|
Scarborough Civic Centre
150 Borough Drive
Scarborough, Ontario Canada M5V 3C6
Fax: 416-396-4301
Phone: 416-396-7288
Novina Wong
City Clerk
City of Toronto
February 26, 1998
To: Budget Committee
From: City Clerk
Subject: Manson Property at 5421 Lawrence Avenue East
Recommendation:
The Scarborough Community Council, on February 18, 1998, approved the following reports:
(1) (February 6, 1998) from the Commissioner, Works and Environment, Scarborough, recommending that this report be forwarded to Budget Committee as part of the 1998 Corporate Budget process and considered in conjunction with Part II; and further, that all reporting be through the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services; and
(2) (February 6, 1998) confidential report from the Commissioner, Works and Environment, Scarborough, respecting the foregoing.
The Scarborough Community Council reports, for the information of Budget Committee, having directed that the Interim Lead, Real Estate, Scarborough, continue negotiations with the owners of the other properties involved in the Village Common issues.
Background:
The Scarborough Community Council had before it a Part I report, dated February 6, 1998, from the Commissioner of Works and Environment, Scarborough, and a Part II, confidential report, dated February 6, 1998, from the Commissioner of Works and Environment, Scarborough, respecting the Manson Property at 5421 Lawrence Avenue East.
Mr. William A. Dempsey, Honorary Secretary, Centennial Community and Recreation Association, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.
Interim Contact,
Scarborough Community Council.
Margaret O =Neil
Copy of Transmittal Sent to: W. A. Liczyk, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
L. Ross, Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough and
Interim Functional Lead, Planning
M. A. Price, Commissioner of Works and Environment, Scarborough
R. P. Mayr, Real Estate Division, Scarborough
February 6, 1998
To: Scarborough Community Council
From: Michael A. Price, P. Eng., FICE
Commissioner, Scarborough Works & Environment Department
Subject: Manson Property at 5421 Lawrence Avenue East PART 1
Purpose:
To identify a process that is private and/or public that will ensure the early and safe demolition of the existing industrial building on the Manson property located on Port Union Road and Lawrence Avenue East in Scarborough, and also to address the issues of site remediation and future land use. The property =s address is 5421 Lawrence Avenue East, and is approximately 9.3 hectares in size.
Financial Implications:
The question of funding from City reserves or accounts is addressed separately in a confidential report which is to be considered as Part II of this report.
Recommendations:
That this report be forwarded to Budget Committee as part of the 1998 Corporate budget process and considered in conjunction with Part II. Further, all further reporting be through the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development.
Background:
Scarborough Council, at its last meeting in 1997, directed the Acting City Manager to report in January 1998 on what action the City can take to expedite the safe demolition of the building and cleanup of the property.
The site at 5421 Lawrence Avenue East, known as the Manson site and formerly as Johns Manville, was opened approximately 50 years ago in February 1948 as a plant for the production of asbestos-related materials. The plant ceased production in February 1995. It is known that the existing building and site contain asbestos material which will require considerable remediation. The land is actually owned by a company that is in receivership and all activities on the site are controlled by the mortgage holder, Penfund Management Limited. Penfund has hired a firm known as Parallel Management Inc. to work with potential developers and identify what work needs to be done on the site, in the short term to ensure that it is secured and safe, and in the long term to address the question of remediation and development. Penfund has an agreement with Yellow Moon Homes (the Conservatory Group), that requires decommissioning of the site and demolition of the building to create a land parcel ready to accept residential land redevelopment.
Yellow Moon Homes had submitted a Zoning By-law change and a Plan of Subdivision which the previous City of Scarborough Council turned down and as a result the developer has proceeded to the Ontario Municipal Board for a ruling on their application.
Currently the building is boarded up, the site is fenced off with a chain link fence, and security patrols check the site periodically.
Discussion:
There are several activities going on in the general area surrounding the Manson site that are related to development by the private and public sectors. The Toronto Region Conservation Authority is now proposing to create a waterfront park and are undertaking an environmental assessment at the Port Union Road/Lake Ontario area. The Conservation Authority is buying land that is needed for the waterfront park and the Manson property incorporates a water lot into Lake Ontario which is needed for the Conservation Authority work. The Conservation Authority would like to start work in the Fall of 1998, and need to either acquire or expropriate the particular property that is associated with the Manson site. It should be noted that the water lot is not part of the Subdivision Application.
Scarborough Council approved a project known as the Port Union Village Common which is the creation of a Village Centre around an access road to the Lake Ontario waterfront under the CNR tracks. The land necessary to create the Village Common was to be obtained through both land acquisition and by dedication through Plan of Subdivision, part of which was to come from the Manson lands. The City has been negotiating and has acquired the Baker property on the east side of Port Union Road for the Village Common project that was to be matched on the west side of Port Union Road by lands dedicated from the proposed Plan of Subdivision on the Manson lands. There is still property to be acquired on the east side of Port Union Road. See attached plan.
In the latter part of 1997 servicing for a development on the east side of Port Union Road necessitated constructing a sanitary sewer across the southerly portion of the Manson property in an easement, and this involved the removal of asbestos encountered within the limits of the sewer easement.
1. Community Concerns
Given the fact that the surrounding communities were very concerned regarding the existence of asbestos in the building and in the ground on the Manson lands, a meeting was arranged in the community on January 19, 1998 to hear the concerns from the three community associations that represent the area, namely the West Rouge Community Association (WRCA), the Centennial Community Recreation Association (CCRA), and the Port Union Village Homeowners Association (PUVHA).
