The filed record
859 The Queensway - Zoning By-law Amendment Application - Request for Further Direction Regarding Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Decision
The Public Gallery wrote no story on this item. What follows is the city’s own record of what happened to it, as filed: nothing on this page is summarised or scored by us.
The decision
2021-04-07 · Toronto City Council · adopted
As filed
City Council on April 7 and 8, 2021, adopted the following: 1. City Council adopt the confidential instructions to staff in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor. 2. City Council authorize the public release of the confidential instructions to staff in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor, and Confidential Attachments 2 and 3 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor.
Show the rest of As filed, 10,040 more characters as filed
3. City Council direct that the balance of Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor remain confidential at the discretion of the City Solicitor, as it contains advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege. The confidential instructions to staff in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor were adopted by City Council and are now public, as follows: 1. City Council accept the without prejudice Settlement Offer dated March 26, 2021, in Confidential Attachment 2 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor and as shown on the Settlement Plans dated March 25, 2021, in Confidential Attachment 3 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor, subject to Parts 2 to 6 below. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal in support of the revised proposal as set out in the without prejudice Settlement Offer dated March 26, 2021, in Confidential Attachment 2 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor and as shown on the Settlement Plans dated March 25, 2021, in Confidential Attachment 3 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor, subject to the Parts 3 to 6 below. 3. City Council accept the Section 37 offer contained in the without prejudice Settlement Offer dated March 26, 2021, in Confidential Attachment 2 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor for a community benefit in the form of a cash contribution in the amount of six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) and City Council authorize the City Solicitor to secure the community benefit in a Section 37 Agreement as more particularly described in Part 4 below. 4. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to enter into and register an Agreement under Section 37 of the Planning Act with the Applicant to secure community benefits as follows, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor: a. an indexed cash contribution by the Applicant to the City in the amount of six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) as described in Part 3 above, to be allocated amongst the following at the discretion of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Ward Councillor: i. streetscape improvements along The Queensway through the Shop The Queensway Business Improvement Area; ii. improvements to local parks and trails located in Ward 3, including Queensway Park and Mimico Park Trail; and/or iii. public art on the site at the south-west corner of The Queensway and Islington known municipally as 1001-1037 The Queensway; b. the amount of the cash contribution in Part 4.a. above shall be indexed upwardly in accordance with the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Construction Price Index for Toronto, or its successor, calculated from the date of execution of the Section 37 Agreement to the date of payment of the funds by the Applicant to the City; and c. in the event that the cash contribution in Part 4.a. above has not been used for the intended purpose within three (3) years of the Zoning By-law Amendment coming into full force and effect, the cash contribution may be redirected for another purpose, at the discretion of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Ward Councillor, provided that the purpose is identified in the Toronto Official Plan and will benefit the community in the vicinity of the Site. 5. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to secure the following as matters of legal convenience to support the development in an agreement under Section 37 of the Planning Act with the Applicant as follows, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor: a. a 1.9 metre road widening along The Queensway to be conveyed by the Applicant to the City through the Site Plan Control process to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the City Solicitor; b. a 5 metre right-of-way rounding at the southwest corner of The Queensway and Plastics Avenue intersection to be conveyed by the Applicant to the City through the Site Plan Control process to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the City Solicitor; c. a surface pedestrian clearway easement to be conveyed by the Applicant to the City for public access over the privately-owned portions of the pedestrian clearway along Plastics Avenue on the site; the details, location, and configuration of the pedestrian clearway and easement will be determined and conveyed through the Site Plan Control process and the Applicant shall agree to construct and maintain the pedestrian clearway easement lands at its own cost and expense; d. the conveyance of any easement or fee simple interest of lands by the Applicant to the City shall be at no cost to the City and for nominal consideration and shall be free and clear of encumbrances, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, as well as the General Manager, Transportation Services as the case may be; without limiting the generality of the forgoing, the cost of preparation and deposit of accepted reference plans shall also be at the Applicant's sole cost and expense; e. a revised Pedestrian Wind Assessment, including a wind tunnel test, to be provided by the Applicant to the City, and the implementation of any recommended mitigation measures by the Applicant, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; f. a Peer Review of the Noise and Vibration Impact Feasibility Study prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Limited by a third-party Noise and Vibration Consultant retained by the City at the Applicant's sole cost and expense, and the implementation of any noise and vibration control measures and recommendations as identified through the Peer Review by the Applicant, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and g. an Air Quality Study prepared by an Air Quality Consultant, which shall be subject to a Peer Review by a third-party Air Quality Consultant retained by the City at the Applicant's sole cost and expense, and the implementation of any air quality control measures and recommendations identified through the Peer Review by the Applicant, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services. 6. City Council instruct the City Solicitor to request the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal to withhold its final order on the Zoning By-law Amendment application until such time as the Tribunal has been advised by the City Solicitor that: a. the revised proposal as shown on the Settlement Plans dated March 25, 2021, in Confidential Attachment 3 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor is submitted for a recirculation for comments to all appropriate City divisions and such recirculation is completed, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; b. the form and content of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment is finalized to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor; c. the Applicant and the City have entered into and registered an Agreement under Section 37 of the Planning Act securing such community benefits and other matters of legal convenience as set out in Parts 4 and 5 above, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor; d. all outstanding transportation matters, including the submission of an accepted revised Transportation Impact Study, Parking Justification Report and Truck Maneuvering Diagrams, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services; e. all outstanding engineering matters, including the submission of an accepted revised Functional Servicing Report, Stormwater Management Report, Geotechnical Report and Hydrogeological Report, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; f. the Applicant has entered into an agreement or agreements securing the design, construction and the provision of financial securities for any required upgrades or improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure should it be determined that improvements or upgrades are required to support the development as may be identified in the accepted Transportation Impact Study, Functional Servicing Report, Stormwater Management Report, Geotechnical Report and Hydrogeological Report, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Transportation Services; g. the Applicant has provided space within the development 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 Sewer By-law Chapter 68-10 and to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and h. the Applicant has provided a revised shadow study based on the Settlement Plans to demonstrating the sun and shadow impacts of the Settlement Plans, the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning. Confidential Attachments 2 and 3 to the report (March 30, 2021) are now public and can be accessed under Background Information (City Council). The balance of Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor remains confidential at this time in accordance with the provisions of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, as it contains advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege and litigation privilege. The balance of Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (March 30, 2021) from the City Solicitor will be made public at the discretion of the City Solicitor.
