du territoire
Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement
ISSUE DATE: May 24, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003265
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: BJL Properties Inc. and 47 Camden Inc.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision
Description: To permit a 16-storey mixed-use building
Reference Number: 21 235947 STE 10 OZ
Property Address: 35-47 Camden Street
Municipality: City Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003265
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003265
OLT Case Name: BJL Properties Inc. and 47 Camden Inc. v. Toronto (City)
Heard: April 17, 2024 via Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
BJL Properties Inc. and 47 Camden Inc.
Eileen Costello
City of Toronto
Derin Abimbola, Ray Kallio, J. Reason (Student at Law)
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY D. CHIPMAN ON APRIL 17, 2024 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal convened a settlement hearing (“Settlement”) in respect of the appeals filed by BJL Properties Inc. and 47 Camden Inc (“Applicant”) against the City of Toronto (“City”) for failing to make a decision for a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) pursuant to s. 34 (11) of the Planning Act. The lands that are the subject of the applications are located at 35 – 47 Camden Street in the City of Toronto (“Subject Property”).
2The effect of the ZBA is to allow a mixed-use development with increased height and density on the subject property. At the request of City staff, the Applicant purchased 35 Camden Street in December 2023, and has revised the proposed building to extend eastward onto this property.
3At its meeting of March 20 and 21, 2024, City Council adopted a report outlining the Settlement between the Parties in support of the revised development proposal.
4On May 15, 2024, the Tribunal was to begin a five-day hearing on the merits of the appeal instead, as a result of progressive discussions the Parties requested that April 17, 2024, be set aside to hear the evidence in support of the planning instruments.
5The Parties have jointly requested that the Tribunal allow the appeal in part and approve the ZBA in principle, as set out in Attachment 1 and requested that the Tribunal withhold the final Order pending confirmation from the City that the conditions set out in paragraph [26] below are satisfied.
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
6Briefly summarized, as a result of the inclusion of 35 Camden Street, the site area has been increased from 941 square metres (“sq m”) to 1,152 sq m and the building has been extended eastward to the mutual property line between 29 Camden Street (“Camden Lofts”) and 35 Camden Street. As a result, the east-west width of the building has increased from 35.4 metres (“m”) to 43.35 m.
7The height of the streetwall along Camden Street has been revised from 13 storeys (41.9 m) to 14 storeys (45.1 m) for the majority of the streetwall and five storeys (18.55 m) for the easternmost portion of the building. The modified streetwall heights respond to, and generally align with, the streetwall heights of the Ace Hotel to the west and Camden Lofts to the east.
8The depth of the stepback above the streetwall has been reduced from 2.5 m (3.0 m measured to the glazing) to 2.0 m (2.5 m measured to the glazing). The stepback responds to the stepback above Level 6 at Camden Lofts.
9A 3.0m by 3.8 m notch has been introduced at the northeast corner of the building above Level 7 to respond to the stepback above Level 7 at Camden Lofts.
10The stepback above Level 16 along the west elevation and notch above Level 16 at the southeast corner of the building have been eliminated, resulting in the building being built to both side property lines at all levels.
11The windows along the east and west elevations at Levels 15 to 17 have been removed, resulting in a blank wall condition for those facades at all levels.
12The shape, siting and configuration of the Mechanical Penthouse Level have been revised to accommodate 153.25 sq m of indoor amenity space and 281.75 m of outdoor amenity space on the roof of Level 17.
13The configuration and programming of the interior of the building, including the layout of the parking garage, lobby, retail, indoor and outdoor amenity space, bicycle parking, loading, elevator and stair cores, and various other functional spaces at all building levels have been revised to reflect the increased site area and the above noted built form changes.
14The following table indicates the results of the above noted revisions versus the original submission:
EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS
15The Tribunal had before it the Affidavit of Peter Smith sworn April 5, 2024, which was marked as Exhibit 1. Mr. Smith is a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners and a Registered Professional Planner with the Ontario Professional Planners Institute. He has over 40 years of land use planning and urban design experience and the Tribunal qualified him to provide viva voce opinion evidence on land use planning on consent of the Parties.
