September 3, 1998

To:Toronto Community Council

From:Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services

Subject:Final Report on Application 197011 for Site Specific Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and Site Plan Approval to permit three residential condominium buildings with a total of 375 units at 195 to 253 Merton Street (Ward 22)

Purpose:

To recommend approval of this application to permit three 12-storey residential condominium buildings on this 14,417 square metre parcel, 6,193 square metres of which form part of the Beltline and are to be acquired by the City as part of the Beltline linear park.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable

Recommendations:

1.That the City Solicitor be requested to submit a draft by-law to give effect to amendments to the former City of Toronto Official Plan substantially as set out below:

add to Section 18 a new subsection as set out below:

"Lands known as 195 to 253 Merton Street - Parcel 3

See Map 18.-- at the end of this Section.

a)Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Plan, City Council may pass by-laws applicable to the lands indicated on Map 18.-- to permit the erection and use of three buildings containing residential uses provided:

(i)the total residential gross floor area does not exceed 32, 103 square metres;

(ii)the total number of dwelling units does not exceed 375;

(iii)none of the three buildings contains more than 125 dwelling units."

2.That the City Solicitor be requested to submit a draft by-law, in consultation with the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to amend the former City of Toronto Zoning By-law 438-86, as amended, as it affects the lands known municipally as 195 to 253 Merton Street, shown on Map 1 attached to this report, so as to:

a)permit the construction and use of three residential buildings on the site provided that:

(i)none of the three residential buildings contains more than 125 dwelling units;

(ii)the total residential gross floor area of all three residential buildings does not exceed 32,103 square metres;

(iii) no part of any of the three residential buildings above grade extends beyond the building envelopes shown on the roof plan on Map 4;

(iv)a minimum of 112 parking spaces plus a minimum of 15 visitor parking spaces will be provided for each of the three residential buildings; and

(vi)none of the three residential buildings exceeds 39.3 metres in height, excluding any mechanical penthouses.

(vii)a minimum of 75 bicycle parking spaces will be provided for the occupants of all of the buildings and 19 bicycle parking spaces for visitors for all of the buildings.

b)exempt the site from the provisions of Zoning By-law 438-86 , as amended, identified by the Chief Building Official in the letter dated July 3, 1998, and forming part of Appendix C to this report.

3.That prior to the introduction of Bills in Council, the owner shall have entered into an agreement authorized under the provision of Section 37 of the Planning Act. The Section 37 Agreement should contain provisions which

a)acknowledge the increase in height and density which permit Council to require the Section 37 Agreement;

b)require the owner to provide on the day before issuance of the first building permit for the proposed development a Park Contribution of $ 473,000.- (value as of June 1998, the agreement will provide for escalation to the current dollars depending on timing of construction), such Park Contribution shall be used for the purposes of permanent improvements to the Beltline Park, as well as parkland acquisitions and improvements within the boundaries of Ward 22, in accordance with the recommendation of the Director of Development and Support, Toronto Area Parks and Recreation;

c)require that the details of the Park Contribution shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Director of Development and Support, Toronto Area Parks and Recreation, and shall be set out in the Section 37 Agreement in accordance with existing arrangements for former CN properties on the south side of Merton Street;

d)require the owner to ensure that the City has permanent access over the right-of-way as described in Section 9.3 of this report, and such right-of-way be in accordance with the terms and conditions of a typical right-of-way for public access. The owner will be responsible for all costs and work associated with maintaining the retaining wall located within the right-of-way, including repair, replacement and maintenance of the wall. Further, any work on the development site which necessitates closure of the right-of-way shall occur between October and April and all efforts shall be made to minimise the length of the closure. The right-of-way shall be returned to its original condition on completion of any work;

e)require the owner to provide on the day before issuance of the first building permit for the proposed development a Letter of Credit in a form satisfactory to the City Treasurer in an amount sufficient to cover the costs of implementing the Environmental Remediation Plan and Program in accordance with the Report on the Environmental Site Assessment for Lots Nos. 154 & 160 Merton Street, prepared by Candec Consultants Limited, dated June 18, 1997 as augmented by the letters from Candec Consultants Limited, Reference No. 97/0188, dated May 29, 1998 and June 24, and undertaking the Basic Park Construction as shown on Landscape Plan L-1 through L-3, prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, dated-stamped received by Urban Planning and Development Services on June 19, 1998.

4.Subject to execution of the Section 37 Agreement, and in view of agreements made therein securing the provision of a Parkland Contribution referred to in recommendation 3(b) above, that City Council authorize an amendment to Chapter 165, Article 1, Conveyance of Land for Parks Purposes, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, to exempt therefrom the development of lands to the extent permitted by the By-law Amendment.

5.That the owner be requested to apply for revised municipal numbering to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services prior to filing a formal application for building permit.

6.That the owner be advised:

a)that the storm water run-off originating from the site should be disposed of through infiltration into the ground and that storm connections to the sewer system will only be permitted subject to the review and approval by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services of an engineering report detailing that site or soil conditions are unsuitable, the soil is contaminated or that processes associated with the development on the site may contaminate the storm run-off;

b)of the need to receive the approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for any work to be carried out within the street allowance; and

c)of the City's requirement for payment of a service charge associated with the provision of City containerized garbage collection.

d)of the need to revise his application at least three weeks prior to introduction of Bills in Council, so as to comply with the minimum bicycle parking requirement of the former City of Toronto Zoning By-law 438-86, as amended.

