To: Chairman and Members Etobicoke Community Council
From: Karen V. Bricker, MCIP, Commissioner of Urban Development
Meeting
Date: January 21, 1998
Subject: AMENDMENTS TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE
CITY OF ETOBICOKE
West Side of Islington Avenue, Between Orrell Avenue and Riverbank Drive
File No: Z-2256 (Ward No.3 - Kingsway-Humber)
____________________________________________________________________________________
1. PURPOSE:
To review the lot area requirement for certain properties located on the west side of Islington Avenue, between Orrell Avenue and Riverbank Drive.
2. FUNDING SOURCES, FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS AND IMPACT STATEMENT:
There are no funding sources and financial implications.
3. RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that a Public Meeting be held in connection with the proposed Official Plan and Zoning Code amendments with respect to increasing the minimum size of lots in the area located on the west side of Islington Avenue, between Orrell Avenue and Riverbank Drive. Should Council decide to proceed with amendments, staff should be directed to finalize the draft amendments attached to this report, for adoption by Toronto Council.
4. BACKGROUND:
On September 8, 1997, Etobicoke Council refused an application by F & F Construction Ltd. for draft plan of subdivision approval to create five lots which complied with the existing (R1) zoning standards and Official Plan (nos. 1394 and 1396 Islington Avenue). (from 15.24 m (50 ft.) to 18.3 m (60 ft.) in frontage and from 558.15 m2 (6,008 sq.ft.) to 694 m2 (7,470 sq. ft.) in area.) The applicants have appealed Council’s decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Council further directed Urban Development staff to bring forward an appropriate amendment to the Zoning Code to increase the minimum lot size in the area west of Islington Avenue, between Orrell Avenue and Riverbank Drive (Exhibit No. 1).
5. COMMENT:
5.1 Official Plan and Zoning Code
The area under review comprises a total of twenty-four (24) lots. The Official Plan (Section 5) designates the subject lands Low Density Residential, subject to Site Specific Policy No. 22 (Exhibit No. 2).
This policy permits the re-subdivision of the lots in these blocks to proceed on an incremental basis, provided that a comprehensive plan is approved that would not jeopardize the rights and enjoyment of owners who chose not to re-develop their lands.
Council’s direction to increase the minimum required lot size however, effectively precludes any re-subdivision of these existing lots. The City Solicitor has advised that it would be appropriate to amend the Official Plan to delete special Site Policy 22.
The lands are zoned First Density Residential (R1) which permits single, detached dwellings on lots having a minimum frontage of 15 m (50 ft.) and lot area of 557 m2 (6,000 sq. ft.). The lots fronting on Islington Avenue vary from 12 m (40 ft) to 28.6 m (94 ft) in width, with most lots having a frontage of 15 m (50 ft). The majority of these lots are approximately 119 m (390 ft) deep. The remaining lots fronting on Fairway Road are more in keeping with the (R1) zoning standards (Exhibit Nos. 3 & 4). In order to increase the development standards for these lands, an amendment to the Zoning Code would be required.
6. CONCLUSION:
A review of the lots in the area indicates that the majority of the 21 deep lots with frontage on Islington Avenue have an average area of slightly greater than 1800 m2 (19,378 sq. ft.). In accordance with the Etobicoke Council direction to increase the permitted lot area requirements for lots within these blocks, the minimum lot area requirement identified in the attached draft by-law is 1800 m2.
In the event that Toronto Council supports the increased lot area requirements, staff should be directed to finalize the amending Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment. Drafts of each document are attached as Exhibit Nos. 5 and 6 respectively.
7. CONTACT NAME:
Lorna Hahn, Tel: (416) 394-8232, Fax: (416) 394-6063
Planner, Development and Design
Respectfully submitted,
Karen V. Bricker, MCIP
Commissioner of Urban Development
Z-2256\report
January 8, 1998
The property owners who abut the Perry Crescent road allowance have approached the City about acquiring the stub-end of Perry Crescent, in order to prohibit the proposed road from extending to Orrell Avenue. As the stub-end would be too small to create a stand-alone development lot, the Realty Services is reviewing the disposition of the subject city owned land with Transportation Staff.
Exhibit No.24
PRESERVATIVE ZONING CRITERIA - Excerpts from 1974 Study
(Used to determine merits for specific zoning provisions for the subject area, with updated assessment in bold)
1. Architectural and/or historical merit of buildings, where condition and age as qualities contributing to a unique historic continuity.
"The application of this criterion will primarily be in the interest of ensuring the continuance or stability of existing residential areas on the basis of the quality of building construction, size of the building and complementary use of the lot area. The buildings and respective lots in the subject area on the whole, are significantly different from present residential construction in these respects, and therefore appear to qualify for special consideration on this basis."
2. Development History
This area was originally developed largely between 1940 and 1953. .....based on the status of past applications, "it would appear that this residential area is a stable and an economically viable area, where owners are willing to sustain those costs necessary to buy and maintain the properties, this is evidenced by a high level of maintenance of individual properties and by the apparent success of home owners in withstanding redevelopment pressures." Current evidence include the applications for draft plan of subdivision approval and severance approval, both of which were strongly opposed by the community.
