City of Toronto Re: F-F Construction Limited and

Charles and Pauline Sammut, 1386-1392 Islington Avenue

The Etobicoke Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May 4, 1998) from Reble, Ritchie, Green & Ketcheson, City Solicitors, Etobicoke District:

Purpose:

To report concerning the outcome of an Ontario Municipal Board proceeding conducted on April 30 and May 1, 1998 involving the above-captioned properties.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no funding requirements nor financial implications associated with this matter.

Recommendations:

1.That the City of Toronto concur with a mediated settlement endorsed by the Ontario Municipal Board of a proposed residential draft plan of subdivision at the north-west corner of Fairway Road and Islington Avenue; and

2.That the City of Toronto consent to an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board of Zoning By-law No. 136-1998, as filed by F-F Construction Limited and Charles and Pauline Sammut, as required for the implementation of the said settlement.

Council Reference/Background/History:

On September 8, 1997 Council for the former City of Etobicoke adopted Resolutions No. 348 and No. 349. These resolutions provided for the refusal of an application for draft subdivision plan approval submitted by F-F Construction Limited (AF-F Construction@). The decision to refuse this application was subsequently appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the developer, and was the subject of a hearing scheduled for April 30, 1998.

The appeal involved two residential lots municipally known as 1386-1388 Islington Avenue. These properties are located at the north-west corner of Islington Avenue and Fairway Road in the former City of Etobicoke.

The two properties comprise part of a larger residential plan of subdivision situated between the Islington Golf Course and Islington Avenue. The lots in this plan of subdivision are extremely large, with typical frontages of 15.24 metres and depths of 120.4 metres. This area is characterized by existing, well maintained, single family dwellings and well-landscaped lots featuring rear yards adjoining the Islington Golf Course.

Pursuant to the subdivision plan application, it was proposed to create four new residential lots with frontage on Fairway Road, together with two additional lots fronting on Islington Avenue and occupied by the existing dwellings. As well, this draft plan provided for the dedication to the municipality of a block of land located at the rear of the existing lots, adjacent to the golf course. This dedication was to be made in order to permit the construction and future extension of a public road along the rear portion of the existing lots, beside the golf course. It was intended by the provision of the future road to permit additional applications for subdivision plan approval to be processed within this block of residential lots.

Following the refusal by Council of the draft plan of subdivision, the owners of the adjacent property to the north of the F-F Construction site, Charles and Pauline Sammut, applied to the Etobicoke Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever the rear portion of their property at 1392 Islington Avenue. The intent of this application was to create an additional residential lot which would front on the proposed public road to be extended along the golf course from Fairway Drive.

This application was refused by the Committee of Adjustment and was subsequently appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board for hearing. As the consent application was related to the subdivision proposal, both matters were consolidated for one hearing by the Board.

In refusing the subdivision plan application, Council responded to concerns expressed by a number of area residents. Their concerns related primarily to a desire to preserve the existing Character of their community by discouraging applications for subdivision plan approval, or consent applications, involving these large lots. In response to these concerns, the new City of Toronto ultimately adopted Official Plan Amendment Number 62-98 and related Zoning By-law No. 136-1998. The Official Plan Amendment deleted former policies within the Official Plan which contemplated the processing of the subdivision plan applications in this area. The zoning by-law established new minimum lot areas for the community, which were based on the existing lotting pattern within the community.

Comments:

In response to this situation, we were instructed to appear on behalf of the municipality at the Municipal Board hearing. In preparation for that attendance we secured independent planning advice and consulted with both the concerned residents and representatives of the golf course. We understand that a number of the residents also obtained independent legal and planning advice concerning the matter.

Based on these discussions and our review of the file, it became apparent that it would be difficult, given the size of the lots, to persuade the Board to refuse any form of intensification within the existing community. Accordingly, with the concurrence of both the residents and the golf course, a mediated settlement of the matter was pursed with the assistance of the Municipal Board. As a result of this initiative, a revised plan of subdivision was ultimately agreed to by the parties and endorsed by the Board Member, Mr. Wilson Lee.

Pursuant to this mediated settlement it was agreed that the three existing residential lots controlled by F-F Construction and Mr. and Mrs. Sammut would be consolidated for the purpose of one development proposal. Under this proposal, three new residential lots would be created to the rear of the three existing dwellings fronting on Islington Avenue. The three new residential lots would take access off of Fairway Road. The proposal to extend a new municipal road along the edge of the golf course would not be proceeded with. The three new residential lots to be created would be substantially larger than the lots originally proposed.

In order to implement this revised proposal, a set of conditions to the draft plan was negotiated and will be attached to the Board Order approving the revised development. These conditions include a number of safeguards inserted at the request of the golf course and the residents.

In order to implement this mediated settlement, it will be necessary to amend By-law No. 136-1998 to exempt the subject properties. This exemption is necessary given that the areas of the revised lots would not conform with the proposed lot areas established by the new by-law. F-F Construction and the Sammuts have agreed not to appeal the coming into force of the by-law for the balance of the community if their properties are exempted from its provisions. We would recommend that Council support the granting of this exemption in order to implement the settlement mediated by the Municipal Board.

Conclusions:

Implementation of the settlement mediated by the Municipal Board will result in the approval of fewer lots, with larger lot areas, than originally proposed by the developers. The elimination of the proposed public road along the golf course will significantly reduce the impact of this intensification proposal on the balance of the existing community. We would therefore recommend that Council support this settlement and agree in principle to the provision of the exemption from By-law No. 136-1998 required in order for the implementation of this mediated settlement.

Contact Name:

Bruce C. Ketcheson, Reble, Ritchie, Green & Ketcheson, Solicitors

Tel: 622-6601; Fax 622-4713