7.That the owner be required to submit to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services dimensioned plans of the development for the purpose of preparing site specific exemption by-laws and such plans should be submitted at least 3 weeks prior to the introduction of Bills in Council;

8.That as a condition of City Council approval, the owner enter into an Undertaking under Section 41 of the Planning Act requiring that:

a)Develop and maintain substantially in accordance with plans

(i)the proposed development (including all landscaping related thereto) shall be undertaken and maintained substantially in accordance with the plans and drawings submitted with this application, namely Plans No. A1 to A5, date stamped received on April 20, 1998, prepared by E.I. Richmond Architects, and Landscape Plans L-1, L-2 L-3, and L-5 dated March 21, 1997, date-stamped received on June 19, 1998, and Landscape Plan L-4, date stamped received on April 20, 1998, prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, all as on file with the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services;

b)Garbage

(i)that the owner be required to provide and maintain in each of Buildings A, B and C a garbage room at least 25 square metres in size and a recycling room at least 10 square metres in size and install and maintain a stationary compactor unit, to City specifications, in each garbage room;

c)Loading

That the owner be required to

(i)provide and maintain 1 Type G loading space on the site to serve each of Buildings A, B and C, with a generally level surface and access designed so that trucks can enter and exit the site in a forward motion;

(ii)provide and maintain a concrete base pad with a slope not exceeding 2% adjacent to the front of each Type G loading space for the storage of at least 4 compactor containers on collection day;

(iii)construct a Type G loading space and all driveways and passageways providing access thereto to the requirements of the Ontario Building Code, including allowance for City of Toronto bulk lift and rear bin vehicle loading with impact factors where they are to be built as supported structures;

(iv)construct all driveways and passageways providing access to and egress from the Type G loading space with a minimum width of 3.5 metres (4 m where enclosed), a minimum vertical clearance of 4.3 metres and minimum inside and outside turning radii of 9 m and 16 m;

(v)provide and maintain level service connections between garbage and recycling rooms and the Type G loading space for the transporting of container bins;

d)Parking

That the owner be required to:

(i)provide and maintain a minimum of 122 parking spaces on the site to serve each of Buildings A, B and C, including at least 107 parking spaces for the exclusive use of the residents of each building and at least 15 spaces for the residential visitors to each building, for a total minimum of 366 spaces;

(ii)construct the access ramps to the underground garage with a slope not exceeding 5% within 6 m of their intersection with the driveways from Merton Street and not exceeding 15% along the remaining portions;

e)Transformer Vaults

(i)that the owner be required to provide space within the development for the construction of any transformer vaults, Hydro and Bell maintenance holes and sewer maintenance holes required in connection with the development;

f)Studies required by Civic Officials

(i)that the owner be required to submit to and have approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, prior to the introduction of Bills in Council, a Noise Impact Statement in accordance with City Council's requirements;

(ii)that the owner be required to have a qualified Architect/Acoustical Consultant certify, in writing, to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services that the development has been designed and constructed in accordance with the Noise Impact Statement approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(iii)that the owner be required to provide, maintain and operate the noise impact measures, facilities and strategies stipulated in the plan approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(iv)that the owner be required to submit, prior to the issuance of a building permit, a grading and drainage plan for the review and approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

g)Other Conditions for Approval

(i)that the owner be required prior to the release of or clearance from any agreements registered against the subject property:

-to implement the Environmental Remediation Plan and program in accordance with the Report on the Environmental Site Assessment for Lots Nos. 154 &160 Merton Street prepared by Candec Consultants limited, dated June 18, 1997, as augmented by the letters from Candec Consultants Limited, Reference No. 97/0188, dated May 29, 1998, and June 24 and Landscape Plan L-1 through L-3, prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited dated March 21, 1997, date stamped received by Urban Planning and Development Services on June 19, 1998;

-to implement the Tree Management and Protection Plan and Measures, set out on Landscape Plans L-1 through L-3, prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associate Limited, dated March 21, 1997, date stamped received by Urban Planning and Development Services on June 19, 1998;

-to implement the Soil and Groundwater Plan set out on Landscape Plans L-1 through L-3 prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, date stamped received by Urban Planning and Development Services on June 19, 1998; and

(ii)that the owner be required prior to entering onto the Beltline Park, to obtain an Occupation Permit from the Commissioner of Community & Economic Development Services.

Background:

1.Application:

Application received April 9, 1997 from E.I. Richmond Architects on behalf of the owner, Orchid Hills Construction Ltd., 80 Tiverton Court #300, Markham, Ontario, L3R 0G4.

2.Public Meeting

On July 17, 1997, a Public Meeting was held , notes of which are attached to this report as Appendix A. The meeting was attended by 16 area residents whose concerns focussed on building height, density and site design, as well as the proposal's impact on traffic.