16Mr. Smith 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.
17Overall, Mr. Smith 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 built form and urban design policies of the OP, the Downtown Plan and the in-force King-Spadina Secondary Plan and is generally in keeping with the relevant urban design guidelines, including the Tall Building Design Guidelines and the King-Spadina Urban Design Guidelines.
18From an intensification perspective, Mr. Smith opined that the Subject Property is located within a “strategic growth area” and is supportive of, and implements, numerous policy directions which promote intensification on underutilized sites within the built-up urban area, particularly in locations which are well-served by municipal infrastructure, including existing and planned higher order public transit.
19The Subject Property is also falls within the definition of a “major transit station area” pursuant to the Growth Plan and is located approximately 200 m, 460 m and 530 m radius distance of the planned Queen-Spadina subway station, the planned King-Bathurst subway station and the planned Front-Spadina GO RER Station, respectively.
20The Settlement represents an appropriate form of residential/mixed-use intensification in a location that is well suited for redevelopment. Residential/mixed-use intensification on the Subject Site can take advantage of, and provide population support to, the wide range of shops, services, restaurants, recreational and cultural facilities available within the King-Spadina Area.
21Additionally, the proximity of the Subject Site to significant employment opportunities and urban amenities in the Financial District and broader Downtown will foster a strong live-work relationship, reducing the need for inbound commuting and aiding the ongoing transformation of the area into a complete community. Furthermore, intensification will support transit ridership on existing “frequent transit” routes and on the future Ontario Line, reinforcing the role of the Downtown as a desirable area for living, working and shopping.
22The Tribunal heard the proposed form of the building, with no side yard setbacks or stepbacks, and with blank side wall interfaces is in keeping with the form and pattern of development in the King-Spadina West Precinct and in the immediate surroundings. The new Secondary Plan promotes this form of development, which only requires stepbacks above the streetwall from adjacent properties in instances where they are required to provide separation distances between buildings that protect access to light, view and privacy.
23On the strength of the uncontradicted expert opinion evidence of Mr. Smith, 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 development through the ZBA represents an efficient use of land, resources and infrastructure, and it achieves important local, regional, and provincial policy objectives.
24Further, 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 in the public interest. The Tribunal commends the Parties in working collaboratively in order to reach a settlement in these proceedings.
INTERIM ORDER
25THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the appeal against By-law No. 569-2013 of the City of Toronto is allowed in part, and By-law No. 569-2013 is amended and approved in principle as set out in Attachment 1 to this Order. In all other respects, the Tribunal orders that the appeal is dismissed.
26THE TRIBUNAL will withhold the Final Order until such a time as:
a. the final form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment is to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the City Solicitor;
b. the Owner has, at its sole cost and expense:
i. resubmitted the Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report and Hydrogeological Report, which includes confirmation of water, sanitary, and stormwater capacity, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, or the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services has determined that holding provisions are required in the Zoning Bylaw Amendment;
ii. entered into a financially secured agreement for the construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure, should it be determined that upgrades and road improvements are required to support the development, according to the Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report and Hydrogeological Report accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and
iii. submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study or addendum to demonstrate the necessary easements for access from the private laneway to the south and any streetscape and curb extension provisions, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and such matters arising from the Transportation Impact Study, if required, be secured through the Site Plan Control process; and
iv. submitted a revised Landscape Plan (with a public utility plan underlay in an updated soil volume plan) to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation.
27If the Parties do not submit the final draft of the Zoning By-law Amendment, and provide confirmation that the contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order, by Tuesday, December 31, 2024, the Applicant 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 request for 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 that 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.
28The 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.
29The 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 and the satisfaction of the contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order.
