Update from the City of Toronto as of November 2016 regarding Rockport's proposed 25.8 metre high development of 1327-1339 Queen St. East

From Matthew Longo, Solicitor, Planning & Administrative Tribunal Law, City of Toronto Legal Services

With respect to the site plan application, the developer submitted further refinements in late September. As always, the new material was posted on the City’s Development Application portal. You can review the material at the following link (click “supporting documentation”), Development Applications 1327 Queen St. East 
 and in particular the “cover letter” document explains the latest revisions and responses: 

The City has not yet crafted the site plan approval conditions. We will circulate them for your information when they are to be provided to the developer. The form of the zoning by-law has also not been finalized. 

The LCC also asked Mr. Longo about an application that Rockport, the now owner of 1327 Queen Street East, had submitted for a permit to injure a tree located at 73 Laing St. 

The City stated that it is going to grant the permit, on the basis that as long as the tree is injured in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit, then the relevant by-law will not be breached. However, the City has advised the owner of 1327 Queen Street (Rockport) that they are not authorized to injure the tree without the owner’s of 73 Laing Streets consent, and they have put the onus on Rockport, the owner of 1327 Queen Street to resolve any property disputes. 

The concern being that Rockport, the owner of 1327 Queen Street, goes ahead and injures the tree as soon as it gets the permit. In response to voicing that concern Mr. Longo advised that " It would, of course, be wise for the developer not to interfere with the rights of neighbouring landowners but the City does not become involved in such disputes."

To see the state of the proposed by-law to date click here then click on Supporting documentation and Draft Zoning By-law amendment.

Rockport appeals Ashbridge Precinct Guidelines

Not good news regarding the Ashbridge Precinct Guidelines

When we last reported on the OMB decision, we said that one of the few good things to come out of this process was the fact that the new Ashbridge Precinct guidelines were now in place. Well, hold that thought. Rockport and Fieldgate – a newly named developer in the mix - are appealing the Ashbridge Precinct Guidelines.They do not want them to be passed as an Official Plan Amendment.

The attached document sent via their Legal Council is self-explanatory. They do not want the new Guidelines to be used to evaluate proposed development in the area. Both 1327-1339 and the Beer store are the two developments in question at this point but there are several 'soft sites' in the wings.  Any development applications submitted to planning while this issue is before the OMB will be exempt from the new Guidelines.

Rockport and Fieldgate letter to the Toronto & East York Community Council regarding their appeal of the Ashbridge Precinct Guidelines

It is our understanding that the city will be fighting this.

Please write to your local councilor if you believe that the city needs to fight to keep the newly established guidelines for this area.  These will limit the height, recommend set backs both front and side, rear transitions and the wrapping of the mechanical penthouse.

Those are just a few of the issues. We hope that you care about this as much as we do.





LCC Google Drive | OMB Ashbridge Precinct appeal.pdf |  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-Vl-kM-oCKRd3lZNl81WURJcHc/view?usp=sharing



vd/mh

The lack of protest on the city’s part was deafening in its absence

Many of you will have already seen the very very large sign that the developer has erected announcing his Condo project at 1327-1339 Queen East.

Ontario Municipal Board ruling on Rockport 1327-1339 Queen E, Front Page crop (click image to read .pdf)

The OMB (decision link) has granted Rockport their appeal. One of the reasons cited was the following:

[58] Since the proposal now before the Board has come on the consent of the City, the Board draws the reasonable and inescapable inference that City Council is now satisfied that this proposal meets the requirements of OP policy 2.2.3.3(b).
[59] The Board has no contrary evidence before it.