The WRCA would ideally like to see all of the land turned into a park, however they agreed that it does not seem likely. They would like to see the City, the Province, and the Federal Government join forces and take the Manson lands under collective stewardship. They would be prepared to see a section along Lawrence Avenue East used for retail uses to provide a tax base. Secondly, a parking lot should be constructed to service the Village Common and the lakefront development, and lastly, the most polluted portions of the Manson property should be covered in 1.7 metres of soil and just used for park purposes. The WRCA is opposed to residential housing going into any of the area of the Manson site.
The CCRA acknowledges that it is very unlikely that all of the lands will be turned into park, and that the issue of back taxes and cleanup costs make this a complicated issue. They would like to see the City carry out a baseline audit of the lands to determine a contingency plan and determine which areas of the site can be cleaned up and which areas of the site should be left alone. Their major concern is with public safety, during the current situation with the existing boarded-up building, during the demolition of the building, and during the cleanup of any of the remaining lands. They acknowledge that more retail outlets are needed within their community, and therefore it is possible that the Lawrence Avenue frontage of the Manson site could be used to create this type of development and thus generate funding from the sale of the land and the development which would offset the cost of purchase. Their preference would be for the City to become the stewards of the land through whichever means possible so that the demolition process is controlled totally by a level of government.
The PUVHA would ideally like to see all of the lands used for park, however their main concern is that they do not wish to see the empty factory remaining on the site for the next three or four years. Their feeling was that if a park is not realistic and waiting for it to happen means that the empty factory remains, then they would like to see the land developed so that an early demolition of the building can be achieved.
There are general concerns that the building is old and falling apart, and if any part of the building does collapse then asbestos dust could be freed into the atmosphere and distributed throughout the community. They wanted assurance that the City would be able to take steps to have the building secured and safe and, if necessary, carry out the work itself and bill the landowner.
On January 26, 1998 there was a fire in part of the old existing factory which clearly indicates that the building is a safety hazard in the community and that as far as the public is concerned, the sooner the building is safely demolished, the better.
The community was adamant that there needs to be a methodology for communicating activities for upcoming steps in the process to not only the Community Associations but also to the general public in the area. Similarly, they felt there should be a liaison or ad hoc committee created to address the future uses of the Manson property should it come under the stewardship of the City, and failing that, to address the development proposals and timing by any potential developer.
The CCRA also put forward the suggestion that if the City was to obtain ownership of the site, then the proposed location of the Village Common could be moved westerly onto the Manson property and therefore save any future acquisition costs for the Village Common that were to have occurred on the east side of Port Union road.
To ensure there is continued communication between the community representatives and the City, it was agreed that a meeting will be held on Monday evening, February 23, 1998, at 7.30 p.m. in the Port Union Community Centre Library and that this committee would be called the Manson Site Liaison Committee. It is proposed that the City staff contact person for this project be Lorne Ross, Interim Functional Lead - Planning.
2. Future Actions
The developer, Yellow Moon Homes, has taken the application to the OMB, however, no date has been set for the preliminary hearing and therefore there is no indication at the present time as to when a decision will be made by the OMB. The mortgage holder, Penfund, has indicated that they will only spend money developing the site when they know there is approval for the development application. They will not, therefore, pursue the demolition of the building and its associated studies and procedure until they know there is a development approved. Similarly, Penfund will not spend any more money addressing the cleanup of the site to whatever degree required until they know that there is a development that can proceed in order to ensure a return on any investment in site cleanup.
While the existing mortgage owner and their agreement with the developer, Yellow Moon Homes, contemplates residential and commercial development on the site, nothing is proceeding at the moment and presumably until there is an OMB decision, there is always the possibility for other applications to be brought forward.
3. City of Toronto Involvement in the Process
When the private sector proposes development of land, the municipal level of government gets involved in the planning process, and the servicing of the proposed land use, all as prescribed under the Planning Act. In this particular case the City did not approve the proposal presented to it and therefore the applicant can either submit a revised development proposal or wait for an OMB decision on the current proposal. The City of Toronto would also approve and issue demolition permits for the existing factory building, and while an application was originally submitted by Penfund, no further action is contemplated until they are sure that development can proceed. The City would be retaining, at the developer =s expense, a qualified consultant for a peer review of the proposed demolition process and appropriate site cleanup. The Ministry of the Environment will be involved in the remediation plan and the demolition of the existing Manson buildings. To this effect the Ministry of the Environment has written to City staff requesting that they be advised of any action proposed on the site so that they can be involved at the appropriate time.
The City can play one of two roles in the future of the Manson site. It can continue to play a reactive role to whatever happens on the site and use existing legislation and by-laws to control the process and ensure that any work is carried out safely and in accordance with all appropriate legislation. Alternatively, the City can take a proactive approach and attempt to obtain control of the land so that it will be totally responsible for the demolition of the buildings and the cleanup to whatever degree necessary on the remaining part of the Manson site. Whichever option is chosen, there is definitely a need to coordinate with, and communicate to, the residents and businesses that are within the community impacted by any activity on the Manson site.
4. Conclusions
As indicated in more detail in Part II of this report, I believe that the City of Toronto should initiate steps to take a proactive approach to solving this issue in the West Rouge Community. It is proposed that Planning staff will take over the role of communicating with the Associations and residents, as well as being the lead contact for the Manson Site Liaison Committee.
Contact Name:
Michael A. Price, P. Eng., FICE
Commissioner, Scarborough Works & Environment
Telephone: 396-7139
Fax: 396-5684
e-mail: price@city.scarborough.on.ca
Concurred in as to financial matters,
Michael A. Price W. A. Liczyk
Commissioner Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer
Scarborough Works & Environment Department
|
