March 18, 1998

To: Scarborough Community Council

From: Lorne Ross, MCIP, RPP.

Commissioner of Planning and Buildings

Subject: PRELIMINARY EVALUATION REPORT

Official Plan Amendment Application SP98002

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98001

Subdivision Applications T98002 to T98004 inclusive

Ontario Hydro (Graywood Investments Ltd.)

Part of Lots 33 & 34, Concession 2

Part of Lot 33, Concession 3

Part of Lots 33 & 34, Concession 4

Highway 401 to south of McNicoll Avenue

L=Amoreaux and Sullivan Communities

Scarborough Wexford, Scarborough Agincourt

Purpose:

The above applications have been filed by Graywood Investments Ltd., purchaser of the Ontario Hydro Corridor from Highway 401 to south of McNicoll Avenue (excluding that portion of the corridor adjacent to the First Alliance Church on the north side of Finch Avenue), to enable development of 356 single-family and 310 semi-detached units, or 666 units overall on 511 lots. Other features of the Graywood proposal include 3.3 kilometres (2 miles) of new neighbourhood streets on 18.5 metre (60 foot) road allowances, rear yard extensions into the corridor for 38 lots on Glen Springs Drive, and three commercial blocks of approximately 0.3 hectare (0.8 acre) each on Finch and Sheppard Avenues. Approximately 1.7 hectares (4 acres) of neighbourhood parkland would be provided for the expansion of Bridlewood and Vradenburg Parks and to connect North Bridlewood and Collingsbrook Parks. An additional 3.4 hectares (8.4 acres) would be set aside for other open space and new or expanded stormwater management facilities. Together with the above noted parkland, these lands represent approximately 15% of the total lands being purchased by Graywood.

Recommendations:

1. That staff process the applications in the normal manner and convene community information meetings in consultation with the Ward Councillors.

2. That the applicant be required to submit transportation, servicing reports and an environmental and ecological survey of the corridor.

3. That staff submit a further report not later than the June 24, 1998 meeting of the Scarborough Community Council, on the results of the above reviews and consultations.

Background:

1. Following a year of land use review of the corridor which the City commenced in May, 1996, the former Scarborough City Council in September, 1997 approved Official Plan Amendment 1001 which added an Open Space designation to the existing Ontario Hydro Corridor designation, together with Special Policy Areas to provide for Council=s future consideration of applications for Place of Worship at three locations on the basis of specific applications. The amendment was approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on December, 1997 and has been referred to the Ontario Municipal Board by Ontario Hydro. A pre-hearing conference on the amendment has now been scheduled by the Board for Friday, May 1, 1998 in the Scarborough Civic Centre, with the full hearing anticipated this fall.

2. The First Alliance Church has joined in the appeal, objecting to the Special Study Area designation applied to corridor lands abutting its site on the north side of Finch Avenue which are being purchased from Ontario Hydro separately, and which are not included in the Graywood applications. Those corridor lands and church site at the north-west corner of Finch Avenue East and Bridletowne Circle are now the subject of separate Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications by the church for which a Preliminary Evaluation Report is also included on this agenda.

3. The Official Plan currently provides that within the Open Space designation a variety of uses such as recreation or amusement areas, private parks, golf courses, arenas, swimming pools or cemeteries would be permitted; uses which may not necessarily be compatible in every instance with abutting, predominantly low density, residential developments.

Comments:

1. The single family lots proposed would generally have frontages of 11 metres (36 feet), versus the typical 15 metre (50 foot) lot common in the adjoining neighbourhoods, and are generally 30 to 47 percent smaller in area. Similarly, semi-detached dwellings would be situated on either 7.6 metre (25 foot) or 8.25 metre (27 foot) wide parcels, versus the typical 9 metre (30 foot) semi-detached parcel common to the area, and are generally 15 to 26 percent smaller.

2. The zoning requested by the applicant proposes a reduction in the City=s standard 6 metre (20 feet) minimum front yard setback requirement applying to the neighbouring subdivisions, to 3 metres (10 feet), with garages to be setback a minimum of 5.5 metres (18 feet). Similarly, the minimum rear yard setback requirement proposed is 6 metres (20 feet), compared to the City=s standard minimum 7.5 metres (25 feet).

3. While some aspects of the Graywood proposal reflect the proposals set out in the June 12, 1997 staff report on the Ontario Hydro Corridor land use review initiated by the former Scarborough City Council in May, 1996, staff are very concerned with the density, lot sizes and setbacks currently proposed which are not consistent with the established fabric of the abutting neighbourhoods. In some cases, this is partially a result of the width of the corridor, the need to address the Consumers Gas pipeline and the provision of new roads. More compatible lot sizes can and should be achieved, however, by widening the proposed frontages and reducing the overall number of lots to achieve a better fit with the established character of the area.

