Request for Direction Report - Zoning By-law Amendment Application - 717, 719, 723 and 733 Mount Pleasant Road

On July 30, 2020, the applicant (Rockport MPE Inc.) appealed the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). The appeal was made without revisions to the original proposal and citing Council's failure to make a decision on the application within the timeframe prescribed by the Planning Act. A Case Management Conference (CMC) was held on November 5, 2020. A further CMC is scheduled for March 3, 2021. As part of the approval of Midtown in Focus and the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan (the "Secondary Plan") in July 2018, City Planning was directed by Council to initiate a zoning review for Midtown's 22 Character Areas to implement the directions of the Secondary Plan (the "Midtown Zoning Review"). The intent of the zoning review is to establish specific heights in the Zoning By-law as set out in Policy 5.4.3 of the Secondary Plan. It will also provide clarity on the location, scale and form of appropriate development within each Character Area and implement other policy directions within the approved Secondary Plan. The outcome of the Midtown Zoning Review would guide the review of this application and future redevelopment of other sites within the block. Phase 1 of the Zoning Review is underway and it is anticipated that there will be a community consultation meeting held in early 2021. As part of City Council's adoption of the Preliminary Report for this application, City Planning Staff were directed to evaluate this application as part of the Council-directed Midtown Zoning Review. While the proposed building is within the height range of 20 to 35 storeys as identified by Policy 5.4.3(p) of the Secondary Plan, it has not yet been determined how the height range will be applied through the City-initiated Zoning By-law Amendment. This report reviews and recommends that the City Solicitor together with City Planning staff and other appropriate staff be directed to oppose the Zoning By-law Amendment application, in its current form, at the LPAT. The proposed development is not providing appropriate transition to the Neighbourhoods to the east, the lower-scale Mount Pleasant South Character Area to the south and does not respect the existing area context. Amongst other matters, the proposed tower does not minimize shadowing on the Neighbourhoods designated lands to the east of the site; lacks sufficient non-residential gross floor area; is not meeting the intent of the City's Tall Building Design Guidelines; is not providing an adequate amount of large units per the Growing Up guidelines; is not providing an adequate amount of vehicular parking; and is not providing a public laneway at the rear of the site. In addition, the application does not have a satisfactory Functional Servicing Report to address servicing issues. This report also recommends that despite the applicant's appeal of the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the LPAT, City Planning staff continue to work with the applicant's team on revisions to the application to bring forward a proposal, within the context of the ongoing Midtown Zoning Review that represents a supportable development of the site. In its current form, the proposed development is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and does not conform with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020). Additionally, it does not conform to the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan.

405, from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning. 3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal allows the appeals in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request that the Tribunal withhold its Order until such time as the Tribunal has been advised by the City Solicitor that: a. the proposed form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendments are satisfactory to the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District and City Solicitor; b. the owner has entered into and registered a Section 37 Agreement with the City incorporating language securing the above all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director City Planning, and the City Solicitor; and c. the owner has addressed the comments in the Engineering and Construction Services memo dated February 24, 2020, as applicable, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and any additional comments arising from the technical review of the November 6, 2020 resubmission to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with appropriate City Staff. 4. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and necessary City staff to take such necessary steps, as required, to implement the foregoing.