3.Revised Application

In response to concerns raised at the public meeting and by civic officials, the applicant has revised his proposal as follows:

a)The proposed density has been reduced from 4.14 x to 3.9x the developed area of the lot (ie. the "development parcel" which excludes the area of the lot to be conveyed to the City to complete the Beltline Park).

b)In keeping with the discussions contained in the preliminary report (May 22, 1997), the density bonus assumed for the belt line portion of the site has been reduced from the originally proposed 1.54x to 1.2x.

c)The number of proposed dwelling units has been reduced from the a total of 399 to 375 units.

d)The number of parking spaces has been reduced from 432 to 381.

e)The building and site design have been changed as follows to comply with the Merton Street Urban Design and Development Guidelines, adopted by City Council on October 28/29, 1996 (see Appendix B):

i)the building has been set back above the 5^th floor;

ii)setbacks from the side lot lines have been increased to 7.5 metres;

iii)a 2 metre front yard setback and a 3 metre rear yard setback has been achieved; in addition, the setback from the Merton Street property line has been increased to 3 metres above the 5^th floor of all three apartment buildings;

iv)the facade has been changed to include expression lines;

v)taller building elements have been redesigned to maximize high level views from the north; and

vi)the number of curb cuts to permit access to the buildings has been reduced from 11 to 2.

f)Landscape plans have been revised and submitted to the satisfaction of the Director of Development and Support, Toronto Area Parks and Recreation.

4.Site and Surrounding Area

The site fronts on the south side of Merton Street, between Yonge Street and Mount Pleasant Road. The parcel consists of 14,417.05 m2 in total, of which the 6,193 m2 rear portion forms part of the Beltline and is to be conveyed to the City as part of the Beltline linear park. The remainder of 8,223.43 m2 has frontage on Merton Street and is to accommodate the proposed development.

Merton Street between Yonge Street and Mount Pleasant Road is in the process of transformation from an industrial and office commercial street to one predominantly residential in character.

Mount Pleasant Cemetery abuts the site to the south. For the property immediately to the west, a site plan approval application for 17 townhouses has recently been approved. Immediately adjacent to the east are two commercial properties followed by the City's public works yard and the Dominiom Coal lands. To the north are a number of low and medium rise commercial structures and an approved 8-storey (21 m) residential development at 260 Merton Street (formerly known as 254 Merton Street).

5.Planning Controls

5.1Official Plan:

The 8,223.43 m2 development portion of the site along Merton Street is designated by the former City of Toronto Official Plan as "Low Density Mixed Commercial Residential Area" where commercial and residential uses up to 3 times the lot area are permitted. This part of Merton Street is also subject of Section 18.367 of the former City of Toronto Official Plan which requires that any development be in accordance with Development Guidelines adopted by City Council on October 28/29, 1996 and attached hereto as Appendix B.

The Beltline portion of the site is designated "Open Space" where no residential uses are permitted.

5.2Zoning By-law:

The development portion of the site is zoned CR T3.0 C2.0 R2.0 which permits a mix of commercial and residential uses at a density of up to 3.0 times, provided neither the commercial nor the residential use exceeds 2.0 times the lot area. The height limit is 21.0 metres. An amendment to this Zoning is in process, as discussed in Section 5.5 below.

The Beltline portion of the site is zoned G for park purposes.

5.3Site Plan Control:

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

5.4Beltline Agreement:

The Beltline Agreement between the City and the owner of the Beltline, originally the Canadian National Railway, identifies the portion of the subject parcel with frontage onto Merton Street as "Merton Street Development Property Three" and the portion to its rear as "Merton Street Beltline Lands Three". In return for conveying the Beltline Lands Three to the City, thereby facilitating the completion of the Beltline linear park, the Agreement permits the owner to "include the Merton Street Beltline Lands Three in the calculation of lot area in development applications respecting Merton Street Development Property Three". Owners whose properties do not include part of the Beltline, may not use the adjacent Beltline in calculating the density permitted on their lot.

The Agreement also stipulates that the owner undertake certain improvements to the Beltline before it is assumed by the City for park purposes.

5.5Merton Street Study and Development Guidelines

Following extensive public consultation and detailed examination of potential impacts of future redevelopment of this part of Merton Street, Council of the former City of Toronto, at its meeting on October 28/29, 1996, adopted the recommendations of the final report (dated August 23, 1996) to amend the Official Plan to permit residential as well as commercial development at a maximum density of 3.0 times , provided such development is consistent with a comprehensive set of Urban Design and Development Guidelines which were adopted by Council of the former City of Toronto at the same time (see Appendix B).

With respect to the Zoning By-law, Council of the former City of Toronto endorsed my recommendations to change the current CR T 3.0 C2.0 R2.0 to CR 2.0 C2.0 R2.0 while maintaining the current height limit of 21 metres for both sides of the street. This will, in effect, limit single-use as well as mixed use development to an as-of-right density of 2 times. By-law 1997-0551 implementing Council's decision in this regard was passed by Council of the former City of Toronto on October 6/7, 1997, but was subsequently appealed to the OMB by the applicant. To date, no hearing date has been set.

6.Recent Planning Approvals and Applications on the South Side of Merton Street

In recent years, site specific by-laws were passed by City Council to permit the development of a 15 storey apartment building on 35 Merton Street and two 12 storey apartment building on 117-147 Merton Street. A site plan approval application was approved in 1997 for 151 Merton Street permitting 17 townhouses on the land immediately adjoining the subject site to the west.

