Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-96-30 - Harry Snoek -

15-19 Finch Avenue West and 7-11 Blakeley Road -

North York Centre

The North York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (March 18, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, and for the reasons that the proposal is an appropriate use of lands, recommends that the application submitted by Harry Snoek regarding Zoning Amendment for 15-19 Finch Avenue West and 7-11 Blakeley Road, be approved, subject to the recommendations contained in the following report (March 18, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning and subject to the following amendment adopted by the North York Community Council on June 24, 1998:

(1)Recommendation No. 3(e) contained in the following report from the Acting Commissioner of Planning be amended to read as follows:

"(3)(e)the property identified municipally as 11 Blakeley Road described as Lot 88, Registered Plan 3705 has been conveyed to the City, subject to the existing tenancy."

The North York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having requested that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to prepare for the North York Community Council, a transportation analysis for this development based on the 24 percent transit use noted in the report from the Toronto Transit Commission; and that such report include any transportation improvements that may be required to deal with traffic from this site.

The North York Community Council also reports having held the continuation of the 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 (March 18, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

This report recommends approval of this application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit two residential apartment buildings. The north tower is proposed to be 18 storeys high containing 112 units with first floor commercial space with frontage on Finch Avenue West. The south tower is proposed to be 18 storeys high containing 121 units with frontage on Lorraine Drive.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)a public meeting be scheduled and appropriate notice be given;

(2)prior to the enactment of the zoning by-law, the Acting Commissioner of Planning shall have granted site plan approval with the conditions described in Appendix "B";

(3)staff be directed to do all things necessary to ensure that at the time of the enactment of any zoning by-law, the following conditions have been satisfied:

Zoning By-law

(a)an implementing zoning by-law which generally complies with the draft by-law attached as Schedule "E1" to this report has been perfected;

(b)the Owner has paid to the City in cash or certified cheque, the Yonge Centre Development Charges in accordance with Council policy as amended from time to time;

(c)a 10 metre strip at the south end of the site as shown on Schedule "C" has been conveyed to the City;

(d)a 2.76 metre widening along the Finch Avenue West frontage has been conveyed to the City; and

(e)the property identified municipally as 11 Blakeley Road described as Lot 88, Registered Plan 3705 has been conveyed to the City;

General

(f)a Section 37 agreement with the City shall have been executed to secure the items referred to as incentives and density transfers;

(g)the Owner has satisfied:

(i)the conditions of the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department as set out in Schedule "F";

(ii)the conditions of the Parks and Recreation Department as set out in Schedules "G" and "H";

(iii)the conditions of the Transportation Department as set out in Schedules "J" and "J1";

(iv)the conditions of the Public Works Department as set out in Schedule "K";

(v)the conditions of the Fire Department as set out in Schedule "M";

(vi)the conditions as set out in the February 17, 1998 Wind, Snow and Sun/shade studies referred to in the Certification attached as Schedule "N"; and

(vii)the conditions as set out in the October 27, 1997 Traffic Impact Study referred to in the Traffic Certification attached as Schedule "O";

(h)the Owner has acknowledged and agreed that prior to the issuance of any Building Permit, the following condition will be required to have been met:

(i)that they shall pay to the City in cash or certified cheque, on or before Building Permit issuance, the City-wide and Hydro Development Charges, the Sewer and Water Services Development Charge, and the Sheppard Subway Development Charge, in accordance with Council policy as amended from time to time; and

(3)the Owner shall agree to develop the two residential towers as condominiums in accordance with Council policy.

Council Reference/Background/History:

1.0Proposal:

The applicant has proposed two residential towers for the site. The north tower fronting onto Finch Avenue West would contain ground floor commercial uses. The pertinent statistics are listed below.

2.0Location and Existing Site:

The site is on the south east corner of Finch Avenue West and Lorraine Drive and has an area of approximately 0.4 hectares. The site is made up of 6 lots that previously were occupied by single family homes. Part of the site is currently being used for a sales office for a residential tower approved to the south currently known as "Symphony Square".

