July 7, 1998

 To:Toronto Community Council

 From:Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, upon application by Peter Prattas, Miller Thomson, Barristers and Solicitors, 20 Queen Street West, Suite 2500, Toronto, Ontario, M5H 3S1, on behalf of 1213763 Ontario Inc.

 Subject:50 Prince Arthur Avenue - Application No. 197026 for Official Plan and Zoning By law Amendments and Site Plan Approval to permit eight townhouses behind an existing 19 storey apartment building (Midtown)

  Purpose:

 To recommend refusal of this application in its current form, and to request the applicant to submit a revised application which responds to the planning issues and concerns outlined in this report and provides an adequately increased separation distance between the proposed new development and existing low density residential development adjacent to the westerly edge of No. 50 Prince Arthur Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

 Not applicable

 Recommendations:

 1.That this application be refused in its current form.

 2.That the applicant be requested to revise his current application to respond to the concerns outlined in Section 6.0 of this report.

 History:

 On March 1, 1968, Council of the former City of Toronto passed site specific By-law 64-68 to permit the existing apartment building on the subject site.

 On April 15, 1979, the City expropriated certain lands to the north of the apartment site for purposes of creating a public park, known since then as Taddle Creek Park.

 Last fall, the applicant sought minor variances from the Committee of Adjustment to permit a similar development proposal to that which is the subject of this report. At the time, the Committee of Adjustment refused the application on the basis that "this proposal exemplifies a significant departure from the original concept that was developed approximately thirty years ago and that the proposed development is excessive and would have significant impact on the surrounding neighbourhood". The applicant has appealed the Committee's refusal to the Ontario Municipal Board. To date, no hearing has been scheduled. In the interim, the applicant has filed the current application for amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

 On February 19, 1998, the Toronto Community Council adopted my Preliminary Report (dated February 18, 1998) and requested at the same time, that "the owner be advised of the Toronto Community Council's serious concerns respecting the setbacks of the two most westerly townhouse units to the existing Lowther Mews, and the proximity and potential effects of the overall development on Taddle Creek Park".

 A public meeting was held on May 4, 1998, notes of which are attached as Appendix A. The majority of those in attendance opposed any additional development on this site.

 On May 27, 1998, Toronto Community Council deferred the applicant's request to permit removal of three mature trees from the subject site to facilitate the proposed infill project, until such time as the development application has been dealt with by City Council..

 Background:

 1.Application

 As shown on the attached Map 1, the applicant proposes to build eight, 3-storey (9.3 metre high) townhouses on what is now a landscaped open space and a private 36 space surface parking lot serving the tenants of the existing 19-storey rental apartment building on the lot . To compensate for the loss of surface parking, it is proposed that 12 below grade parking spaces be added to the existing 163 spaces in the 2-level below grade parking garage on the lot.

 Features of the project are shown on Map 1 and include:

 -a 6 m building setback from the northerly property line adjacent to Taddle Creek Park;

-a 5.5 m building setback from the westerly property line adjacent to the Lowther Mews;

-a 0.78 m building setback from the westerly property line adjacent to 64 Prince Arthur Avenue where currently exists a two-and-a-half storey office building; and

-vehicular access from Prince Arthur Avenue and pedestrian walkways through the site from Bedford Road as well as from Prince Arthur Avenue.

 The townhouses will require removal of three mature trees. The proposal is for improved landscaping of the entire site, including new tree planting and creation of pedestrian short-cuts and visual connections through the site.

 2. Public Meeting

 On May 4, 1998, a public meeting was held which was attended by approximately 35 members of the public, who -with only one exception- expressed their opposition to the proposed infilling project. Major concerns centred around:

 -the loss of private open space between the apartment building and Taddle Creek Park;

-the loss of all surface parking for the existing apartment building;

-the lack of street frontage or "address" for the new development:

-the proposed development's proximity to existing houses to the west as well as to Taddle Creek Park;

-the requested increase in building coverage and density; and

-the lack of perceived public benefits resulting from the proposal.

 Notes of the Public Meeting are attached as Appendix A.

 3.Site and Surrounding Area

 The site is located in the Annex, on the north-west corner of Prince Arthur Avenue and Bedford Road and contains a 19-storey, 150 rental unit apartment building, constructed in 1968, pursuant to site-specific By-law 64-68.

 To the north is Taddle Creek Park. To the west is a three storey townhouse development known as the Lowther Mews, and to the south a 2.5-storey commercial building at 64 Prince Arthur Avenue. This property has a site specific by-law which would permit a building of about 9 storeys in height. On the south side of Prince Arthur Avenue is a 12-storey condominium at 55 Prince Arthur. On the east side of the street, at 25 Bedford Road, an 8 storey rental apartment building is located.

 4.Planning Controls:

 4.1Official Plan:

 The Annex Part II Official Plan designates the southerly portion of the site where the apartment building is located, as "Medium Density Residence Area 'A'" permitting residential development at a maximum density of 2 times the lot area. The northerly portion of the site where the new town houses are proposed, is designated "Low Density Residence Area"permitting residential development at a maximum density of 1 times.

 4.2Zoning By-law:

 By-law 438-86 , as amended, zones the southerly portion of the site R2Z2.0 permitting residential development at a maximum density of 2 times the lot area, whereas the northerly portion is zoned R2Z1.0 where residential density is limited to 1 times the lot area.

