Improving Community Consultation – Housing Action Plan

Toronto City Hall
100 Queen Street West
Toronto, ON M5H 2N2
Attention: Nancy Martins

RE:PH16.1 – Housing Action Plan: As-of-Right Zoning for Mid-rise Buildings on Avenues and Updated Rear Transition Performance Standards – Final Report

Dear Councillor Gord Perks and Members of the Planning and Housing Committee,

FoNTRA requests

  • that consideration of the report be deferred to allow for proper communication, engagement and consultation for its proposals and recommendations.

Here is why:

FoNTRA supports the objectives of the Housing Action Plan however the detailed recommendations introduce many changes to current zoning and add new recommendations which affect many communities and in different ways across the City including modification to previously approved proposals (PH8.4 Housing Action Plan: Mid-rise Buildings Rear Transition Performance Standards Review and Update- Status Report. – June 2024)  

While the staff report was posted as per City Committee procedure on October 23, the draft Zoning Bylaw that includes zoning provisions, zoning maps, and height maps, was only made public late yesterday afternoon (October 28), i.e. a day and a half before the Committee meeting. This is contrary to Committee procedure, and clearly unfair to the public, allowing inadequate time to review and examine the final recommendations. Even the normal week’s notice is too short for complex items like this.

While FoNTRA sent out information to its member RAs about 16.1 Housing Action Plan: As-of-Right Zoning for Mid-rise Buildings on Avenues and Updated Rear Transition Performance Standards – Final Report, we noted that the draft Bylaw was missing. The late arrival of the Bylaw yesterday made it impossible to have the needed consultation with our members.

At the June 2024 meeting of the Planning and Housing Committee, FoNTRA requested that drawings to explain the new proposals be provided for the Fall consultations, as many members of the public are not able to visualize the impacts of what is proposed. This was not done. An important part of this visualization exercise is to demonstrate the space requirements for a residential building with double loaded corridor.  Is the proposed building envelope deep enough for such a building, or is it excessive, so that the building can be set back farther from the rear lot line that abuts the Neighbourhoods area?

In the meantime, we make one specific bylaw recommendation:

  • That Provision 18. D for SS4 and 19.D for SS5 re rear yard setbacks of properties abutting the back yards of residential neighbourhoods be amended to be the same as the (larger) setbacks in provision F for both SS4 and SS5. The back yards of buildings in neighbourhoods are also important open spaces.

Geoff Kettel
Co-Chair, FoNTRA

Cathie Macdonald
Co-Chair, FoNTRA


CC: Mayor Olivia Chow
Caroline Samuel, Director (Acting), Zoning and Secretary-Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment, City Planning Division
John Duncan, Senior Planner, Zoning Section, City Planning Division
Emilia Floro, Director, Urban Design, City Planning Division
Rong Yu, Project Manager, Urban Design, City Planning Division
Jeffrey Cantos, Director (Acting), Strategic Initiatives, Policy & Analysis, City Planning Division
Kyle Pakeman, Project Coordinator, Official Plan & Legislation, City Planning Division