By-law 33061 was passed on July 9, 1997 to implement a rezoning application immediately south of the site for a 20-storey, 305 unit residential building. Immediately to the east of the site is a North York Parking Authority parking lot and further to the east of the site towards Yonge Street are low rise retail commercial buildings. Across Lorraine Drive to the west are single family homes. To the north of the site across Finch Avenue is a three storey office complex fronting onto Duplex Avenue.

3.0Planning Controls:

3.1Official Plan:

The site is within the Uptown Secondary Plan. The northern five lots are designated Uptown Mixed Use One (UMU1) and the southern lot is designated Uptown Residential Two (UR2) as shown on Schedule "A". Specific Development Policy 6.3 of the Uptown Secondary Plan applies to the site which is outlined in Appendix "A".

3.2Zoning:

The three northerly lots of the site are zoned C1 (General Commercial) and the southerly three lots of the site are zoned R4 (One-Family Detached Dwelling, Fourth Density Zone) as shown on Schedule "B". The C1 zone permits a wide variety of commercial uses at a density of 1.0 FSI and also permits limited residential uses. The R4 zone generally permits single family homes. The applicant has requested a site specific RM6 (Multiple-Family Dwellings Sixth Density Zone) to permit the residential towers and the ground floor commercial in the north tower.

3.3Site Plan:

The Site Plan Approval process is required by Council to proceed concurrently with the rezoning process for the City Centre development applications. This includes all developments within the Uptown Plan. The applicant submitted a Site Plan application which has been processed with the rezoning application and has provided detailed drawings to enable evaluation of the application in the context of the Urban Design and Environmental objectives of the Uptown Plan. The Commissioner of Planning is delegated to approve plans and drawings and is prepared to do so with Community Council consideration of this report. The site plan considerations are outlined in Appendix "A" and the recommendations are in Appendix "B".

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

4.0Other Department Comments:

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

The former Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department requested that a Traffic Impact Study be submitted. This study has been completed and reviewed. A 2.76 m road widening along the Finch Avenue West frontage is required and a north bound left turn lane is required on Lorraine Drive at the intersection of Finch Avenue West and Lorraine Drive. This widening will be secured prior to enactment of the zoning by-law.

A number of criteria have been outlined for the design of the Finch Avenue West boulevard area. A number of permits are required which are outlined in the comments attached as Schedule "F". Further, since the site is located adjacent to the Yonge subway line, the developer should contact the TTC to address noise and vibration impacts from the subway to adjacent buildings and determine appropriate mitigation measures. It is also noted that the developer should investigate opportunities to reduce the volume of stormwater runoff and to improve the quality of stormwater discharge.

All access to the site will be from Lorraine Drive only with no direct access onto Finch Avenue West. The Traffic Impact Study which was reviewed and accepted by Metro Transportation indicated auto traffic resulting from occupancy of the proposed development will not significantly contribute to reducing the levels of service on nearby arterial roads and their intersections with local roads to below a generally acceptable level. This analysis included both the Finch/Lorraine intersection and the Finch/Yonge intersection.

The North York Parks and Recreation Department have discussed with the applicant opportunities to acquire land for parks, but will accept cash-in-lieu of parkland. The application originally included 12 Lorraine Drive, however the applicant revised their plans after the Parks and Recreation Department indicated that 12 Lorraine Drive was not acceptable for parkland. The applicant was unable to acquire other land for parks that were considered appropriate by the Parks Department. The provision of additional indoor and outdoor amenity space is encouraged. The comments are outlined in Schedules "G" and "H".

The Metropolitan Separate School Board advises that the Board objects to the rezoning application due to the lack of permanent facilities and overcrowding at Brebeuf College, Loretto Abbey and St. Joseph Morrow Park Catholic Secondary Schools. At the elementary level, St. Cyril Catholic School (JK-8) could accommodate additional enrollment in portable facilities. These comments are attached as Schedule "I".

