Settlement Offer for Church Redevelopment Near Station

Summary#

City Council approved confidential directions to the City Solicitor for an Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) hearing about a redevelopment at 25 Old York Mills Road. Council also allowed the public release of the applicant’s settlement offer. The goal appears to be to set the City’s position at the tribunal and consider resolving the appeal.

Key points:

• The owner (Agricola Finnish Lutheran Church) applied to change the Official Plan and zoning to redevelop its site near York Mills Station. The application was appealed to the OLT after the City did not decide in time.
• Council had earlier directed staff to oppose the original application; this decision updates the City’s directions for the hearing.
• The applicant’s public settlement offer proposes an 11‑storey mixed‑use building with about 103 homes, a place of worship with assembly space, and a child care centre.
• The offer reduces the building by one storey from the original plan, adds more family‑sized homes, increases step‑backs (upper floors set farther back), and keeps a 3‑metre setback from TRCA lands (Toronto Region Conservation Authority).
• The offer removes “commercial” uses (spaces are described as assembly space tied to the church), adds two short‑term pick‑up/drop‑off spaces in the garage, shows 82 parking spaces (4 accessible), more bicycle parking, and a redesigned driveway to Campbell Crescent.
• The offer includes conditions before any final OLT order, such as a Transportation Demand Management plan, engineering clearances, and possible infrastructure upgrades and a holding (H) symbol on zoning.
• What is unclear: The exact instructions Council gave remain mostly confidential. The record does not clearly state whether Council agreed to settle on the applicant’s terms.

What it means for you#

• Nearby residents

  • Day‑to‑day impacts will not change until the OLT makes a decision or a settlement is finalized.
  • If the proposal is approved as offered, the current 2‑storey church would be replaced by an 11‑storey building with a church and assembly space, a child care centre, and about 103 homes, including more two‑ and three‑bedroom units.
  • Revised step‑backs and a 3‑metre setback from TRCA lands could lessen massing next to the valley.
  • Traffic and access changes could include two short‑term pick‑up/drop‑off spaces inside the garage and a re‑angled driveway on Campbell Crescent; signal timing at Yonge/York Mills/Wilson could be optimized (the applicant would post security for this during site plan approval).
  • Parking would be about 82 spaces on site, with increased bicycle parking. A Transportation Demand Management plan would aim to reduce car trips (for example, by promoting transit and cycling).

• Congregants and community users

  • The church use would continue in new space labeled as a place of worship with assembly areas. No stand‑alone commercial uses are proposed in the offer.

• Parents

  • A child care centre is proposed, with an outdoor play area shown. The number of child care spaces is not stated in the supplied material.

• Future residents

  • Homes would be near frequent transit at York Mills Station. The offer mentions measures like bike‑share capacity and possible pre‑loaded transit cards for new residents (details would be set in a Transportation Demand Management plan, subject to City approval).

Note: This Council decision mainly concerns legal directions. Actual construction, services, and traffic changes depend on the OLT outcome and detailed approvals.

Expenses#

No new City spending beyond existing approved budgets is identified in the report.

• City costs: Legal and staff time related to the OLT are covered in the current-year budget. No separate fiscal estimate is provided.
• Developer costs (if the offer terms are accepted by the OLT):
  • Possible relocation of a hydro pole at the applicant’s cost.
  • Security for potential traffic signal timing work; funds returned if not implemented.
  • Any required municipal infrastructure upgrades before lifting a holding (H) symbol, along with financial securities.
• Other costs: Not specified in the public material.

Proponents' View#

Based on the applicant’s public settlement letter:

• The revised plan lowers the height from 12 to 11 storeys while adding more homes, including more family‑sized units, near rapid transit. This could support housing goals.
• A 3‑metre setback to TRCA lands is maintained to address floodplain and natural area protection.
• Building step‑backs and inset balconies on some floors would reduce the apparent massing and overlook.
• Traffic and operations were adjusted (underground pick‑up/drop‑off spaces, a safer driveway angle, added accessible parking, more bike parking), with further studies promised (parking utilization, vehicle maneuvering).
• A Transportation Demand Management plan would promote transit, carpooling, cycling, and could include a bike‑share station and pre‑loaded transit cards to reduce car trips.
• Clarifying there are no commercial uses (assembly space is accessory to the church) reduces the need for large truck loading.

Opponents' View#

Concerns noted in the record and issues referenced in the applicant’s letter include:

• Scale and fit: Some residents have said the building is too tall for the area. Although reduced, the proposal remains mid‑rise/high‑rise in a sensitive valley setting.
• Traffic and access: Questions remain about pick‑up/drop‑off operations, the redesigned driveway on Campbell Crescent, and whether parking (about 82 spaces) is sufficient.
• Natural hazards: The site is near TRCA‑regulated lands and a floodplain; while a 3‑metre setback is proposed, long‑term impacts and maintenance may still be concerns.
• Land use change: The offer proposes redesignating the site to Apartment Neighbourhoods (rather than the current Neighbourhoods). This could raise questions about precedent and fit with nearby low‑rise areas.
• Reliance on future conditions: Many commitments (e.g., final zoning language, transportation studies, TDM measures, infrastructure upgrades, possible holding symbol) would be settled later “to the satisfaction” of City officials. It is unclear how strongly these will mitigate impacts until detailed approvals are complete.
• Transparency: The core Council directions remain mostly confidential, so the exact City position is not fully known from the public material.