4. A pathway system is proposed running down the west side of the corridor, over the pipeline easement that Consumers Gas is in the process of purchasing separately from Ontario Hydro. This walkway responds, in part, to the strong interest expressed last year by area residents, the cycling community and staff for a new linear trail system along the corridor. Much of the walkway currently proposed, however, will run between rear, likely fenced, lot lines of adjacent homes. Many stretches have very poor connectivity to the existing and proposed neighbourhoods. This represents a serious public safety concern, as anyone threatened mid-point on the walkway would have very few opportunities for escape. As well, the present configuration of the walkway, limited to a linear pipeline corridor only, may not provide the best linkages between schools, parks or new roads within the new neighbourhoods. Lastly, the expectation will be that the City install and maintain such a system, the implications of which must be considered.

Scarborough Community Council and the community now have an ideal opportunity to consider adjustments to the current pathway proposal with Graywood, and achieve a design which optimizes its benefits to existing and future residents.

5. Similarly, the current neighbourhood park proposal needs to be discussed, particularly the inadequacy of the small extension proposed to Vradenburg Park. There may also be other options for enhancing green spaces on the corridor. The community is looking to Scarborough Community Council to seize this opportunity and commence negotiations with Graywood toward achieving an optimum, perhaps continuous, open space system along the corridor.

6. From the land use review last year, it is clear that neither the community nor Planning staff supported additional commercial uses on the Finch and Sheppard frontages of the corridor as is now proposed. The appropriate use of these frontages is best discussed and negotiated here, locally, prior to consideration by the Ontario Municipal Board.

7. The proposed new road system to serve the Graywood proposal consists of both cul-de-sacs and through roads. The City needs, through a review and processing of the applications, to determine the optimum function and location of both types of roadway should development proceed.

8. Throughout the land use review of the corridor, the issue of drainage and past flooding was sufficiently important that the former Scarborough City Council authorized the City=s own municipal services assessment completed by CH2M Gore and Storrie last September. We now have a firm development proposal against which various stormwater and environmental enhancements can be identified and tested. Stormwater management options must be identified, and any benefits from the capture of overland runoff from the corridor, currently impacting adjacent residential areas, determined. As well, do opportunities exist for renaturalization of the Bendale Branch of Highland Creek in the northern portion of the corridor or for improving water quality, erosion and flooding downstream? Will this development impact on the longstanding concerns of the community with respect to insufficient water pressure? From this, all concerned will then be in a much better position to focus on just what level and type of development the corridor can most reasonably sustain.

9. In terms of how to proceed from here, the option is available to refuse the Graywood applications without further consideration as they are clearly contrary to the intent of Official Plan Amendment 1001.

It appears that Graywood=s intention is to refer these applications to the Board in the near future for consolidation with the hearing on Official Plan Amendment 1001, and in the case of a refusal they most likely will be referred in order for Graywood to advance its current proposal as a preferable alternative vision for the corridor. Should the applications be refused at this time without further consideration, and appealed, Scarborough Community Council would be prevented from exercising a very key role in the planning process. Full technical and public review of the proposal at the local level would be precluded, affording the City no planning position on the applications to present and argue before the Board.

In my view it is absolutely essential that Scarborough Community Council seize this opportunity to develop your own response to the Graywood proposal for presentation to the Ontario Municipal Board, and I cannot recommend the refusal option to you at this time.

10. It is clearly in the City=s best interests, and those of the neighbourhoods that would receive the Graywood development, that there be full public consultation and technical review of the proposal, particularly with respect to desirable modifications to the Graywood plans and conditions of any approval. This option is also available to you.

A direction to process the applications for further discussion does not mean a reversal or reconsideration of Official Plan Amendment 1001. Indeed, such a process will benefit all parties, particularly the City, by putting the greatest amount of information in everyone=s hands and facilitating the greatest amount of dialogue at the local level. It particularly would indicate Scarborough Community Council=s commitment to minimizing the complexity, length and costs of a protracted Board hearing, and ideally, to avoiding the need for a hearing altogether.

This is a unique opportunity for the City, and I strongly recommend this approach for your consideration.

Contact Name:

Rod Hines, Principal Planner

(416) 396-7020

(416) 396-4265 Fax Number

hines@city.scarborough.on.ca

Lorne Ross, MCIP, RPP

Commissioner of Planning and Buildings

RGH/KS