30The 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
Authority: Ontario Land Tribunal Decision issued on [date] and Ontario Land Tribunal Order issued on [date] in Tribunal File OLT-22-003265
CITY OF TORONTO
BY-LAW XXXX-2024 (OLT)
To amend Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, with respect to the lands municipally known in the year 2023 as 35-47 Camden Street
Whereas the Ontario Land Tribunal, in its Decision issued on [date] in and its Order issued on [date], in file OLT-22-003265 in hearing an appeal under Section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P13, as amended, ordered the amendment of Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, with respect to the lands municipally known in the year 2023 as 35-47 Camden Street;
Whereas the Ontario Land Tribunal has the authority pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, as amended, to pass this By-law; and
Whereas pursuant to Section 39 of the Planning Act, as amended, a by-law passed under Section 34 of the Planning Act, may authorize the temporary use of land, buildings or structures for any purpose set out therein that is otherwise prohibited in the by-law;
The Ontario Land Tribunal, by Order, amends Zoning By-law 569-2013 as follows:
The lands subject to this By-law are outlined by heavy black lines on Diagram 1 attached to this By-law.
The words highlighted in bold type in this By-law have the meaning provided in Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, Chapter 800 Definitions.
Zoning By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by amending the Zoning By-law Map in Section 990.10 respecting the lands outlined by heavy black lines from a zone label of CRE (x76) to a zone label of CRE (xXXXX) as shown on Diagram 2 attached to this By-law;
Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, is further amended by adding Article 900.12.10 Exception Number (xXXXX) so that it reads:
The lands, or a portion thereof as noted below, are subject to the following Site Specific Provisions, Prevailing By-laws and Prevailing Sections:
Site Specific Provisions:
(A) On lands municipally known as 35-47 Camden Street if the requirements of By-law [Clerks to supply by-law ##] are complied with, a building or structure may be constructed, used or enlarged in compliance with Regulations (B) to (S);
(B) Despite Regulations 50.5.40.10(1) and (2), the height of a building or structure is the vertical distance between the Canadian Geodetic Datum elevation of 90.10 metres to the elevation of the highest point of the building or structure;
(C) Despite Regulation 50.10.40.10(1), the permitted maximum height of a building or structure, including a mechanical penthouse, is the numerical value, in metres, following the letters "HT" as shown on Diagram 3 of [Clerks to supply by-law ##];
(D) Despite regulations 50.5.40.10(3) to (8), 50.10.40.10(3) and (C) above, the following equipment and structures may project beyond the permitted maximum height shown on Diagram 3 of By-law [Clerks to supply by-law ##];
(i) roof access, chimneys and vents, solar panels and related equipment by a maximum of 2.0 metres;
(ii) architectural features and elements, parapets, planters, landscaping features, guard rails, screens, trellises, pergolas, pool equipment and associated decks and platforms, light standards, green roofs, seating areas, wheelchair ramps, public art, divider screens and unenclosed structures providing safety or wind protection to rooftop amenity space, flagpoles, antennae and satellite dishes by a maximum of 2.0 metres;
(iii) elevator overrun, cooling tower, screening elements, generator/back-up generator, emergency generator, window washing equipment and building maintenance units by a maximum of 3.5 metres; and
(iv) roof assembly elements by a maximum of 0.4 metres;
(E) In addition to the elements listed in Regulation 50.5.40.40(3), the gross floor area of a building or structure on the lot may also be reduced by electrical, utility, mechanical and ventilation rooms above-ground;
(F) The maximum permitted gross floor area of all buildings and structures must not exceed 14,500 square metres, of which:
(i) the residential gross floor area does not exceed 14,000 square metres; and
(ii) the non-residential gross floor area does not exceed 500 square metres;
(G) Despite Regulation 50.10.40.50(1), amenity space must be provided at a minimum rate of:
(i) 2.0 square metres for each dwelling unit of indoor amenity space;