The lack of protest on the city’s part was deafening in its absence. The fact that the new Ashbridge Precinct guidelines are now in place is one of the few positive developments to have come out of this process. The only thing slowing down the ground-breaking ceremony for the development was cited in the report as follows:

01] At the request of Rockport, and with consent of the City and with the consent of LCC in the alternative, the Board withholds its order until it has received confirmation from the City Solicitor that:
1. the final form of the zoning by-law amendment is to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, the City Solicitor, counsel to Rockport and counsel to LCC,
[102] At the request of the City, and with the consent of Rockport and with the consent of LCC in the alternative, the Board further withholds its order until has received confirmation from the City Solicitor that:
1. all site plan pre-approval conditions have been satisfied, and
2. approval has been granted for the demolition of the existing buildings on the site, as set out in the decision of the City Council on December 9, 2015.
“Susan de Avellar Schiller”

Thanks to all of you for your support. The LCC will be running an ad in the Beach Mirror to thank all of you who stepped up to the plate to help us to pay for our Legal representation at the hearing. We are still out of pocket so any additional donations would be greatly appreciated. If there are any other developments we will keep you posted. It’s been an interesting few years (yes few! this process started in 2013) and we’ve learned a great deal. We can only hope that the next development will actually implement the recommendations made in the new Ashbridge Precinct guidelines so that we can have a project to be proud to stand behind.




vd/mh

And now we wait

The OMB hearing for 1327-1339 Queen St. East lasted two and a half days and was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday Jan 27 after final summaries by the lawyers for Rockport and the LCC. Susan De Avellar Schiller, the adjudicating Board Member, stated that she was reserving her decision for a written statement and she did not provide a timeline as to when that might reasonably be expected. As to placing your bets, it’s anyone’s guess as to which way it will go.

The most important thing to remember is that we have made a difference just by being there regardless, and that there are now guidelines for the area - Ashbridge Precinct - that were voted on by City Council on Wednesday February 3  Agenda item link   and they are being made an amendment to the Official Plan. Stay tuned for the the decision. We’ll keep you posted.

Also we are still trying to raise the funds necessary to pay our bills so please donate if you can.

Mark your calendars: Monday January 25 10:00 a.m. OMB Hearing Please Plan to attend

On Monday January 25th at 10:00 a.m. the hearing for Rockport’s application to build a 25.8 metre high condo tower, located on the 1327-1339 Queen East site, will be heard at the Ontario Municipal Board. The Leslieville Community Coalition, represented by our lawyer and expert witnesses, will be there and we need your support. We hope to get as many community people as possible to attend so that the Board Member adjudicating will understand that this is a precedent-setting decision that will impact a community. The Board needs to see that this community cares and that it believes in planning good development, not development driven planning. 

Please mark it in your calendars and make arrangements to come. 

Please share this information with your friends and neighbours. Ontario Municipal Board 10:00 a.m. Monday January 25th 16th Fl, , 655 Bay Street, 16th Floor Toronto ON M5G 1E5 

 

Also on Tuesday January 19th the “Ashbridge Precinct” Guidelines were passed by TEYCC which gives this area (Leslie – Coxwell) guidelines for the developers to follow (or not as we have unfortunately seen). Here is a link to the video from the teycc Ashbridge Precinct Guidelines Motion at TEYCC– interesting dynamic 

 

The only questioning of the report was by Councillor Davis who is the Councillor who has the Ward opposite Councillor McMahon on Danforth. Gregg Lintern Director, Community Planning, Toronto East York, speaks to the actual Ashbridge Precinct guidelines in such a laudatory fashion that one then wonders how City Planning could have caved on the Rockport file. 

Councillor Davis addresses the fact that these guidelines have gotten us away “from a rigid formulaic approach to get the nuance of local communities”.

How to Interpret the Spin

There has been a certain amount of spin surrounding City Council's vote to not proceed to the Ontario Municipal Board to oppose Rockport's development application for 1327-1339 Queen St. East.  The facts minus the spin are as follows:

On May 5, 2015, City Council adopted Item TE5.12 Request for Directions report Request for Direction and directed the City Solicitor and appropriate staff to oppose Rockport’s Zoning By-law Amendment application in its present form.

The City Solicitor felt that there were were three issues that were of primary importance
 a. reducing the proposed height, massing and density so as not to overdevelop the site; 
 b. setting the building back to achieve a 4.8 metres sidewalk width, measured from the existing curb; and 
c. reorienting the rear units so they do not gain access from the Memory

So what happened? 

 

 On December 10th 2015, at City Council meeting there was a Motion Without Notice where Councillor Mary-Margaret McMahon, seconded by Councillor Mike Layton, recommended that City Council adopt the recommendations contained in the report (December 9, 2015) from the City Solicitor: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/mm/bgrd/backgroundfile-86619.pdf


 In that report, City Planning said that with regard to Height and Massing, the overall height of the proposal has been reduced to 25.8 metres from 30.15 metres.

