Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application UDOZ-97-48 -

Har-Ru Holdings Limited -

1 Canyon Avenue - North York Centre South

The North York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (June 24, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, and for the reasons that the proposal is an appropriate use of lands, recommends that the application submitted by Har-Ru Holdings Limited regarding Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application for 1 Canyon Avenue, be approved, as set out in the following report (June 24, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning and subject to:

(1)Recommendation No. 3(a)(ii) contained in the following report from the Acting Commissioner of Planning be deleted and replaced with the following:

" (3)(a)(ii)an undertaking from the owner that arrangements will be made, upon consultation with the tenants of the existing rental building, to create in the B1 level of the existing rental building, meeting and recreational facilities occupying, in the aggregate, approximately 150 square metres, within such location or locations as the owner shall designate.";

(2)that the undertaking referred to in Recommendation No. (1) be subject to the approval of the North York Community Council through the site plan process;

(3)not less than $50,000.00 be spent on the recreational facilities; and that the $50,000.00 be secured by a letter of credit, such letter of credit to be received prior to the enactment of the zoning by-law; and that the facility be built within one year of the enactment of the by-law; and

(4)there be, as a condition of approval, safe access and egress to this condominium from Sheppard Avenue West and that this be worked out in connection with the site plan process and at the expense of the applicant.

The North York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July 22, 1998, with appropriate notice of this meeting, in accordance with the Planning Act.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (June 24, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

This report recommends approval of an application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning by-law to permit the development of an underutilized portion of an existing rental building site with a new eleven storey apartment building subject to conditions. The proposal conforms with Part C.4 official plan policies for the intensification of an existing apartment site. This report addresses:

• the preservation of the existing rental housing stock through an agreement under section 37 of the Planning Act in the absence of the Rental Housing Protection Act;

• the appropriateness of any intensification at this location; and

• the conveyance of valley lands below the top of bank to the Toronto Conservation Authority for nominal sum.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following:

Official Plan Amendment

(1)the Official Plan be amended:

(a)to redesignate the lands below the stable top of bank to VOS Valley Open Space; and

(b)to redesignate the remainder of the lands forming the net site to RD5 Residential Density Five with a Site Specific C.9 policy:

(i)which recognizes the existing rental apartment house building; and

(ii)which permits the addition of a new 11 storey, 9,550 m² apartment housing building;

Zoning By-law

(2)Zoning By-law 7625 be amended:

(a)to repeal the existing Site Specific By-law No. 18112;

(b)to rezone the lands below the stable top of bank from RM6 to Open Space O1;

(c)subject to the final technical refinement of the site plan, to rezone the table lands RM6 (exception) to recognize the existing apartment house dwelling with respect to the maximum existing gross floor area, number of units, new yards, building height, and a minimum landscaped area of 3,000 m²; and

to permit an additional apartment house dwelling of 11 storeys with a maximum gross floor area of 9,550 m² of 100 units;

General Conditions

(3)prior to the enactment of any zoning by-law:

(a)the applicant enter into an agreement under section 37 of the Planning Act which will permit the construction of an additional 11 storey, 100 unit apartment house building provided that through this agreement the City secures the following considerations:

(i)an undertaking from the owner that for a period of fifteen years the existing rental apartment housing building will be preserved as rental housing stock; no application for condominium conversion or for demolition to construct anything other than rental housing units will be made by the owner during this period of time; and

(ii)an undertaking from the owner that arrangements will be made to secure access to common recreational facilities and amenities of the new condominium building by the tenants of the existing rental building under fair and reasonable terms and such arrangements will be properly reflected in the condominium declaration governing the new building;

(b)submission of reference plan of survey which describes the lands below the stable top of bank, Site A and Site B as shown on Schedule "C";

(c)site plan approval be granted to achieve good linkages between the buildings with the maximization of landscaping throughout the site, and pedestrian and vehicular site circulation improvements for both the existing and new building;

(4)conveyance to Toronto & Region Conservation Authority of all lands below the stable top of bank for nominal sum;

(5)prior to any building permit the applicant shall:

