KINGSTON – The province’s planning appeal body rescinded a decision from earlier this year against a pair of high-rise building projects in the downtown core.

In response to a request for review of the decision from the company that wanted to build the projects, Homestead Land Holdings, the Local Planning Appeals Agency also ordered a new hearing about the appeal.

The company had wanted to build a 19-storey building at 51-57 Queen St. and a 23-storey building at 18 Queen St. and 282 Ontario St.

The projects were opposed by the Frontenac Heritage Foundation.

In mid-August, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ruled the projects were not compatible with the area.

But in a letter to those involved in the hearing, Maria Hubbard, associate chair of the LPAT, wrote that there had been errors made in the original ruling.

“I have concluded that this is a rare instance in which the exercise of my review power is warranted,” Hubbard wrote in a letter on Monday. “The request has established a convincing and compelling case that there are significant errors of law in the Tribunal’s interpretation of the (official plan) and if these errors had not been made, it is likely that the Tribunal would have reached a different decision.

“These errors, if considered on an individual basis, may not be sufficient to warrant a review,” Hubbard added. “However, the cumulative effect amounts to a manifest error that exceeds the high threshold set out in … to authorize the exercise of my discretion to rescind the decision and order a rehearing.”

Homestead took the city to the former Ontario Municipal Board, now the LPAT, on the grounds that it had taken too long for the city to issue the needed approvals.

The company was seeking to have the tribunal order the approvals — including an official plan amendment and a site-specific zoning bylaw — approved by the city.

In September 2017, Homestead and the city reached a deal that would see the height of the two buildings lowered, the podiums redesigned, and the addition of a municipal art gallery.

The city argued before the LPAT that the company had agreed to changes that would better incorporate them into the area.

But in her 45-page decision in August, LPAT member Marcia Valiante wrote that while the project’s final proposal lowered the height of the towers and provided for a municipal art gallery, it did not conform to the city’s official plan “because they would create undue adverse effects that have not been sufficiently mitigated, specifically visual intrusion and architectural incompatibility.”