It’s not literal, you have to interpret

In actual fact, on the Data Sheet submitted by the developer in August 2014, the building height is listed as 26.35 metres plus mechanical. The Developer’s Data sheet revised as of December 2015, shows that the actual building been reduced by less than 1 metre to 25.8 which includes a wrapped mechanical. The entire mass of the building above 20 metres is, in fact, occupied. 

It would seem that reducing the proposed height, massing and density which was deemed an important issue by City Council in May 2015, was not important enough for City Planning to want to fight it at the Ontario Municipal Board.

The Leslieville Community Coalition thinks it is important. 

The Maximum Allowable Height: 

If the Mid-Rise guidelines were applicable in this situation (which they are not), the building exceeds the overall maximum height by 5.8 metres. The City Planners said the revised massing presents as a six storey massing from Queen Street East because of the deep step back of the upper two storeys.

Whether it presents as six storeys or eight storeys is irrelevant, it is 5.8 metres higher and 2.6 times denser than allowed in the Mid-Rise Guidelines and 13.8 metres higher than what is actually allowed under the current zoning.

Sidewalk Width

The drawings have been revised to include a 4.8 metre wide sidewalk.  The Mid-Rise Guidelines (Beaches, Leslieville) is 4.8 metres, This is the minimum set back required by the City. This is great, they're following the guidelines.

Orientation of Rear Units

 On May 5, 2014 City Council requested that the Town house units on Memory Lane not have access from Memory Lane. Now City Planning is positioning the fact that these units do not have front doors opening on to Memory Lane – a public space – as a win. Not only do they have direct access via integral garages that were not envisaged in the original drawings but they no longer are connected to the building by the underground parking garage.

Reduction in square footage 

Once again, it’s not literal – you have to interpret.   We have read that the development is more than 1,000 sq. meters smaller than the original proposal.

 – Hmmm, the original proposal was for 9222 sq m residential, the present proposal is for 8883 sq m residential, a difference of 339 sq. metres. The retail component was originally 660 sq. metres, the current version has 455 sq. metres of retail, a difference of 205 sq. metres. The total change is 544. These figures are taken directly from Rockport’s project data sheets.

The rest of the square footage shrinkage might be made up from the fact that the City is allowing the developer to reduce the amount of parking significantly resulting in one less floor of parking. A win for the developer.

No matter what spin the City tries to put on this one, this is not a win for the community. This development will set a precedent and we would like the precedent to be driven by good planning and vision. That’s why we’re going to the OMB.  We think that a 20 metre height on a 20 metre right-of-way is the right way to go.

If you can or would like to help us fight for good planning, please donate.

Save the date : Tuesday Jan 19 10:00 a.m. City Hall Committee Rm 1 Last chance to be heard on area guidelines

Happy New Year to all and here’s hoping that it will be healthy for everyone and that we’ll make some headway at the OMB appeal on January 25th. The next important event is the public meeting on January 19th at City Hall Committee Room 1 for the proposed guidelines for the area from Leslie to Coxwell on Queen East. The proposal is available via Report from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District - Queen Street East/Ashbridge Precinct Planning Study - City-Initiated Official Plan Amendment and Urban Design Guidelines - Final Report. They are being considered on Jan 19 at Toronto and East York Community Council (TEYCC). The link to the agenda item is here. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2016.TE13.8 ? These are the guidelines that will shape the future development of the area. This meeting is your last chance to be heard regarding this very important issue. You may also submit written comments.

If you wish to address the Toronto and East York Community Council in person or in writing contact : City Clerk, Attention Rosalind Dyers, Administrator, Toronto and East York Community Council, 100 Queen St. West, 2nd floor, Toronto M5H 2N2 email teycc@toronto.ca fax 416 397-0111 – If you plan to make comments at the meeting please call the City Clerks office by 12 noon on Jan 18th. 416-392-7033 Subsequent to this meeting It will be considered by City Council on February 3, 2016, subject to the actions of the Toronto and East York Community Council.