(i)obtain all easements or consents necessary to achieve the site plan as approved;

(ii)obtain all permits and permission required under Ontario Regulation 158; and

(iii)provide a Record of Site Condition in accordance with the MOEE Guidelines for Use at Contaminated Sites (1996);

(6)the conditions of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority as set out in Schedule "E" be complied with;

(7)the conditions of the Works and Emergency Service Department as set out in Schedule "F" be complied with;

(8)the conditions of the Parks and Recreation Department as set out in Schedule "H" be complied with;

(9)the conditions of the Fire Department as set out in Schedule "I" be complied with; and

(10)the conditions of the Transportation Department as set out in Schedule "L" be complied with.

Background:

1.0Proposal

The applicant is proposing residential intensification of 1 Canyon Avenue with an 11 storey, 100 unit residential apartment building. The site is occupied by a 17 storey, 202 unit apartment building which will remain. The new building will be located to the east of the existing building with frontage on Sheppard Avenue West with access from Canyon Avenue. The statistics are listed below.

* this includes lands below the stable top of bank

2.0Location and Existing Site:

The site is located at the north east corner of Sheppard Avenue West and Canyon Avenue east of Bathurst Street. The new building site is tableland adjacent to a natural valley slope of the Don River. Two 20 storey apartment buildings (15 and 25 Canyon Avenue) containing approximately 233 units are to the north. A small retail strip plaza which fronts on Sheppard Avenue is west of the site across Canyon Avenue. A 14 storey apartment building is located north of this plaza. There are 3 apartment buildings which vary in height from 12 to 13 storeys across Sheppard Avenue to the south. See Schedule "C2" Context Plan.

Canyon Avenue is developed with high rise apartment buildings and a private school located at the north end of the street. The area was originally developed in the mid 1960s.

3.0Planning Controls

3.1Official Plan

The site is designated Residential Density Four (RD4) which permits residential uses at a density of 1.5 FSI with a very small portion of the lands being designated Valley Open Space at the eastern end of the property as shown on Schedule "A". The eastern portion of the lands fall within the Valley Impact Zone (VIZ). Part C.4 (Housing Policies) establishes the general development policies and criteria for the intensification of existing apartment sites to accommodate additional density. These polices are attached as Appendix "C".

3.2Zoning:

The site is zoned RM6 (Multiple Family Dwellings Sixth Density Zone) and is subject to site specific By-law 18112 which permits a maximum height of 800 feet above sea level allowing for the existing 17 storey building. The existing gross floor area represents FSI 1.5 based on the entire site.

Discussion:

4.0Other Department Comments:

The following section summarizes significant comments received from the departments and agencies circulated:

The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staked the stable top of bank and established a development limit and reviewed a geotechnical report. The conservation authority has no objection provided a minimum setback of 1 to 2 metres from the stable top of bank is provided. The TRCA identified the valley lands as appropriate for public acquisition. Their comments are attached as Schedule "E".

The Works and Emergency Service Department indicated structures will not be permitted to encroach on a sewer easement on site. The waste collection arrangements are not considered acceptable and must be settled at site plan approval. Their comments are attached as Schedule "F".

The Public Health Department reviewed the applicant's environmental reports and a subsequent peer review. They have no objections. Their comments are attached as Schedules "G" through "G3".

The Parks and Recreation Department indicate the development is subject to a 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland payment. The lands below the top of bank should be conveyed to the appropriate public body and designated and zoned as open space. Parks encourages the provision of landscaping and outdoor recreational space. Their comments are attached as Schedule "H".

The Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic School Board indicate the proposed development will create accommodation pressures. Their comments are attached as Schedule "J" and Schedule "K".

The Fire Department have concerns regarding the fire route access which must be resolved as part of any approved site plan. Their comments are attached as Schedule "I".

The Transportation Department indicates the traffic generated by the proposed development will have minimal impact on the overall operations. Access onto Sheppard Avenue will not be permitted because of safety and operational concerns. The number of parking stalls proposed is adequate, however some modifications will be required to the location of some of the spaces. Their comments are attached as Schedule "L".