Comments:

7.Reasons for this Application

The application requires amendments to both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law because:

a)the proposed residential density of 3.9 x on the development portion of the site is not permitted in the Official Plan and exceeds the 2 times residential density permitted in the Zoning By-law; and

b) the proposed height of 12 storeys or 39.3 metres (excluding the proposed 5 m high mechanical penthouse) exceeds the 21 metre height limit of the Zoning By-law.

8.Comments from Public Officials

The application has been circulated among public officials whose comments are attached to this report as Appendix C. No negative comments or concerns have been received.

As pointed out in the letter from the City's Building Section (dated July 3, 1998), the current plans do not show sufficient bicycle parking to comply with existing Zoning By-law requirements. The applicant should be requested to revise his plans to comply with existing bicycle parking standards. Such revised plans should be received by the City at least 3 weeks prior to the introduction of Bills in Council permitting this application.

9.Reasons for Approving the Revised Application

The application has been revised substantially to meet the intent of the Official Plan as well as comply with the Urban Design and Development Guidelines which were adopted by Council as a framework for future development on Merton Street between Yonge Street and Mount Pleasant Road. Accordingly, I am in a position to support this proposal.

9.1Density

The site has a split Official Plan and Zoning designation, ie. a low density mixed commercial-residential designation for the northerly portion with frontage onto Merton Street with a permitted maximum density of up to 3x the lot area, and a greenbelt designation for the southerly portion which forms part of the Beltline and has no density permission. As mentioned previously, the Beltline Agreement does allow for an unspecified density bonus if, as is anticipated in connection with this application, the Beltline is conveyed to the City for linear park purposes.

In approving a similar application for development west of the site, namely the former CN lands Parcel Two (117-147 Merton Street), a residential density bonus of 1.2 x the area of the Beltline was accepted by the former City of Toronto. The applicant has revised his application accordingly, in that the current proposal is for 3 x density on the development portion of this site plus a density bonus of 1.2x the Beltline portion of these lands. This results in a net density of 3.9x the development portion of the lot.

The applicant's revised density scenario can be supported as it is consistent with densities recently approved elsewhere along the south side of Merton Street west of Mount Pleasant Road.

9.2Built Form and Site Design

As detailed in the Background Section 3 of this report, the application has been revised substantially with respect to building setbacks, building height, terracing, facade treatment and number of vehicular access points. As a result, the proposal is within the development parameters adopted by City Council in 1996 for development on the south side of Merton Street.

9.3Integrity of the Beltline Lands

A 3 metre setback has been provided between the south side of the proposed apartment buildings and the northerly boundary of the Beltline linear park. The proposed landscape plan provides for generous planting within this space to enhance the recreational amenity of the abutting public park area.

As well, a total separation distance of 15 metres will be provided between apartment buildings to facilitate visual access to the Beltline from Merton Street.

In keeping with the Beltline Agreement executed in 1990 between the City and CNRail, a 4.7 metre wide right-of-way next to the easterly lot line is to allow for a public walkway connection between Merton Street and the Beltline park .

The Beltline portion of the site is to remain free and clear of any above or below grade development, is to be landscaped at the applicants' expense to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, and to be conveyed to the City in accordance with the Beltline Agreement.

It will be necessary for the owner to enter onto the Beltline Park in order to construct this project and to remove existing vegetation, including trees. The Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism has indicated that these tree removals are acceptable since the owner will be planting replacement trees and plant material as part of the park improvement program which will constitute an improvement over the existing trees and vegetation.

Conclusions:

The original application has been revised to satisfy the planning concerns identified in the Preliminary Planning report and to meet the built form and development parameters of the Merton Street Urban Design and Development Guidelines adopted by the former City of Toronto Council in 1996. Development of this site will result in conveyance of a significant portion of the former Beltline to the City and contribute to the completion of the Merton Street portion of the Beltline linear park. Accordingly, I am recommending approval of this application subject to the conditions outlined in the Recommendations Section of this report.

Contact Name:

Feodora Steppat

City Planning Division, North Section

Telephone:392-7740

Fax:392-1330

E-Mail:fsteppat@city.toronto.on.ca

Beate Bowron

Director, Community Planning, South District

(p:\1998\ug\uds\pln\to981686.pln) - st

APPLICATION DATA SHEET

Confirmed Municipal Address:195, 253 Merton Street (Parcel C).

PLANNING CONTROLS (For verification refer to Chief Building Official)

PROJECT INFORMATION

Appendix A

Notes of Public Meeting

195 Merton Street

July 17, 1997

Davisville Public School

Present:

Sid Tennenbaum, Chair, Planning Advisory Committee

JoAnne.Simonetta, member, Planning Advisory Committee

Feodora Steppat, Urban Development Services (Planning)

Bob Duguid, Community Services (Parks and Recreation)

The meeting commenced at 7:35 p.m with 16 members of the public in attendance.

The Chair explained the role of the PAC in the planning process and the purpose of the meeting as an opportunity for area residents to make known their concerns about this application.

Feodora Steppat, the area planner, outlined the most important aspects of this application and the reasons why amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law were needed if the application was to proceed.

The architect for the project, Sal Vitiello, explained the building and site design details of the proposal.

Area residents' concerns focussed on building height, density and site design, and the proposal's impact on traffic and social services.

