City of Toronto  
HomeContact UsHow Do I...?Advanced search
Living in TorontoDoing businessVisiting TorontoAccessing City Hall
 
Accessing City Hall
Mayor
Councillors
Meeting Schedules
   
   
  City of Toronto Council and Committees
  All Council and Committee documents are available from the City of Toronto Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@city.toronto.on.ca.
   

 

February 5, 1998

 

To: Scarborough Community Council

 

From: Lorne Ross, MCIP RPP

Commissioner of Planning and Buildings

 

Subject: PRELIMINARY EVALUATION REPORT No. 2

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97058

2351 Kennedy Road Inc.

2351 Kennedy Road

Part of Lot 28, Concession 3

Agincourt Centre Community

Scarborough Agincourt

 

Purpose:

 

At its meeting on January 21, 1998, Scarborough Community Council:

 

(1) Approved my Preliminary Evaluation Report dated January 8, 1998 which recommended Scarborough Community Council convene a Public Meeting to consider the application for a mixed use residential/commercial development subject to Staff convening a Community Information Meeting following the submission of a Traffic Impact Study by the applicant;

 

(2) Requested the Interim Functional Lead, Planning, convene a meeting with Councillors Mahood and Shaw, planning staff and the applicant to discuss the proposal; and

 

(3) Requested a report to the next meeting of the Community Council addressing the minimum unit sizes for commercial space, appropriate parking standards for small commercial units and examples of where this type of development has been successfully introduced before; and further, the issue of deliveries and their impact on the surrounding residential area.

 

A meeting between Councillors Mahood and Shaw and the applicant has been scheduled for February 5, 1998. The remainder of this report addresses the issues raised by Community Council above.

 

Recommendations:

 

For the information of the Community Council.

Comments:

 

The applicant=s proposal:

 

The residential component of the proposal consists of 78 dwelling units averaging 70 m5 (750 square feet). The commercial component of the proposal consists of 930 m5 (10,000 square feet) of commercial gross floor area divided into 23 commercial units on the ground floor of the three storey building averaging 40 m5 (435 square feet). Nineteen of the commercial units are proposed to be sold in association with a dwelling unit under a live/work arrangement.

 

A total of 128 parking spaces are proposed including 33 surface parking spaces and 95 underground spaces. This translates into a parking ratio of 1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit to be located underground and 3.6 parking spaces per 100 m5 (1076 square feet) of commercial gross floor area to be conveniently located on the surface. The applicant is proposing commercial/office uses (excluding restaurants) for the commercial units which would ordinarily require a minimum parking requirement of 3 spaces per 100 m5 (1076 square feet).

 

Examples of Live/Work developments:

 

There are several examples of live/work developments throughout the City. The live/work concept has many variations across the City and generally consists of a dwelling unit in which a small component of floor area is devoted to business use by the occupant(s) of the dwelling unit. An example of such a project is located at 1552 Danforth Avenue. Robertson Village consists of 13 live/work townhouses and 30 traditional townhouses on the former Robertson Motors property (Danforth and Coxwell). The live/work townhouses front onto Danforth Avenue and are approximately 176 m5 (1900 square feet) in size including the commercial component of approximately 26 m5 ( 280 square feet) in the form of a store front at grade along Danforth Avenue.

One parking space is provided with each dwelling unit, however this project is located on the Subway line and additional parking is available along Danforth Avenue.

 

There are no recently built examples of live/work developments in the former municipality of Scarborough however two planned developments will contain live/work units. The Mondeo development at Birchmount Road and Ellesmere Avenue will contain 28 live/work units along Birchmount Road. The zoning applied to the lands permits dwelling units which may be combined with offices (excluding medical or dental offices), personal services, service uses, and agencies used and operated by one or more persons of a single household. Although details of the dwelling units have not yet been finalized, it is anticipated that the dwelling units will average 214 m5 (2300 square feet). No restrictions have been applied to the lands to limit the extent of floor area devoted for business use, however it is anticipated the ground floor of approximately 74 m5 (800 square feet) along Birchmount Road will be utilized for business purposes. A two car garage plus two tandem parking spaces on the driveway leading to the garage will be provided for each dwelling unit.

 

The Port Union Village is another location where live/work dwelling units will be built in the Village Common area along Port Union Road south of Lawrence Avenue. Plans for the live/work dwelling units have not been developed to the level of the Mondeo project however it is anticipated the concept will be similar and will create a vibrant community focus for the Village.

 

Minimum unit sizes for commercial space:

 

Recent commercial/office developments in the vicinity of the subject lands contain similar sized commercial units including those at 8 Glen Watford Drive (average unit size: 480 square feet), 4211-4231 Sheppard Avenue East (average unit size: 625 square feet), 4168 Finch Avenue East (average unit size: 498 square feet), and 4465 Sheppard Avenue East (average unit size: 393 square feet). None of these examples are subject to minimum unit size restrictions in the Zoning By-law.

 

Appropriate parking standards for small commercial units:

 

The examples of commercial/office developments provided above require parking based on the minimum general parking standards in the Zoning By-law (ie: 3 spaces and 10.7 spaces per 100 m5 of retail and restaurant gross floor area respectively), however two of the four examples provide a parking supply beyond the minimum requirements. Comparison of parking supplies with the office/commercial examples noted above would not be appropriate in this instance since none are live/work developments. The concept of live/work should inherently promote a reduction in the normal parking standards because the resident(s) of the dwelling unit may also work in the commercial unit.

 

The proposal under consideration is providing a parking supply for both the residential and commercial components. This will ensure sufficient parking is available under a scenario in which the residential and commercial components function as separate entities. If the minimum general parking requirement of 3 spaces per 100 m5 (1076 square feet) for commercial gross floor area and the guideline of 1.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit for apartments is applied to the proposal, 137 parking spaces would be provided which is comparable to the 128 spaces proposed.

 

The subject lands are located on a major arterial road well served by public transit. The applicant is currently preparing a Traffic Impact Study. Planning staff have requested the issue of parking supply be addressed in the Study to ensure sufficient parking is provided. Following submission of the Study, further discussions will be undertaken with the applicant and local councillors regarding the appropriate parking supply for the proposal.

 

Deliveries and their impact on the surrounding residential area:

 

Deliveries to the commercial component will be undertaken on the surface parking area. Because the surface parking is proposed in the form of a courtyard facing south toward an existing commercial development, no adverse impact on existing residential developments to the north and east is expected in terms of deliveries. Garbage storage will be located indoors in a common garbage storage room located at the south east corner of the building. Staff will ensure that the design and layout of the proposal will continue to reflect a functional design that provides for these services but does not impact on surrounding residential areas.

 

Contact Name:

 

Joe Nanos, Planner

(416) 396-7037

(416) 396-4265 Fax Number

nanos@city.scarborough.on.ca

 

 

Lorne Ross, MCIP, RPP

Commissioner of Planning and Buildings

 

   
Please note that council and committee documents are provided electronically for information only and do not retain the exact structure of the original versions. For example, charts, images and tables may be difficult to read. As such, readers should verify information before acting on it. All council documents are available from the City Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@city.toronto.on.ca.

 

City maps | Get involved | Toronto links
© City of Toronto 1998-2001