5.0Community Consultation

In March, there were three community meetings held in the immediate area. The issues raised by the residents were:

1)increased traffic generated from the new development and access onto Canyon Avenue rather than Sheppard Avenue West;

2)location of the building and the environmental impacts of construction at this location;

3)adequate parking on site in order to prevent overflow on street parking;

4)community benefits to residents in the existing building on site;

5)loss of open space; and

6)overview and shadow impact.

During the review period, the applicant and the transportation staff have endeavoured to resolve the resident concerns with respect to traffic impacts of this development. The recommendations of this report with respect to the conveyance of valley lands, the establishment of a minimum landscaped area on site and other recreational access conditions, respond to the concerns of the community with respect to the loss of open space. A follow up meeting was held with several of the residents in May.

6.0Planning Issues

6.1Redesignation of Residential Lands to a Higher Density

The official plan's housing policies state that in order to consider a site appropriate for intensification, at least one of the following criteria must be met:

"a)the area, which includes lands beyond a single development site, demonstrates a need for rejuvenation and reinvestment, or

b)existing land uses or buildings are considered to be obsolete or underutilized; or

c)land use conflict is occurring."

This proposal conforms to the official plan criteria. The area primarily consists of high rise rental apartment buildings developed in the 1960's which require reinvestment on an ongoing basis to preserve this valued rental housing stock. The existing building at 1 Canyon is currently undergoing a program of improvements. The residential land use itself cannot be considered obsolete or in conflict with other land uses, as the existing apartment building on site and other residential dwellings in the area appear to be occupied, well maintained and do not represent an area in transition.

There is an opportunity to more efficiently use the site and the surrounding community facilities, services and infrastructure. The existing apartment building being located towards the Canyon Avenue frontage, instead of centred in the middle of the site, provides a large amount of open area to the east of the building. The location and orientation of the existing apartment building provides the opportunity for redevelopment of the property. Any intensification of the site must demonstrate that the proposal can be accommodated from an urban design perspective on site and within the existing community. Further it must be demonstrated that there is available community facilities, services and infrastructure to serve the additional 100 apartment house units.

The following section of this report will review and assess the proposal's bearing on community services, transportation, its compatibility with the adjacent residential neighbourhood and its impact on the existing site.

6.2Land Use and Density

(a)Built Form Considerations:

This site is appropriate for residential intensification. The location takes advantage of physical infrastructure, existing community services and transportation facilities. It is located on an arterial road, well served by public transit and close to Earl Bales Park, Community Centres and the Don Valley.

This residential node contains several high rise apartment buildings. Its expansion is limited by the valley lands to the north and east. This site represents the only parcel above the top of bank capable of accommodating additional development here.

This proposal represents an appropriate scale of residential intensification. The building will be one of the smaller apartment buildings in the area. Its floor plate is square with an coverage of approximately 800 square metres giving the building a compact form. The building is smaller than the existing apartments to the north and the west. This provides an opportunity for existing views to be maintained for the surrounding apartments. The apartment buildings on the south side of Sheppard Avenue are 12 to 13 storeys with gross floor areas of approximately 8,600 m² to 14,900 m². This infill building is in keeping with this scale of the area and is reflective of the existing RM6 zone regulations with respect to building separation.

(b)Preservation of Rental Housing Stock:

The Rental Housing Protection Act repeal came into effect June 17, 1998. The city is reviewing its policies to establish a citywide strategy for the preservation of rental stock. This application, however, represents an opportunity to take action now with the full cooperation of the owner to ensure that the existing rental building remains and is integrated with the new condominium.

There is an ongoing program of reinvestment in the rental building including renovations to all balconies, common areas, roof, and the individual suites. Fire safety upgrades, lighting improvements, elevator modernization and new appliances and broadloom have been completed. This represents a substantial new investment in the existing rental apartment building. The maintenance of the rental building is strongly encouraged by Council. Rental accommodation is recognized as an essential form of housing tenure that is currently limited in supply.

