Item - 2020.TE16.10

City Council recessed its public session and met as Committee of the Whole in closed session on July 29, 2020 to consider confidential information on this Item as it pertains litigation or potential litigation and advice or communications that are subject to litigation and solicitor-client privilege.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council direct the City Solicitor, together with City Planning staff and other City staff, to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing to oppose the Zoning By-law amendment (File 13 248425 STE 27 OZ) application as proposed.

2. City Council direct the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff be directed to continue discussions with the applicant with an aim to resolve the issues identified in the report (June 25, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District; and

3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal allows the appeal in whole or in part, City Council authorize the City Solicitor to request that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal withhold its final Order to approve the Zoning By-law amendment application until such time as:

a. the City and the owner have presented to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal a Zoning By-law amendment that implements the decision of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal in a form and substance satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor;

b. the owner has provided a revised functional servicing and stormwater management report, satisfactory to the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, including securing (and the provision of any financial securities) for any identified and/or required improvements and/or upgrades to municipal infrastructure;

c. the owner has provided a revised parking study, satisfactory to the Manager, Transportation Services;

d. the owner has provided a revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study, including wind tunnel test, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning. The owner shall be required to implement and maintain all recommended mitigation measures, all of which is to be secured as a matter of convenience in the Section 37 Agreement, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor; and

e. community benefits and other matters in support of the development as determined appropriate are secured in a Section 37 Agreement executed by the owner to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor.

On August 3, 2017, the owner of the property at 80 Bloor Street West appealed its Zoning By-law Amendment application to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) due to Council's failure to enact the requested amendment within the time allotted by the Planning Act. 

On November 1, 2019 a new Official Plan Amendment (OPA) application (File No. 20 244311 STE 11 OZ) was submitted for an expanded site to include 82 Bloor Street West.  Accompanying the new OPA for 80-82 Bloor Street West was a revised Zoning By-law Amendment application for the expanded site.

On June 5, 2020, the Zoning By-law Amendment application was revised again, and the OPA application (File No. 20 244311 STE 11 OZ) was withdrawn.

The application proposes a mixed-use development with two attached towers at 78 and 76-storeys (259.6 and 252.6 metres, respectively, including mechanical penthouse) with a shared 17-storey base building at 80-82 Bloor Street West. The proposal contains  1,430 residential units and 6,695 square metres of retail space on the concourse level, ground, second, and third floors. The existing 18-storey commercial/office building, and 4-storey commercial building, with approximately 19,875 square metres of office space would be demolished. A total of 215 resident vehicular parking spaces are to be provided in a 5-level underground parking garage accessible from Critchley Lane.

This report recommends that Council direct the City Solicitor, together with appropriate City staff, to oppose the current proposal at the LPAT. The proposal does not provide any office replacement, does not provide an acceptable parkland dedication, does not transition in height and does not have an acceptable built form. The proposal does not conform to the Growth Plan (2019), is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), does not conform with the Official Plan, The Downtown Plan (OPA 406), SASP 211, OPA 231, and OPA 352, and does not adequately address the City's Tall Building Design Guidelines, or the intent of those guidelines.