Concerns were raised about the proposed 12 storey height as this exceeds not only the Zoning Height limit of 21 metres but also the 7 storey height limit for the south side of Merton Street set out in the Urban Design Guidelines approved in 1996 .The proposed height was seen as incompatible with the town houses approved on the parcel adjoining to the west, and expected to have a negative impact on the street scape and on the abutting Beltline park. A resident of the apartments on Davisville Avenue noted that the new towers would likely block current spectacular views to the south.

The density also was seen as too high as it results in buildings of the height such as those proposed. Also of concern was the number of residents added to this area and the increases in demand on the social services and the road network.

With respect to the need for traffic studies, the recent efforts toward traffic calming in the South Eglinton Area were noted, and it was pointed out that a transportation impact study will likely be required of the applicant. The potential for a traffic light at Pailton Crescent was raised by a member of the audience.

Several clarification questions were put to the applicant's architect with respect to the circulation pattern on site including servicing and loading as well as the location of the common below grade garage in relation to the Beltline corridor above. It was explained that the Beltline corridor will have to be conveyed to the City and that nothing can be built below it.

A question was raised with respect to the Beltline Agreement and how it affects the proposal. It was explained that the Agreement grants a bonus density in return for the Beltline being turned over to the City for park purposes.

The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

Appendix B

Urban Design and Development Guidelines

For Merton Street

Between Yonge Street and Mount Pleasant Road

(Adopted by City Council on October 28/29, 1996)

North Side

1.The north side of Merton Street should be developed as a generally continuous and articulated, street related building wall of 5-storeys, fronting a well landscaped streetscape, with the highest portion of the building not exceeding 7 storeys.

2.Street related building walls should be set back up to 4 metres from the property line in order to create a well landscaped streetscape. Portions of buildings may be built to the property line to reduce the impact of the development on properties to the north.

3.A street-related expression line of 2 storeys should be incorporated into the design of the facade.

4.In vertically stacked, mixed commercial-residential development, a setback should occur at the height of the change in use to mark the change.

5.Only under exceptional circumstances and where the reconfiguration of a building, without exceeding the permitted density, could better achieve these development guidelines, Council may consider applications to permit taller building elements.

6.Taller building elements (above the 5-storey height) should be set back from the street-related building; and should be massed toward the street line; and should be designed and oriented to maximize southward views from existing heigh rise development to the north. Building heights should be stepped down towards the north in order to reduce the shadowing effect over the properties to the north.

7.East and west sides of buildings should be articulated, and not consist of blank walls.

8.Building entries should be street and grade related, and where appropriate, building frontages should include street-related uses at grade.

9.Servicing should occur from the side or the rear of buildings. If several adjacent parcels are to be developed at once, the possibility of shared service access from the street should be explored.

South Side

1.The south side of Merton Street should be developed as a series of individual buildings set within a continuous landscaped open space that visually and spatially connects the street to the Beltline park and cemetery to the south.

2.Larger building parcels should contain several buildings along the street frontage, with significant at-grade open spaces between buildings permitting views to the south.

3.East/west buildings should not exceed 5-storeys in height in order to maximize sunlight on the northern side of the street.

4.Street-related buildings should have a side yard setback of approximately 7.5 metres on each side to permit views to the south and sunlight penetration to the street.

5.Street-related building walls should be generally set back approximately 3-4 metres from the property line in order to create a well landscaped streetscape.

6.As a general principle, building heights should step up from the Beltline park, with setbacks at the 5-storey base building height and at the top of the building.

7.A street-related expression line of 2-storeys should be incorporated in the design of the facade of buildings.

8.Building facades facing the Beltline should be designed as a front of the building, and have a minimum setback at grade of 3 metres.

9.East and west sides of buildings should be articulated and not consist of blank walls.

10.Only under exceptional circumstances and where the reconfiguration of a building, without exceeding the permitted density, could better achieve these development guidelines. Council may consider applications to permit taller building elements.

11.Taller building elements (above the 5-storey height) should not exceed 7 storeys and should be set back from the street and designed and oriented on a north-south axis to permit and maximize high level views from the north. In general, as building height increases, the amount of sky view should increase.

12.All entries to buildings should be grade related.

13.Street-related building frontages should include street-related uses at grade.

14.Street-related building walls should be designed to demarcate public access locations between Merton Street and Beltline park.

15.Future development on the south side of Merton Street adjacent to the historic coal towers should be set back with open space from the Dominion Coal Towers. Open space should have a strong public character and create a strong visual relationship from the corner to the Beltline park. The building setback from the Beltline should be established at 3 metres at the westerly boundary and be extended parallel to Merton Street rather than following the Beltline in order to preserve easterly landmark views along the Beltline which could otherwise be obscured by buildings.

16.Vehicular access to buildings should occur at the openings between buildings and be shared to serve adjacent buildings wherever possible.

Streetscape and Open Space

1.Sidewalks should be created on the south side of the street.

2.A streetscape concept plan should be prepared for Merton Street.

3.Generous open space access points between Merton Street and the Beltline should be created at Pailton Crescent, at the east side of 119 Merton Street and at the public lane between 25 and 35 Merton Street. Pailton Crescent should be visually extended south to the Beltline park.

4.The open space gaps between buildings along the southerly frontage at grade should be designed and planted to permit landscaped views through to the Beltline park and Mount Pleasant Cemetery beyond.