To secure this rental stock, the applicant is prepared to enter into a section 37 agreement under the Planning Act ensuring that:

• the existing rental apartment building remains as rental for a minimum period of fifteen years and there is agreement that no application for condominium conversion or application to demolish to construct anything other than a replacement rental housing building be permitted,

• on site amenities in the new building will be accessible to the residents of the rental building under fair and reasonable terms which will need to be carried forward in the condominium declaration.

See the submission of the Owner attached as Appendix "A".

(c)Recognition of Existing Property Rights

The entire property to the bottom of the slope is designated RD4 and zoned RM6 as was the practice in the 1960's before the city had any Valley Open Space policies.

This application provides the opportunity to rezone the valley lands from RM6 to O1 Open Space which consolidates the existing official plan designation and zoning on the tablelands consistent with the current Official Plan policies. The net density on the tableland increases to approximately 3.0 FSI with the development of the new building. The removal of the valley lands from the RM6 zone also presents an opportunity for the long term preservation of the lands in public ownership and maintenance of the valley. The Valley Open Space designation and Valley Impact Zone (VIZ) will work together to manage the valley land uses. The policies are found in Appendix "B". In addition, redesignation of the lands below the stable top of bank to Valley Open Space and conveyance of these lands for a nominal sum to the TRCA is appropriate. The applicant and TRCA concur with this. This conveyance completes a cross section of land from crest to crest in public ownership.

(d)Common Amenities

This proposal also has the ability to provide a net benefit to the existing residents in terms of on-site facilities and improvements to amenities.

Significant shared outdoor amenity space is proposed by the applicant comprised of approximately 2,000 m² between the existing and proposed buildings. This will be landscaped to include a tot lot and/or passive park with walkways, a gazebo, benches and lawn areas. These outdoor amenity areas will be shared by the existing and the new building and are an improvement to the site. Currently, the area consists of natural field above the top of bank and a natural treed slope below with no formalized landscaped area.

The new building will be a condominium apartment rather than a rental apartment building. As all of the residential buildings in this node except for one are rental, the provision of a condominium building will help to provide variety in tenure in the area while preserving the existing rental building.

6.3Shadowing and Overview

There are substantial yard setbacks proposed for the new building from the existing buildings surrounding the site which will minimize the impact of both shadowing and overview. The proposed building is approximately 47 metres from the existing building of 1 Canyon Avenue and will be approximately 35 metres in height. The siting of the buildings will maintain many of the view corridors from the surrounding buildings to the valley lands.

6.4Community Services and Facilities

The site is well served by parks and community facilities. Located adjacent to the Don Valley System, it is within walking distance of Earl Bales Park which contains the Earl Bales Seniors Centre and the Earl Bales Community Centre. The John Bales House which is an historical land mark is also located within this 30 hectare park. The site is in close proximity is the North York Ski Centre as well. There are park facilities within walking distance of the site.

6.5Physical Feasibility of Development

6.5.1Geotechnical - Slope Stability

The applicant submitted a geotechnical report which assessed the stability of the slope. It concludes that there is no evidence of erosion and the slope is considered stable and will not be adversely affected by the construction of the proposed building. In order to maintain this stability, surface runoff from the top will not be allowed to run down the slopes and the vegetation on the face of the slope will be maintained and improved where possible. The TRCA reviewed these finding and have no objections provided a 1 to 2 metre yard setback is maintained for all structures including those underground. The construction is subject to TRCA permits.

6.5.2Soil Contamination

A storm sewer easement is located on a portion of the property. Due to the fill operations that were associated with the construction of the sewer, an environmental site assessment was submitted by the applicant in order to determine whether these operations resulted in any soil contamination. These studies were subject to peer review and comments from the Medical Officer of Health. The assessment suggests that residential use is appropriate. This conclusion must be verified by the submission of a record of site condition prior to the issuance of a building permit.