 The site is also subject to site-specific By-law 64-68 which permits the apartment building at a density of 2.7 times the entire lot area.

 4.3Site Plan Control:

 This application is subject to site plan control. The applicant has applied for Site Plan Approval.

 Comments

 5.0Reasons for this Application:

 The application requires amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law because the proposed residential density for the apartment portion of the site is 3.53 x, and 1.72 x for the townhouse portion of the lot, which exceed the densities permitted in both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

 6.0Reasons not to Approve this Application in its current form:

 From a land use planning and urban design perspective, the proposed 0.78 m and 5.5 m building setbacks from the westerly lot line are insufficient The relationship of the proposed new development to the existing homes in the Lowther Mews ought to be improved. This may be achieved by providing a building setback from the westerly lot line equal to the approximately 11 metre building setback of the existing Lowther Mews. Such increased building setback would improve the distance separation between the existing and proposed development and increase the amount of sky light available to the Lowther Mews townhouses.

  Contact Name:Feodora Steppat

City Planning Division, North Section

Telephone:392-7740

Fax:392-1330

E-mailfsteppat@city.toronto.on.ca

   Beate Bowron

Acting Director, City Planning, Toronto Community

 (p:\1998\ug\uds\pln\to981661.pln) - st

APPENDIX A

  Notes of Public Meeting

 Subject:50 Prince Arthur

Date of meeting:May 4, 1998

Time:7:00 - 9:00 pm

Location:Huron Street Public School

 Attendance:Michael Mizzi (City Planning Department)

Mal Williams(City Planning Department)

Feodora Steppat (City Planning Department)

Leo de Sorcy (City Planning Department)

John Adams (Ward Councillor)

Ila Bossons (Ward Councillor)

representatives of the Applicant including his architect and landscape architect

approximately 35 members of the public

 Michael Mizzi introduced the purpose of the meeting. Subsequently, the applicant's representatives outlined the details of the application

 Generally, the development proposal was received by the audience with a great deal of scepticism and, with one exception, there was no expression of support. Numerous concerns were raised with the proposal including the loss of the existing private open space between the apartment building and Taddle Creek Park, elimination of all surface parking for the existing apartment building, the lack of street frontage or "address" for the new development, the proposed development's proximity to existing housing to the west as well as to Taddle Creek Park, the requested increase in building coverage and density, and the perceived lack of public benefit resulting from the proposal.

 Loss of Private Open Space and Surface Parking Lot:

 Many in the audience were concerned that the proposal would not only replace surface parking but all of the private open space, including a number of mature trees north of the apartment building. It was noted that, albeit in private ownership, this open space visually complements and forms part of the L-shaped public open space of Taddle Creek Park. It was also noted that provision of this open space was a major condition for approving the original application to permit the higher density of the apartment building. At the time, a deal was struck which should remain intact. The proposal would result in apartment residents losing almost all of their open space amenity on site. Also seen as a problem was the loss of surface parking for apartment residents, several of whom expressed a preference for surface as compared to underground parking.

 Lack of Street Frontage/Address:

 Concerns were raised with the location of the proposed townhouses behind the existing apartment building, thereby creating residential units without street frontage and an identifying street address. The proposed pedestrian access from Bedford Road was seen as unsafe particularly at night time.

Setbacks:

 The proposed setback for the townhouse units from the adjacent residential development to the west and from Taddle Creek Park was seen as insufficient. Loss of privacy and view, as well as over-shadowing of the existing yards to the west were seen as problematic. The proximity of the townhouses to the park was seen as an encroachment on the public open space. The proposed gate allowing residents of the townhomes direct access to the park was seen as diminishing the 'publicness' of the park, turning it into the 'backyard' of the townhouses.

 Density:

 It was pointed out by several members in the audience that the existing 2.7x density of the apartment building already exceeds the 2x density generally permitted by the Official Plan in high density residence areas. The additional development would exacerbate this non-conformity. Furthermore, if the townhouse units were to be severed from the apartment lot, the resulting net densities for the townhouse development would be approximately 1.5x and for the apartment building approximately 3.5x compared to existing as-of-right zoning permission of 1x and 2x, respectively. Not only were the proposed net densities perceived as out of character with the prevailing densities in this area, but also feared to set a precedent encouraging similar development on private open spaces surrounding tower-in-the-park development elsewhere in the Annex.

 The prevailing opinion among those in attendance was that the lot is not big enough to accommodate any additional development, and that the existing private open space amenities should remain an integral part of the development as it exists today.

 Public Benefit:

 Several members in the audience posed the question as to what public benefit might result from the proposal. The applicant's response was that the new homes would provide additional 'eyes on the park',which may be expected to increase safety for park users. Members in the audience doubted the need for more 'eyes on the park' pointing out that more than half the apartments in the existing structure already face and overlook the park.

 Taddle Creek:

 Concerns were raised respecting the water table of Taddle Creek, the underground water course traversing this area. The applicants assured those concerned that they had examined this matter and were confident that the new homes would not be affected by the Creek's water table.

APPLICATION DATA SHEET

 Confirmed Municipal Address:50 Prince Arthur Avenue.

 PLANNING CONTROLS (For verification refer to Chief Building Official)

 PROJECT INFORMATION