The former North York Board of Education advised that this proposal will result in accommodation pressures at Yorkview Public School and that Churchill Public School will become the sole designated school. These comments are attached as Schedule "I2".

The North York Transportation Department has indicated that the proposed parking supply satisfies the City Centre Parking Policy requirements. There are several comments regarding site plan issues which are outlined in Schedule "J". It is also noted that Lorraine Drive will eventually be closed at Finch Avenue West and that future tenants and owners should be made aware that the driveways to Lorraine Drive may be altered to accommodate this future road design. The optimum driveway arrangement will be achieved through site plan approval. The November 3, 1997 comments attached as Schedule "J1" indicate that the department does not object to the proposal. No functional section of the Service Road is required as a result of this development. Future alterations to the site plan, that may result from the future closing of Lorraine Drive, will be dealt with through the Environmental Assessment process if necessary.

The North York Public Works Department has indicated that the waste collection arrangement shown on the October 11, 1996 plans is not acceptable. The applicant has been working with the Works Department to achieve an acceptable design. The Public Works Department has given direction to perfect the site circulation and driveway arrangement to allow for adequate garbage pick-up areas. With respect to sanitary sewer allocation, this application will form part of the allocation upon enactment of the zoning by-law. Additional comments are noted in Schedule "K".

The Fire Department had concerns with the fire route access. The applicant modified their plans in accordance with the Fire Department's direction and the access issue has been resolved. The comments are attached as Schedules "L" and "M".

5.0Community Consultation:

A community consultation meeting was held on February 16, 1998, attended by approximately 40 people. The key issues that arose from the meeting were:

• Construction of service road is too uncertain. This development does not trigger a need for a functional section of the Service Road, however many people expressed the view that the Service Road should be built today.

• Access onto Finch Avenue West from Lorraine Drive is an issue of the residents on Lorraine Drive within the Uptown development area. Several residents say that it is difficult to make a left or right turn from Lorraine Drive onto Finch Avenue West at the present time.

• Traffic levels on Finch Avenue West and at the intersection of Yonge Street and Finch Avenue are heavy.

• Comprehensive development on Lorraine Drive has not been achieved. Some residents from the remainder of the Lorraine Drive development block expressed the view that this proposal was not comprehensive in nature. The remainder of the block west of Lorraine Drive is not currently assembled with the ownership fragmented.

A further meeting was held with planning and transportation staff on March 11, 1998 to address the above concerns and to ensure a clear understanding by all. Key issues that were also addressed at that meeting, in addition to those expressed previously, were:

• The provision of Service Road lots by developers was questioned. It was expressed that the two development applications already approved and proposed should both share equally the land acquisition for the Service Road.

• The location of the temporary cul-de-sac on Lorraine was questioned. Several people expressed the view that the cul-de-sac that was approved as a result of the Ghods application (UDZ-95-31) on Lorraine be moved to allow the remaining residents to access the western portion of Lorraine or Blakeley Road.

• There was also concern about emergency access onto Lorraine Drive caused by the temporary blocking off of Lorraine Drive at Blakeley Road. There is a concern that emergency vehicles may be delayed if they access the wrong portion of Lorraine Drive. There was also concern expressed about emergency vehicles being able to get quick access onto Finch Avenue West from Lorraine Drive because of heavy traffic.

The densities from the service road between Lorraine Drive and Finch Avenue West could be transferred to the remainder of the site west of Lorraine Drive to make a viable development site. There have been meetings over the years with the existing residents to help them appreciate the scope of an application to redevelop their block. The opportunity to pursue the development of these lands by the residents can be followed up with Planning Department.

With respect to the emergency access concern, Planning staff will be following up with the emergency service providers to ensure they are well aware of the access situation for properties on Lorraine Drive.

