|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC FORUM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Planning Rationale Report
Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments |
This Planning Rationale Report is being submitted pursuant to the requirements of the Toronto Development Guide. It is divided into two parts. The first part provides what I believe to be relevant and factual background. The second part contains the evaluation of the project and the conclusions reached based, for the most part, on the matters raised in the first section.
| A. Existing Site Conditions |
Pianosi Construction is the owner of lands at the southwest corner of Scarlett Road and Fontenay Court. The site area is 76,230 square feet and is developed with a retail\office plaza containing the following uses and commercial gross floor area (as that term is used in the Zoning Code for the former City of Etobicoke:
|
- supermarket
- service retail uses
- offices
|
|
5,200 square feet
10,611 square feet
3,250 square feet
|
Approximately 112 surface parking spaces are provided on site, in addition to areas dedicated to servicing and other outdoor functions.
Access to and from the site is provided by way of driveways on Fontenay Court and Scarlett Road.
The owner is making application an application to the Zoning By-law to permit the construction of a mixed-use residential building, as follows:
|
- residential units
- retail space
- underground or covered parking
- storeys
|
|
250
15,608 square feet
320 spaces
19
|
Access to the visitor parking for the retail use and residential visitors will be provided from Fontenay Court and Scarlett Road roughly in the location of the existing driveways. Resident parking can be accessed from these two driveways and an additional driveway located on the west side of the site from Fontenay Court.
Other details of the proposal will be discussed as necessary later in this report.
It should be noted that the re-zoning application contains a considerable amount of information which will later form the base for the required Site Plan Control application. That application will be made at a later point in the process and will reflect the review of the re-zoning application by City staff.
The site is located in an area designated as one of the "Apartment Neighbourhoods" in the approved Official Plan. The relation of this application to the approved Official Plan will be discussed further below. Again, it is important to note that no amendment to the Official Plan is necessary for this application to proceed.
The site is zoned CPL by the Zoning Code for the former City of Etobicoke, which permits a "plaza form" of commercial development with a maximum lot coverage of 25% and a maximum height of 2 stories. The CPL zoning also permits "no residential use of any kind".
The Official Plan for the City of Etobicoke was amended from 2nd density residential to Commercial to permit the development which is on the lands today.
Neither the existing zoning or the previous Official Plan designation is consistent with the letter or intent of the new Official Plan for the City of Toronto.
| D. Physical Context and Surrounding Area |
Scarlett Road is one of the older roads in the City which provided access from the Village of Lambton, over the Humber River to the northern parts of the former Township of Etobicoke, including Thistletown and Claireville. In the late 1960's, in conjunction with plans for the Richview Expressway, Eglinton Avenue was extended across the Humber Valley from Mount Dennis and connected to the previously named Richview Sideroad.
As the result of these changes in road pattern and planning, the intersection of Scarlett Road and the new Eglinton Avenue became a location with excellent access to the regional road system and with the promise of even greater accessibility and capacity in the future.
In addition, the sites on the west side of Scarlett Road both north and south of Eglinton Avenue, enjoyed excellent views into the Humber River valley and, across the valley, a long view to downtown Toronto and surrounding neighbourhoods.
In addition, the planning for the then Borough of Etobicoke provided for a considerable distance between the properties oriented to Scarlett Road and the low density residential neighbourhood which developed further to the west.
As a result of these attributes, planning controls were changed to permit the higher densities. This is reflected in the earlier low rise buildings (6 stories) and subsequently further removed from the low density neighbourhood, in densities which were the highest then permitted in Etobicoke (and, typically, in other suburban areas of Toronto) of 60 units per acre, with no limit on floor area ratio.
These densities have been approved in the 4 building condominium project south of the Humber River in the former City of York and the other high-rise buildings north of the subject property along Eglinton Avenue and Scarlett Road.
Approvals in excess of the Etobicoke densities were given on the east side of the Humber Valley in the former City of York, taking advantage of similar attributes in that location.
Over the years, significant investments have been made in various locations along the Humber River which have created a regionally significant passive and active recreation area. Public facilities within this area include:
|
- Scarlett Woods Golf course;
- soccer fields;
- cricket pitches
- indoor and outdoor tennis facilities;
- James Gardens
- extensive bicycle paths giving access to the north and south
- walking paths
|
With regard to questions of mobility, both Scarlett Road and Eglinton Avenue West are 4 lane roads with appropriate turing lanes where required.
The Toronto Transit Commission provides excellent services on these roads.
The Eglinton Avenue 32 bus provides rush hour service (every 5 to 6 minutes) to the Eglinton West Station and the growing Airport commercial areas in Mississauga.