(ii) 1.5 square metres for each dwelling unit of outdoor amenity space of which at least 40.0 square metres is in a location adjoining or directly accessible to the indoor amenity space;
(H) Despite Clause 50.10.40.70 and Regulations 50.10.40.80(2) and (3), 50.5.40.70(1) and Article 600.10.10, the required minimum building setbacks, minimum setbacks from a lane, and minimum distance between main walls are as shown in metres on Diagram 3 of By-law [Clerks to supply by-law ##];
(I) Despite Clause 50.5.40.60, 50.10.40.60 and (H) above, the following elements of a building or structure are permitted to encroach into the required building setbacks and main wall separation distancesshown on Diagram 3 of By-law [Clerks to supply by-law ##], as follows:
(i) window projections, including bay windows and box windows exterior stairs, access ramps and elevating devices, landscape features, lighting fixtures, architectural features, such as a pilasters, decorative columns, architectural fins, cornices, sills, belt courses, eaves or chimney breast, by a maximum of 1.0 metres; and
(ii) balconies, terraces, canopies, awnings and wind mitigation features, by a maximum of 2.0 metres;
(J) Article 200.25.15 and Clause 200.25.15.2 regarding transition requirements for parking space regulations do not apply;
(K) Despite regulation 200.5.10.1(1) and Table 200.5.10.1, parking spaces must be provided in accordance with the following:
(i) a maximum rate of 0.3 residential occupant parking spaces for each bachelor dwelling unit up to 45 square metres and 1.0 residential occupant parking spaces for each bachelor dwelling unit greater than 45 square metres;
(ii) a maximum rate of 0.5 residential occupant parking spaces for each one-bedroom dwelling unit;
(iii) a maximum rate of 0.8 residential occupant parking spaces for each two-bedroom dwelling unit;
(iv) a maximum rate of 1.0 residential occupant parking spaces for each three-bedroom dwelling unit;
(v) 0 parking spaces for residential visitor or non-residential uses;
(L) Despite Regulation 200.5.1.10(12), vehicle access to a building is permitted through a car elevator with a minimum width of 3.0 metres;
(M) Despite Regulation 200.5.1.10(2)(A)(iv), a maximum of 15 percent of parking spaces may be obstructed on one or both sides in accordance with Regulation 200.5.1.10(2)(D) with no requirement to increase the minimum width by 0.3 metres;
(N) Despite Clauses 200.15.10.5(1), 200.15.10.10(1) and Table 200.15.10.5, a minimum of 4 accessible parking spaces must be provided and maintained;
(O) Despite Clause 220.5.1.10 (1) and 220.5.10.1, one (1) Type "B" loading space must be provided and maintained on the lot;
(i) Despite (O) above, a Type “B” loading space provided and maintained on the lot shall have a minimum length of 11 metres, a minimum width of 3.5 metres and a minimum vertical clearance of 4.4 metres;
(P) Despite regulations 230.5.10.1(1)(3) and (5) and Table 230.5.10.1(1), bicycle parking spaces must be provided in accordance with the following minimum rates:
(i) 0.9 "long-term" bicycle parking spaces for each dwelling unit;
(ii) 0.2 "short-term bicycle parking spaces for each dwelling unit; and
(iii) no "long term" bicycle parking spaces or “short term” bicycle parking spaces are required for non-residential uses;
(Q) Despite Regulation 230.5.1.10(9)(A), bicycle parking spaces may be located on the first storey, second storey and on levels of the building which constitute a mezzanine or which are located below-ground;
(R) Despite Regulations 230.5.1.10(10), both “long-term” and “short-term” bicycle parking spaces may be located in a stacked bicycle parking space arrangement, and in any combination of vertical, horizontal or stacked positions;
(S) Despite Regulation 230.5.1.10(4)(A)(ii), the required minimum width of a stacked bicycle parking space is:
(i) length of 1.8 metres;
(ii) width of 0.4 metres; and
(iii) vertical clearance of 1.2 metres; and
Prevailing By-laws and Prevailing Sections: (None Apply)
Despite any severance, partition or division of the lands, the provisions of this By-law shall apply as if no severance, partition or division occurred.
None of the provisions of By-law 569-2013, as amended, apply to prevent the erection and use of a retail store and/or office on the the lands municipally known in the year 2023 as 35-47 Camden Street for the purpose of sales and leasing of dwelling units or construction management, for a period of not more than 3 years from the date this By-law comes into full force and effect.
Pursuant to the Ontario Land Tribunal Decision and Interim Order issued on [Date] in Tribunal File OLT-22-003265.