5.Private open space directly adjacent to the Beltline should be designed in a manner that is complementary to the Beltline and clearly articulates the differences between public and private spaces.

Appendix C

Comments from Civic Officials

1.Works and Emergency Services, dated June 9, 1998.

"Recommendations:

1. That the owner be required to:

(a)Provide space within the development for the construction of any transformer vaults, Hydro and Bell maintenance holes and sewer maintenance holes required in connection with the development;

(b)Submit to, and have approved by, the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, prior to the introduction of a bill in Council, a Noise Impact Statement in accordance with City Council's requirements;

(c)Have a qualified Architect/Acoustical Consultant certify, in writing, to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services that the development has been designed and constructed in accordance with the Noise Impact Statement approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(d)Provide, maintain and operate the noise impact measures, facilities and strategies stipulated in the plan approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(e)Provide and maintain a minimum of 122 parking spaces on the site to serve each of Buildings A, B and C, including at least 107 parking spaces for the exclusive use of the residents of each building and at least 15 spaces for the residential visitors to each building, for a total minimum of 366 spaces;

(f)Construct the access ramps to the underground garage with a slope not exceeding 5% within 6 m of their intersection with the driveways from Merton Street and not exceeding 15% along the remaining portions;

(g)Provide and maintain in each of Buildings A, B and C a garbage room at least 25 square metres in size and a recycling room at least 10 square metres in size and install and maintain a stationary compactor unit, to City specifications, in each garbage room;

(h)Provide and maintain 1 Type G loading space on the site to serve each of Buildings A, B and C, with a generally level surface and access designed so that trucks can enter and exit the site in a forward motion;

(i)Construct the Type G loading spaces and all driveways and passageways providing access thereto to the requirements of the Ontario Building Code, including allowance for City of Toronto bulk lift and rear bin vehicle loading with impact factors where they are to be built as supported structures;

(j)Construct all driveways and passageways providing access to and egress from the Type G loading spaces with a minimum width of 3.5 m (4 m where enclosed), a minimum vertical clearance of 4.3 m and minimum inside and outside turning radii of 9 m and 16 m;

(k)Provide and maintain level service connections between the garbage and recycling rooms and the Type G loading spaces for the transporting of container bins;

(l)Provide and maintain a concrete base pad with a slope not exceeding 2% adjacent to the front of each Type G loading space for the storage of at least 4 compactor containers on collection day;

(m)Submit to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services dimensioned plans of the development for the purpose of preparing site specific exemption by-laws and such plans should be submitted at least 3 weeks prior to the introduction of a bill in Council;

(n)Submit, prior to the issuance of a building permit, a grading and drainage plan for the review and approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

1. That the owner be advised:

(a)That the storm water run-off originating from the site should be disposed of through infiltration into the ground and that storm connections to the sewer system will only be permitted subject to the review and approval by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services of an engineering report detailing that site or soil conditions are unsuitable, the soil is contaminated or that processes associated with the development on the site may contaminate the storm run-off;

(b)Of the need to receive the approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for any work to be carried out within the street allowance; and

(c)Of the City's requirement for payment of a service charge associated with the provision of City containerized garbage collection.

Comments:

Location

South side of Merton Street, between Yonge Street and Mount Pleasant Road.

Proposal

Construction of 3 residential condominium buildings, each comprising 106 residential units for a total of 318 units. The site area shown on the application and site plan as being 14,417.05 m² should be corrected to 13,925.5 m².

The proposal was dealt with in Departmental reports dated November 17, 1997 and February 16 and March 23, 1998. The above consolidated recommendations supersede the recommendations contained in the previous reports, including the recommendation requiring the submission of revised plans, which has been satisfied.

Previous Application

This site was previously the subject of Rezoning Application No. 2385 (Parcel 3).

Parking and Access

The proposed provision of 127 parking spaces for each building in a 3-level underground garage (for a total of 381 spaces), consisting of 112 resident spaces and 15 residential visitor spaces satisfies the estimated parking demand generated by each building in this project, based in part on the surveyed demand of residential condominium units, for 122 spaces, consisting of 107 resident spaces and 15 residential visitor spaces (for a total of 366 spaces). The Zoning By-law requirement, as far as can be ascertained, is for a total of 411 spaces.

The parking spaces are located in a 3-level underground parking garage which is designed such that there is a common first level for the visitor parking and the entrance to the resident parking serving Buildings A and B. Gates physically separate the resident spaces for all three buildings from the residential visitor spaces. The plans indicate that the access driveways will have a typical width of 5.5 m and that the typical dimensions of the parking spaces will be 2.6 m x 5.9 m. The dimensions and general layout of the parking spaces are acceptable. The plans also show that ingress to and egress from the parking spaces will be from a sloped ramp/driveway system having a maximum slope of 3%, which is satisfactory.

Access to the portion of the underground parking garage serving Buildings A and B is provided via a driveway from Merton Street between Buildings A and B to a ramp located on the east side of Building A. Access for Building C is via a second driveway from Merton Street between Buildings B and C to a ramp located on the west side of Building C. This is acceptable.

Refuse Collection

The City will provide this project with the bulk lift method of refuse collection in accordance with the Municipal Code, Chapter 309, Solid Waste. This will require the provision of the storage and handling facilities identified in Recommendation Nos. 1(g) to 1(l) above.