The Scarlett Road 79 bus service provides similar rush hour services to the Lawrence\Jane area and the Runnymede subway station.
Twenty-four hour service is provided on the Eglinton Line (including a late night service to Pearson airport) The Scarlett Road services stops after midnight.
| E. Other Application Requirements |
Several studies are being submitted with this application, as follows:
|
- detailed architectural plans, including site and context plans;
- conceptual landscaping plans;
- servicing study and storm water management report;
- community services and facilities study;
- shadow studies;
- pedestrian level wind studies.
- Transportation study.
|
Based on information we submitted to appropriate City staff, we were advised that no archaelogical studies are necessary for this site..
In the evaluation section below, I have noted where these studies have been taken into account in the preparation of this Planning Rationale Report.
It is generally accepted that “intensification”, “infill”, or “redevelopment” (which terms describe this proposal) are supported within the developed area of any significant municipality by provincial policies and, as will be discussed further below, by the City of Toronto Official Plan.
The relevant policies from the Provincial Policy Statement and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe are set out in the attached appendices.
| A.1 Provincial Policies Statement |
The Provincial Policy Statement came into effect on March 1, 2005 and applies to this application.
The Provincial Policy is basically a summary of current planning principles, emphasizing the need to use land efficiently by means of emphasizing that "intensification" and " redevelopment" will be the means to meet growth in the Province and, by extension, in Toronto.
It also points out that intensification should take place where existing and planned infrastructure and public facilities investments can accommodate such growth.
| A.2 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe |
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe has a policy direction similar to that expressed in the Provincial Policy Statement adopted pursuant to the provisions of the Planning Act. It is much stronger in stating that the plan “envisages increasing intensification of the existing built-up area” and describes the need for “transit-supportive densities”.
In this regard, the Plan identifies a "proposed higher order transit" connection to the airport which must be read as being along Eglinton Avenue, and states that "intensification areas" should be planned to, among other matters, "support transit, walking and cycling for everyday activities", and "generally achieve higher densities than surrounding areas", while achieving "an appropriate transition of built form to adjacent areas".
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe goes further than the Provincial Policy Statement in establishing population forecasts. It is relevant to note, in this context, the Toronto has not grown at the rate set out in this document, increasing at a rate of 0.9% as opposed to the average rate of 3.2% which would be required to be consistent to be consistent with this policy.
| A.3 Conclusions Regarding Provincial Policies |
It is apparent that the subject proposal is consistent with, and supportive of, the two provincial policy documents referred to above.
In particular, this proposal is taking place on land that is underutilized in an area of higher density development and, for that reason alone, is an excellent location for intensification.
In addition, there are adequate public facilities in the area to support the additional population which would result from this proposal.
Finally, the location of this proposal adjacent to walkway and bicycling paths, with regular transit service and the fact that it would retain useful commercial facilities all, when taken together mean that the development would directly support the objective of supporting transit, walking and cycling for everyday activities.
| B Official Plan for the City of Toronto |
| B.1 Section 4.2 and Section 3.1.2 |
As noted above, the lands covered by this application are designated "Apartment Neighbourhoods" in the approved Official Plan.
Section 4.2.1 sets out the uses permitted in the area and included in them are apartment buildings and "small scale retail, service, and office uses that serve the needs of area residents.
The proposal is consistent with this section of the Plan.
Sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 deal with "Development Criteria in Apartment Neighbourhoods". Of the two, 4.2.2 is the section that would deal with this type of proposal since Section 4.2.3 specifically refers to the type of development permitted "on some sites containing an existing apartment that has sufficient space to accommodate a new building…".
In Section 4.2.2, there are eight criteria set out which are to be met.
- the objective of this criterion is met by this proposal. The new buildings area located and massed to provide, or rather, maintain the transition sought by this criterion. The height of the buildings reflects an established height along Scarlett Road from the lands south of the Humber River to the area north of Eglinton Avenue. Properties which do not front on Scarlett Road have been built to lower heights (6 and 10 stories) before the low scale residential neighbourhood begins.
- The objective of this criterion is to "limit shadow impacts on properties in adjacent lower-scale Neighbourhoods". Using well-established principles with respect to the time of day and the time of year where shadow impact is examined, there is no shadow impact on "adjacent lower-scale neighbourhoods" resulting from this proposal.
- this section deals with sun and shadow and wind conditions for "pedestrians on adjacent streets, parks and open spaces". With respect to the wind conditions on the pedestrian level, tests are currently being conducted by Theakston Engineering. In the event mitigating measures are required, they will be incorporated in the site plan approval application.