3. Municipal responsibilities in the preservation of a site.
"With respect to the area west of Islington Avenue between Orrell Avenue and Riverbank Drive it would appear that any additional zoning restrictions would be interpreted as reinforcing existing property values thereby diminishing the possibility of redevelopment and in turn preserving the stability of the area. a review of the history of development in the subject area has revealed, however, that there has been relatively little threat to the stability of the area and it is expected that the continuing private responsibilities in maintaining the area will help ensure this stability."
4. Physical features of a particular site and the design and use of public and private open space.
"A number of the residential lots in the subject area either face or back onto the Islington golf club and the Mimico Creek which can be considered an uncommon residential amenity. Additionally private open space areas are very attractive and well-maintained."
5. Social character of an area.
"It may be that a given residential area exemplifies a particular life style of offers accommodation to a population of certain age, family or income characteristics. In light of the current housing situation it is desirable to maintain residential options for perspective home buyers and in this respect zoning provisions to preserve residential stability would be desirable respecting any lands which represent a stable, low density residential area offering single family accommodation to a wide range of people."
6. Neighbourhood support for special zoning.
"While it is generally recommended that special preservative zoning be enacted only in those neighbourhoods that indicate clear support for this action, it is always difficult to ascertain just what the views and concerns of all the residents will be on such a matter". In the case of this neighbourhood, as demonstrated by past and recent dealings with development applications , there is a strong recorded interest on the part of the majority homeowners in special zoning provisions for their area.
Exhibit No. 5
Table Showing Existing Lot Dimensions and Effect of Proposed Lot Size Increase
|
|
EXISTING |
PROPOSED
X = Not comply c = comply |
|
Municipal Address |
Lot front
m (ft) |
Lot depth m (ft) |
Lot area m2(sqft) |
Lot front
15m
(50') |
Lot front
17m
(55') |
Lot area
1 394 m2
(15,000 sf) |
Lot area
1 858 m2 (20,000 sf) |
|
Between Perry Crescent and Fairway Road |
|
#7 Orrell
|
33.83
(111.00) |
20.27
(66.50)
|
685.74
(7382) |
c |
c |
x |
x |
|
road allowance |
20.00
(66.00) |
20.27
(66.50) |
400.18
(6900) |
c |
c |
x |
x |
|
#91 Perry Cres |
33.83
(111.00) |
20.27
(66.50) |
685.74
(7382) |
c |
c |
x |
x |
|
#1416
Islington |
27.42
(67) |
32.6
7,169 |
665.69
7,169 |
c |
c |
x |
x |
|
#1412(*)
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1410
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1408
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1406
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1404
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1402
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1400
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1398
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1394
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1392(*)
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1388(*)
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1386(*)
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.4
(395) |
1834.90
(19750) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
Between Fairway Road and Riverbank Drive |
|
#1 Fairway |
15.24
(50) |
37.80
(124) |
575.98
(6200) |
c |
x |
x |
x |
|
#3 Fairway |
15.24
(50) |
37.80
(124) |
575.98
(6200) |
c |
x |
x |
x |
|
#1380
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1833.80
(19739.5) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1378
Islington |
18.29
(60) |
120.33
(394.79) |
2200.56
(23687.4) |
c |
c |
c |
c |
|
#1376
Islington |
12.19
(40) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1467.04
(15791.6) |
x |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1374
Islington |
12.19
(40) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1467.04
(15791.6) |
x |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1372
Islington |
12.19
(40) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1467.04
(15791.6) |
x |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1370
Islington |
12.19
(40) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1464.04
(15791.6) |
x |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1366
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1833.78
(19739.5) |
c |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1364
Islington |
14.91
(48.92) |
120.33 (394.79) |
1794.19
(19313.1) |
x |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1362(N)
Islington |
15.57
(51.08) |
120.33 (394.79) |
1873.40
(20165.8) |
c |
x |
c |
c |
|
#1362(S)
Islington
|
13.08
(42.92) |
120.33
(394.79) |
1624.77
(17489.5) |
x |
x |
c |
x |
|
#1384
Islington |
15.24
(50) |
44.80
(147) |
682.82
(7350) |
c |
x |
x |
x |
(*) subject of application for land divisions
EXHIBIT No. 2
Site Specific Policy No. 22
Lands west of Islington Avenue, generally between Orrell Avenue and Riverbank Drive.
Either block may be redeveloped independently of the other through resubdivision of existing lots on the basis of a comprehensive plan which ensures an overall orderly development of additional low density residential lots.
Notwithstanding that a complete land assembly may not be possible from the outset, any comprehensive plan and subsequent redevelopment shall ensure that the individual rights and enjoyment of those property owners who may not initially choose to be part of such redevelopment scheme are not adversely affected as a result thereof.
To ensure the comprehensiveness of any future resubdivision for low density residential purposes, partial redevelopment of either block shall be permitted in conformity with a comprehensive plan for the respective block only where necessary for construction, servicing or financing purposes and/or where a complete assembly is unattainable as the result of property owners who may not initially choose to participate in any redevelopment scheme.