6.5.3Traffic and Parking

The Transportation Division is satisfied vehicular access to Canyon Avenue is feasible and has no adverse impacts on traffic operation. However, since the issue of access onto Canyon Avenue was raised at the community meetings, a review of the possibility of access onto Sheppard Avenue rather than Canyon Avenue was examined by the Transportation Department. Ideally direct access onto Sheppard Avenue would ensure there is no additional traffic on Canyon Avenue. However, access onto Sheppard Avenue is not recommended because of safety and operational concerns. There is inadequate stopping sight distances available due to the grade of the road at this location. The presence of a driveway on the south side of Sheppard Avenue could further present traffic conflicts for left turning vehicles and sightlines are reduced because of the steel beam guide rail along the north side of Sheppard Avenue.

The current volume and speed of traffic on Canyon Avenue was further investigated by the Traffic Investigation Section of the Transportation Department. A speed and volume study was carried out over a number of days in April of this year concluding there were no traffic operations or safety concerns on Canyon Avenue. A study was also undertaken by the former Metro Transportation Department in 1995 to investigate the issue of transient traffic on Canyon Avenue due to traffic using Canyon Avenue as a shortcut around the Bathurst Street and Sheppard Avenue intersection. This study concluded the absolute number of transient vehicles was relatively small and therefore did not significantly impact the safety and operations of Canyon Avenue.

Since both the existing and proposed building will share driveway access onto Canyon Avenue, the granting of reciprocal easements rights of way across the property may be needed or alternative arrangements can be made to have a condominium description include all lands necessary to provide direct access.

The applicant originally proposed 112 new parking spaces for the 100 units. In light of the residents' issue with regard to adequate parking on site, and to avoid on street parking of visitors, the applicant revised their plans to include 3 levels of underground parking rather than 2 levels and a total of 150 parking spaces (125 for residents and 25 for visitors). This complies with with the parking rate for new apartment house dwellings as set out in zoning By-law 7625. There have been improvements to the existing apartment building parking supply as well.

6.6Urban Design

A site plan application has been filed by the applicant. In order to achieve an optimal development, a number of urban design principles will guide the site plan application:

• edge treatment of all sides of the site which includes substantially treed edges;

• extensive landscape screening of the existing raised parking structure from Sheppard and from the new landscaped area to the north and the proposed building to the east;

• east edge needs to include the integration of buildings and structures into the natural landscape and screen with plantings any exposed concrete;

• clear linkages to the shared landscaped space located between the existing building and the proposed building must be present for both buildings;

• a well articulated pedestrian entrance should be present along Sheppard Avenue; and

• the existing pedestrian entrance at the Canyon Avenue frontage needs to be substantially improved in terms of landscaping including the walkway.

Additional principles may be defined to further improve the existing building and proposed new building.

Conclusions:

The proposed new apartment house dwelling at this site is appropriate as it meets the intent of the Official Plan policies for residential intensification. The site is located on an arterial road near a major intersection which gives the site the advantage of good transit. The traffic and parking impacts are minimal. The nearby park, open space and community centre facilities supports the intensification. It is appropriate the City secure the preservation of existing rental units through an Agreement under section 37 of the Planning Act. This development proposal presents an opportunity to preserve, improve and intensify a rental apartment site.

Contact Name:

Karen Whitney, Planner (North York District)

Phone: 395-7109Fax: 395-7155

(A copy of the Schedules, Appendices, draft official plan amendment, draft zoning by-law amendment and site plan referred to in the foregoing report is on file in the office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

________

A staff presentation was made by Karen Whitney, Planner, Planning Department, North York Civic Centre.

The North York Community Council also reports having had before it during the consideration of the foregoing matter, the following communications:

(I)(July 20, 1998) from Teresa Hyatt, expressing her concerns with the application.

(I)(July 13, 1998) from Mr. Raymond H. Mikkola, Fraser & Beatty, Barristers and Solicitors, Solicitor on behalf of the owner of the property;

(iii(June 30, 1998) from Mr. Jerry Willer, advising of his concerns with the application; and

(iv)(June 25, 1998) from Ms. Rose Silverman, advising of her objection to the application.