With respect to the Official Plan policies, reference is made "adequately limiting any resulting shadowing of …open spaces, having regard for the varied nature of such areas" and "minimizing any additional shadowing …on neighbourhood parks as necessary to preserve their utility".
It should be noted in this regard that Official Plan does not contemplate an absence of shadowing from new proposals particularly in areas where the higher scale buildings are permitted.
Finally, with respect to this issue, the term "sky view" is used and it is deemed important to maintain that quality in any area. In this case, the proposed design would serve to maximize the availability of "sky view" both within the site and from near-by lands by the use of a "two tower" approach.
In addition, given the low scale neighbourhood to the west and the open area of the Humber Valley to the east, the addition of this building into that environment will not significantly impact on that attribute.
- the project has been designed to provide "sufficient off-street motor vehicle and bicycle parking for residents and visitors", according to the advice given us by our traffic and parking consultant. This will, of course, be subject to the review of the Technical Services staff.
- all parking and service areas will be covered and not visible from the street. Because changes in grade, some ramps will be visible from the street, particularly the ramp leading to the visitor and retail parking from Fontenay Court.
- regarding indoor and outdoor recreation space for residents, the City's requirements will be met.
- the objective of having ground floor uses that "enhance the safety, amenity and animation of adjacent streets and open spaces", as noted above, there will be a retail component fronting on Scarlett Road which should serve to meet this objective.
Along the north part of the site, the access to the residential component will include an extensive landscaped area and the pedestrian entrance will be available through the area directly on to Fontenay Court and to Scarlett Road through the retail component.
- with regard to the principle of universal design, access to the site and to the vast majority of the units, will accommodate people with physical disabilities.
|
| B.2 Conclusions regarding the Official Plan |
The proposal conforms to the principles of the Official Plan designation "Apartment Neighbourhoods" with regard to scale and use. In addition, it meets or exceeds the objectives set out in the criteria for evaluating developments in these areas.
There are many other provisions of the Official Plan which are relevant to this type of development, relating to intensity of use encouragement of transit use and related matters, that are similar to, and, in fact, implement, the policies of the provincial documents discussed above.
| C Other Planning Concerns |
| C.1 Impacts on Adjacent Properties |
Generally speaking, the impact of this proposal on other properties in the "Apartment Neighbourhoods" district are limited to an obstruction of the views which some of the apartment occupants now enjoy over the existing two storey plaza. This is to be expected in an area like this and, in any case, there are many views available since the area is not intensively developed with high coverage high-rise buildings.
The most significant change will occur along the lot line shared by the subject property and the property at 11 Fontenay Court. Currently, there is a retaining wall along the property line and the units on the north side of 11 Fontenay court look into parking and service areas of the existing plaza.
The current plan calls for that area to be replaced with a largely landscaped entry area, with a minimal amount of space for handicapped parking and a ramp leading to the underground parking.
A complete traffic report has been submitted with the application and will be shared with residents. No comment would be appropriate until the results of the review of the applicant's submission, is completed.
The application of Section 37 of the Planning Act has been done in many ways throughout the City of Toronto. These have included simple cash payments, the provision of facilities and, in some cases, the securing of design features which were deemed to be important.
A significant benefit of this project comes from the replacement of the existing, probably outmoded, form of retail now on the site, in the new building. Parking will be provided in a structure, hidden from view, unlike the current plaza which relies solely on surface parking.
In the original concept for this site, the owner did not wish to provide any retail on the site and I agree that it is not an ideal site for such a use, even if it is admitted that this type of retail should be somewhere in the neighbourhod. The two main problems on this site is that there is not a lot of pedestrian traffic and people driving to site must find the location of covered parking.
Nevertheless, and being aware of the desire of local residents and the local councillor, the owner is willing to take the risk associated with this commercial space and the less than ideal location.
On that basis, I believe the inclusion of retail use in the project should be seen as adequate to satisfy Section 37 requirements.
The proposal which is the subject of this application meets the intention of "good planning" and should be approved for the following reasons:
|
- it is consistent with the letter of Provincial Planning objectives and policies;
- it conforms to the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan with particular reference to the type of development contemplated under the "Apartment Neighbourhoods" policies;
- the site is excellently served by public facilities, including passive parks, active parks and schools;
- the proposal will replace and upgrade the existing commercial facilities while, at the same time, meeting public objectives regarding intensification and the efficient use of land;
- it is well served by public transit, providing direct access to the subway system and to the growing commercial areas in the vicinity of the airport;
- it supports the eventual construction of a rapid transit line in the Eglinton Corridor.
|
 
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