The plans show the provision of service areas, each with a Type G loading space, at the southeast corner of Building A and the southwest corners of Buildings B and C. The Type G loading spaces are configured such that trucks using the loading spaces would be able to enter and exit Merton Street in a forward motion. This is acceptable. As an alternative, one Type G loading space, strategically located on the site, for the shared use of two or all three buildings would also be acceptable.

It is the policy of City Council to levy a service charge on all new developments, payment of which is a condition for receiving City containerized garbage and recycling collection. The levy is currently $34.50 per month, including taxes, multiplied by the number of garbage containers on site. The levy includes the provision and maintenance of City garbage and recycling containers. Should the owner choose to provide private garbage containers, the levy will still be charged and the containers must meet City specifications and be maintained privately at the expense of the building owner. Further information regarding the above can be obtained by contacting the Operations and Sanitation Division at 392-1517.

Municipal Services and Storm Water Management

The existing water distribution and sanitary sewer systems are adequate to serve this development.

It is the policy of City Council to require the infiltration of storm water run-off into the ground for all new buildings, whenever possible. Therefore, storm connections to the City sewer system will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that infiltrating storm water into the ground is not feasible. Further information regarding storm drainage can be obtained by contacting the Engineering Section (telephone no. 392-6787).

The applicant should submit a plan showing proposed grades and details of the proposed drainage facilities for review and approval."

2.Urban Planning and Development Services, (Buildings Section), dated July 3, 1998.

"Our comments concerning this proposal are as follows:

Description:Construct two apartment buildings (3 towers) with 3 levels of sub-grade parking and 375 dwelling units

Zoning Designation:CR T2.0 C2.0 R2.0 *Map:51K 311

Applicable By-law(s):97-0551*, as amended

Plans prepared by:E.I. Richmond ArchitectsPlans dated: April 20, 1998

Residential GFA:32102.6 m²

Zoning Review

The list below indicates where the proposal does not comply with the City's Zoning By-law 438-86, as amended, unless otherwise referenced.

1.The by-law requires each principal building to be assigned a defined part of the parcel of land. The proposed buildings have not been assigned their own parcel of land. (Section 2, definition of "lot".)

Building A and Building B are connected at the basement floor level.

Lot lines have not been shown and corresponding statistics have not been provided.

2.Each of the proposed towers exceed the maximum height limit of 21.0 m. (Section 4(2)(a))

3.The by-law requires a minimum of 93 parking spaces to be provided for visitors. The number of proposed parking spaces for visitors is 45. (Section 4(4)(b))

4.The by-law requires at least 75 bicycle parking spaces for the occupants of all the buildings and 19 bicycle parking spaces for visitors to all the buildings. No bicycle parking spaces are proposed. (Section 4(13)(a) and (c))

5.The by-law requires an apartment building having a residential gross floor area in excess of 2800 square metres to have a driveway that serves an entrance to the building and which allows vehicles to travel in one continuous motion. No such driveway is proposed for any of the buildings. (Section 4(16)

6.The by-law requires that the residential gross floor area be not more than 2.0 times the area of the lot: 16 446.86 square metres. The proposed residential gross floor area of the building is 32 102.6 square metres. (Section 8(3) PART I 3(a)

7.The by-law requires a building containing more than 100 dwelling units to have an average floor area of all dwelling units of at least 50 square metres. (Section 8(3) PART I 3(b))

Other Applicable Legislation and Required Approvals

1.The proposal requires Site Plan approval under Section 41 of the Planning Act.

2.The proposal requires conveyance of land for parks purposes, or payment in lieu thereof pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act.

3.The proposal DOES NOT require the approval of Heritage Toronto under the Ontario Heritage Act.

4.The issuance of any permit by the Chief Building Official will be conditional upon the proposal's full compliance with all relevant provisions of the Ontario Building Code."

3.Community and Economic Development Services (Parks Section), dated July 16, 1998.

"I am in receipt of the above-noted application for permission to construct a residential development on the subject property. The site abuts the north edge of the Beltline Park, a linear park under the jurisdiction of Toronto Parks and Recreation.

This site is subject to the requirements set out in the Beltline Agreement executed on April 11, 1990 between the City and CN Rail. This agreement requires the provision of a 4.75 metre wide right-of-way over the easterly portion of this site and requires the resolution of various issues, including but not limited to, park improvements, access, drainage, restoration of City property and construction relating to the Beltline Park in conjunction with this application. The agreement also contains conditions and requirements of an ongoing nature, the Owner is advised that it is the owners responsibility to be aware of these conditions and to ensure that they are complied with.