________

The following persons appeared before the North York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Mr. Raymond H. Mikkola, Solicitor on behalf of the applicant, Har-ru Holdings Limited, who indicated that the applicant concurred with the staff recommendations and with North York Community Council Recommendation No. 2 that the undertaking referred to in Recommendation No. (1) be subject to the approval of the North York Community Council through the site plan process;

-Mr. Julian Jacobs, Architect on behalf of the applicant, who commented on the architectural aspects and the merits of the proposed apartment building. In his opinion, the proposal is appropriate as it meets the intent of the Official Plan policies for residential intensification.

-Mrs. Haneford, who spoke in opposition to the application. Her primary objections were with respect to increased traffic; insufficient parking for visitors; air and noise pollution; overview and shadow impact.

-Mr. Joseph Spring, who spoke in opposition to the application. He was primarily concerned with the intensification of this site and the traffic that would be generated by the proposed development.

-Ms. Teresa Hyatt, who outlined her opposition to the application. She was concerned about increased population and the impact on existing retail services in the area; the integrity of the valley being jeopardized by the proposed apartment building; and increased pedestrian and commuter congestion.

-Ms. Debbie Edelist, who expressed her opposition to the location of the proposed entrance to the apartment building and its proximity to the existing apartment building at 15 Canyon Avenue.

-Mr. George Jolson, who expressed concern with the parking being proposed for the new apartment building.

________

The motions and recorded votes on this issue were as follows:

A.Councillor Berger, North York Centre South, moved that the report from the Acting Commissioner of Planning dated June 24, 1998, be adopted and the application UD0Z-97-48 - Har-ru Holdings Limited, be approved as set out in the report (June 24, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning subject to the following:

(i)Recommendation No. 3 (a)(ii) be deleted and replaced with the following:

"an undertaking from the owner that arrangements will be made, upon consultation with the tenants of the existing rental building, to create in the B1 level of the existing rental building, meeting and recreational facilities occupying, in the aggregate, approximately 150 square metres, within such location or locations as the owner shall designate"; and

(ii)that this undertaking be subject to the approval of the North York Community Council through he site plan process.

B.Councillor Flint, North York Centre South, moved that the foregoing motion A moved by Councillor Berger, North York Centre South, be amended as follows:

(i) not less than $25,000.00 be spent on the recreational facilities;

(ii)there be, as a condition of approval, safe access and egress to this condominium from Sheppard Avenue West and that this be worked out in connection with the site plan process and at the expense of the applicant.

C.Councillor Moscoe, North York Spadina, moved that Part (i) of the foregoing motion B by Councillor Flint, North York Centre be amended by striking out the amount of $25,000.00 and inserting in lieu thereof the amount of $50,000.00.

D.Councillor Shiner, Seneca Heights, moved that the $50,000.00 be secured by letter of credit, such letter of credit to be received prior to the enactment of the zoning by-law; and further, that the facility be built within one year of the enactment of the by-law.

A recorded vote on the foregoing motion C. moved by Councillor Moscoe, was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Mammoliti, Sgro, LiPreti, Moscoe, Flint, Filion, Shiner, King, Augimeri

AGAINST:Councillors Berger, Feldman, Chong, Gardner, Minnan-Wong

Carried

A recorded vote on Part (ii) of the foregoing motion B. moved by Councillor Flint, was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Sgro, LiPreti, Moscoe, Augimeri, Feldman, Berger, Flint, Gardner, Chong, Filion, Minnan-Wong, Shiner, King

AGAINST:Councillor Mammoliti

Carried

:

A recorded vote on the foregoing motion D. moved by Councillor Shiner, was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Mammoliti, Sgro, LiPreti, Moscoe, Augimeri, Flint, Filion, Minnan-Wong, Shiner, King

AGAINST:Councillors Feldman, Berger, Gardner, Chong

Carried

A recorded vote on the foregoing motion A. by Councillor Berger, as amended, was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Mammoliti, Sgro, LiPreti, Moscoe, Augimeri, Feldman, Berger, Flint, Gardner, Chong, Filion, Minnan-Wong, Shiner, King

AGAINST:NIL

Carried