visual connection from Grantbrook Street and Finch Avenue West.
g) The addition of a prominent on-site parkland dedication of 1,610 square meters. The remaining 67 square meters will be satisfied through cash-in-lieu.
h) The re-alignment of the Public Road to match the centre line of Senlac Road and an increase in the width of the Public Road to 18.5 meters including a 2.1-meter sidewalk along the east side of the Public Road.
i) The relocation of 39 of the 41 surface parking spaces to the underground parking garage and replacement of the surfacing parking spaces with an expanded open space between Block A to D including a midblock connection. (Exhibit 2, paragraph 29)
8It was Mr. Pereira’s overall opinion that the Revised Development Concept:
g) Represents good planning and is in the public interest.
h) Has appropriate regard for matters of provincial interest pursuant to Section 2 of the Planning Act.
i) Is consistent with the PPS and conforms to the Growth Plan by providing a compact, efficient and transit-supportive development.
j) Seeks to amend the City of Toronto Official Plan to bring it more into conformity with the Provincial Policy framework in terms of appropriate levels of intensification, transit supportive development and the proper treatment of an Avenue. The OPA and ZBA facilitate a mid-rise vision for an Avenue with transit infrastructure that meets broader Provincial and City objectives while maintaining an appropriate contextual fit.
k) Provides a suitable building height of 13 storeys along a 36 meter ROW [right of way] along Finch Avenue West. In terms of massing, appropriate stepbacks have been provided to articulate the building and provide visual interest.
l) Implements the intent of the Townhouse and Low-Rise Apartment Guidelines by providing a pedestrian supportive scale, strong pedestrian connections, requisite amenity space, below grade parking to the full extent feasible and separation distances, and
m) Is otherwise appropriate. (Exhibit 2, paragraph 76)
FINDINGS
9The Tribunal accepts the uncontroverted opinion evidence of Mr. Pereira, and similarly finds that the proposed OPA and ZBA have regard to the applicable matters of Provincial interest as found in section 2 of the Planning Act, are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2022, conform to the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020, conform to the OP, and otherwise reflect principles of good land use planning in the public interest.
10The Tribunal finds that the proposal is transit-supportive, and will create needed additional housing units in an appropriate location for growth and at a suitable level of intensification
11The Tribunal has considered the concerns of the Participants regarding compatibility, traffic, parking, privacy and overlook, and finds that these have been suitably addressed by the Settlement proposal.
12The Tribunal has had regard to the decisions of the City and the information it had before it when the matter was decided as required under section 2.1(1) of the Act.
INTERIM ORDER
13The Tribunal Orders THAT the Appeal is allowed, on an interim basis, contingent upon confirmation, satisfaction or receipt of those pre-requisite matters identified in paragraph [14] below, and the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Attachments 1 & 2, respectively, to this Interim Order, are hereby approved in principle.
14The Tribunal will withhold the issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation of the following pre-requisite matters:
a) The Tribunal has received, and approved, the Official Plan Amendment and 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 owner has addressed the matters identified in the Engineering and Construction Services Memorandum dated November 23, 2023, and any outstanding issues arising from the ongoing technical review (including the provision of acceptable reports and studies), as they relate to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments application to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;
c) In the event the updated servicing reports referred to in paragraph [14(b)] above identify necessary upgrades or modifications to municipal infrastructure including the provision of servicing or functional items above, the owner shall enter into financially secured agreement(s) for the construction of any such improvements all to be completed at no cost to the City and to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;
d) A Holding provision has been included in the implementing zoning by-law to ensure the necessary municipal infrastructure is in place before any development can proceed for the site;
e) The owner has submitted a revised Travel Demand Management Plan, parking study, and vehicle maneuvering diagrams acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the General Manager, Transportation Services and that such matters arising from such study be secured if required;
f) The owner has submitted updated complete Toronto Green Standards Checklists and Statistics Templates to the satisfaction of satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;
g) The applicant has submitted a plan of subdivision application, or has otherwise made appropriate arrangements to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to secure the public street and required public conveyances to City standards;
h) The owner has submitted a revised Heritage Impact Assessment that includes a conservation strategy to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning;
i) The owner has entered into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 172 Finch Avenue West, substantially in accordance with the accepted Heritage Impact Assessment that includes a conservation strategy to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning;
j) The owner has submitted an application and gained approval in writing under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act for the proposed alterations to the heritage property at 172 Finch Avenue West; and
k) The owner has provided a revised Pedestrian Wind Study, such report to be reviewed with recommendations implemented as part of the amending Official Plan policies and Zoning By-laws.
15The Panel Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final draft of the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-Law Amendment and the issuance of the Final Order and may be spoken to in the event there are difficulties implementing the matters as set out above.
16The Applicant and the City shall provide a written status report to the Tribunal by Friday, June 28, 2024, as to the timing of the expected confirmation of the pre-requisite matters and submission of the final forms of the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment and issuance of the Final Order by the Tribunal.
17The 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 prerequisites and the issuance of the Final Order.
“S. Bobka”
S. BOBKA 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2