It is my understanding that a Section 37 Agreement will secure matters related to the parkland improvements contributions, Beltline Park access and long term maintenance of the right-of-way . With respect to the proposals around the Beltline Park and the parkland design and improvement contributions, the following draft terms and conditions generally represent the agreements that have been reached with the owners representatives. The detailed wording of the various provisions for the agreement will be generally consistent with those set out in the Section 37 Agreements executed with the respective developers of the properties adjacent to Beltline Parcels 1 and 2, we will work closely with legal and planning staff over the next few weeks to resolve the final details. The following recommendations should be included in your report:

That the provisions of the Section 37 Agreement include the following broad terms and conditions:

(a)the owner will provide on the day before issuance of the first building permit of the proposed development a Parks Contribution of $473,000( value as of June 1998, the agreement will provide for escalation to then current dollars depending on timing of construction), such Park Contributions shall be deposited in Parks and Recreation Account 216459 40300 C1401 Beltline, such funds shall be used for the purposes of permanent improvements to the Beltline Park, as well as parkland acquisitions and improvements within the boundaries of Ward 22, in accordance with the recommendation of the Director of Development and Support, Toronto Area Parks and Recreation;

(b)the details of the Park Contributions shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Director of Development and Support, Toronto Area Parks and Recreation, and shall be set out in the Section 37 Agreement, in accordance with existing precedent arrangements;

(c)the owner shall ensure the City has permanent access over the right-of-way as shown on Landscape Plan L-2 (referred to below) and such right-of-way shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of a typical right-of-way for public access and the owner will be responsible for all costs and work associated with maintaining the retaining wall located within the right-of-way, including repair, replacement and maintenance of the wall, further any work on the development site which necessitates closure of the right-of-way shall occur between October and April and all efforts shall be made to minimise the length of the closure, the right-of-way shall be returned to its original condition on completion of any work.

(d)the owner will provide on the day before issuance of the first building permit of the proposed development a Letter of Credit in a form satisfactory to the City Treasurer in an amount sufficient to cover the costs of implementing the Environmental Remediation Plan and Program in accordance with the Report on the Environmental Site Assessment for Lots Nos. 154 & 160 Merton Street prepared by Candec Consultants Limited, dated June 18, 1997 as augmented by the letters from Candec Consultants Limited, Reference No. 97/0188, dated May 29, 1998 and June 24 and undertaking the Basic Park Construction as shown on Landscape Plan L-1 through L-3 , prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, date-stamped received by Urban Development Services on June 19, 1998.

That the Planning report include the following recommendations with respect to the parks levy:

(__)Subject to execution of the Section 37 Agreement, and in view agreements made therein securing the provision of Parkland Contributions referred to in (__) above, that City Council authorize an amendment to Chapter 165, Article 1, Conveyance of Land for Parks Purposes, of the Toronto Municipal Code, to exempt therefrom the development of lands to the extent permitted by the Subject By-Law Amendment.

With respect to the Application for Site Plan Approval submitted in conjunction with the application for O.P.A. and Rezoning, I advise that Landscape Plans prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, denoted as L-1, L-2, L-3 & L-5, date-stamped received by Urban Development Services on June 19, 1998 and L-4 date-stamped received by Urban Development Services on April 20, 1998 are acceptable. It will be necessary for the owner to enter onto the Beltline Park in order to construct this project. In order to access the Beltline, it will be necessary for the owner to remove the existing vegetation, including the trees. These removals are acceptable since the owner will be planting replacement trees and plant material as part of the park improvement program which will be an improvement over the existing trees and vegetation. The owner has also agreed to undertake improvements and carry out work within the Beltline Park, I request that the following recommendations be included in your report, that the owner be requested to:

1.Implement the Environmental Remediation Plan and Program in accordance with the Report on the Environmental Site Assessment for Lots Nos. 154 & 160 Merton Street prepared by Candec Consultants Limited, dated June 18, 1997 as augmented by the letters from Candec Consultants Limited, Reference No. 97/0188, dated May 29, 1998 and June 24 and Landscape Plan L-1 through L-3 , prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, date-stamped received by Urban Development Services on June 19, 1998;

2.Implement the Tree Management and Protection Plan and Measures, set out on Landscape Plans L-1 through L-3, prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, date-stamped received by Urban Development Services on June 19, 1998;

3.Implement the Soil and Groundwater Plan set out on Landscape Plans L-1 through L-3 prepared by Alexander Budrevics and Associates Limited, dated March 21, 1997, date-stamped received by Urban Development Services on June 19, 1998; and

4.Obtain an Occupation Permit from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism prior to entering onto the Beltline Park.

Please contact Rob Watson at 392-0582 should you have any questions or require further information regarding this project."

4.Works and Emergency Services (Fire Prevention Office), dated May 6, 1998.

"Please be advised that when the pertinent requirements of the Ontario Building Code have been applied relative to this project, our Department may be deemed as satisfied."

5.Metro Planning, dated October 9, 1997.

"We have reviewed the above revised application according to Metropolitan planning policies and the provision of Metropolitan services and advise that we have no objections."

6.Metropolitan Separate School Board, dated May 21, 1998.

"Further to your request for comments regarding the above-noted proposal, please be advised that children emanating from this project could be accommodated in permanent facilities at the following Schools:

St. Monica Catholic School (JK-8)

St. Patrick Catholic Secondary School (9-OAC)

Ecole elementarie catholique Sacre Coeur

Ecole secondaire catholique Mgr-de-Charbonnel

It should be noted that Loretto Abbey Catholic Secondary School which also serves the subject area is oversubscribed and could not accommodate additional students.

If further information is required regarding this matter, please contact the Planning and Facilities Department at 222-8282, extension 2278."

7.Metropolitan Separate School Board, dated November 14, 1997.

"The Metropolitan Separate School Board would like to advise you of its inability to accommodate secondary students generated by this application at Loretto Abbey Catholic Secondary School.

An official response will be available after the Board has had an opportunity to review this proposal."