On the agenda
As the city filed it
Latch Developments Ltd. (the "Applicant") is the owner of the property municipally known as 859 The Queensway (the "Subject Property"). The Applicant applied for a Zoning By-law Amendment in order to facilitate a proposed mixed-use redevelopment of the Subject Property (the "Original Application"). The Application proposes a 14-storey mixed use building. The proposed building is "L" shaped, with an 8-storey component along The Queensway that wraps around the corner onto Plastics Avenue and then rises to a tall building height of 14-storeys.
Show the rest of As the city filed it, 4,664 more characters as filed
On January 24, 2018, the Applicant appealed the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the Ontario Municipal Board now known as the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal due to City Council's failure to make a decision. The rezoning appeal is known as Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Case Number PL180105. On November 30, 2018, the Applicant submitted a related Site Plan Approval application with revised plans for a 14-storey mixed-use building that modified certain elements of the original proposal. The Site Plan Approval application is not under appeal and remains with the City for review. On August 19, 2019, the Applicant's legal counsel Goodmans LLP submitted a "with prejudice" settlement offer that included a slightly revised design for the proposed development (the "LPAT Plans"). The Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans still proposed a 14-storey building "L" shaped building, however, incorporated certain minor changes to the design of the development. The Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans proposed 237 units, with only 9 units (or 4 percent of the overall unit mix) proposed to be 3-bedroom units, and had an overall gross floor area of 20,038 square metres and a floor space index of 5.22. The Applicant confirmed that they would be seeking approval of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans at the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing related to their appeal. City Council ultimately refused the proposed "with prejudice" settlement offer at its meeting of October 2 and 3, 2019. Notwithstanding, the Applicant continued to seek approval of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans through its Local Planning Appeal Tribunal appeal. On November 26 to 30, 2020, a 5-day Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing was held regarding the Applicant's rezoning appeal and sought approval of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans (the "LPAT Hearing"). The City attended the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Hearing in opposition to the proposal reflected in the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans. On December 21, 2020, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal issued its written decision and interim order from the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Hearing (the "LPAT Decision"). The Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Decision is included as Public Attachment 1 to this report. The Tribunal found that the proposal reflected in the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Plans did not satisfy the applicable planning policies. The Tribunal continued with its decision, writing: "[15] Rather than deny the development application and force the Applicant to restart the process, the Tribunal will instead enable the parties to have the opportunity to see if a settlement might be arrived at through the following directions from the Tribunal. [16] The Tribunal finds that a development proposal based on the L shaped design in Exhibit 11, of up to and including 12 storeys in height, with an increased rear yard setback from the south property line of about 7.5 metres, with a south elevation stepback of 2.5 metres above the fourth floor, and the application of the angular plane to the Plastics Avenue frontage would satisfy the policy regime, provided of course that it achieves the angular plane to The Queensway and minimizes shadowing. [140] Accordingly as the Subject Lands are appropriate for intensification, rather than refusing this application and requiring the Applicant to start all over again, the Tribunal is prepared to consider a revised development proposal that hopefully would come with consent of the City and would take into account the findings in this decision." (Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Decision, paragraphs 14, 15, and 140) Finally, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Decision directed the Applicant and the City to engage in discussions in order to achieve a settlement based on changes to the rezoning application that follow the parameters set out in paragraph 16 of the Tribunal's decision, cited above. The Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Decision provided a deadline of 6 months for the Applicant to provide a revised proposal to City and a deadline of 3 months once the revised proposal is received for the City to provide responding comments to the Applicant to resolve any outstanding matters. Within 6 months of the City receiving the revised proposal, both the City and the Applicant are required to provide final written submissions to the Tribunal and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal will then issue its final order. The purpose of this report is to request instructions in relation to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Decision and interim order. City Planning staff have been involved in the preparation of this report.
Staff recommended
The City Solicitor recommends that: 1. City Council adopt the recommendations contained in Confidential Attachment 1 to this report. 2. City Council authorize the public release of the confidential recommendations contained in Confidential Attachment 1 to this report, as well as Confidential Attachments 2 and 3, if adopted by City Council. 3. City Council direct that all other information contained in Confidential Attachment
Show the rest of Staff recommended, 126 more characters as filed
1 to remain confidential at the discretion of the City Solicitor, as it contains advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.
On the record
More from this meeting
- Introduction and Enactment of General Bills and Confirming BillsFiled record
- Enhancing Policing Accountability through a Memorandum of Understanding with Ombudsman TorontoFiled record
- 206 Russell Hill Road - Repeal of Heritage Designation By-lawFiled record
- Status of Collective Bargaining and Labour RelationsFiled record
- Authorization to Release Section 37 Funds from the Development at 4 and 6 Tippett Road to Community Matters Toronto for Painting Mural Art on 13 Bell Utility Boxes in York-Centre - by Councillor James Pasternak, seconded by Councillor Jaye RobinsonFiled record
- Call to OrderFiled record