6.0Planning Issues:

6.1Land Use:

The proposed residential towers and the ground floor commercial uses are in keeping with the permitted uses of the Official Plan designations on the site.

6.2Density:

The maximum density assigned to the site, exclusive of incentives and transfers is a combination of 5.0 FSI on the 5 northern lots and 3.75 FSI on the southern lot. The Plan permits a density increase through incentives for the provision of specific uses and facilities and density transfers for the provision of land for public purposes such as roads.

6.2.1Incentives

The applicant has proposed to include indoor amenity space of 502 m² on the second floor in the north tower and indoor space of 62 m² in the south tower. A bicycle storage area is also proposed in the south tower of 64 m². In accordance with the policies of the Uptown Plan, these areas qualify as incentives to a maximum of 1x the gross floor area of each facility. On a per unit basis, there is approximately 4.5 m² per unit of indoor recreational space proposed for the north tower and 0.5 m² per unit of indoor recreational space proposed for the south tower. This amounts to an aggregate of approximately 2.5 m² per unit or approximately 3% of the gross floor area.

A total of 627 m² of gross floor area can be exempted from the calculation of density.

6.2.2Transfers

The applicant will convey 11 Blakeley Road to the City in exchange for the density attributable to the site. The City will use 11 Blakeley for a portion of the Service Road and associated buffer area. The Uptown policies require that the developer provide land for the Service Road when the site abuts the Service Road or requires a functional section of the Service Road. The policies encourage the provision of such lands through density transfers.

In addition, the southern 10 metres of the site are to be conveyed to the City for future access to redevelopment on the Yonge Street frontage. The development to the south has contributed the southern 10 metres. All conveyances will be secured at this time. The applicant will provide for the maintenance of this land as a condition of site plan approval until it is required. A total density increase of 12.5 percent results from the combination of incentives and transfers.

6.3Comprehensive Development:

The development proposed does not cover the entire site specific policy area. It leaves adequate development sites on the west side of Lorraine Drive. An assessment of the Lorraine block was made during the review of rezoning application UDZ-95-31 at 15-25 Lorraine Drive by Ghods Developments. It was determined that a concept as outlined in Schedule "E" was achievable on the city block through this previous assessment. Residential development of 15-25 storeys was shown on the current site. The two proposed 18 storeys residential buildings are in keeping with this scenario, and provision for access between the development to south at 15-25 Lorraine Drive and the current proposal have been made in accordance with this concept plan.

The proposed development does not preclude development in the remainder of the block. Development parcels are of a sufficient size and have adequate density to support the development of the remainder of the block. Density from the remaining Service Road lands can be transferred to lands within the remainder of the block, including the Yonge Street fronting properties, in compliance with the Official Plan policies. It should be noted that if assembled as a whole, the density from the Service Road lots between Lorraine Drive and Finch Avenue West could all be transferred to the development lots of the west side of Lorraine Drive.

6.4Infrastructure and Service Road:

The Uptown Service Road is planned to accommodate the ultimate levels of development contemplated by the Uptown Plan. It is intended that the construction of the Service Road be paid for by private development, and therefore the timing of construction is dependent on the pace of growth within the Uptown. Any new development must demonstrate that the traffic generated by the development can be accommodated in the existing road network. If the traffic cannot be accommodated, a functional section of the Service Road is required. The Traffic Impact Study submitted by the applicant has been reviewed by the Transportation Department. It shows that the proposed development can be accommodated within the existing road network.

It should be noted that there was considerable concern from the community regarding the timing of the construction of the Service Road and the traffic in the area. Subsequent to the community meeting, and in response to these concerns, the applicant acquired 11 Blakeley Road for Service Road purposes. The applicant will convey this property to the City and the density attributable to that property will be transferred to the development site. Further, the applicant will be required to pay Yonge Centre Development Charges, which are intended to contribute specifically towards the hard and soft service requirements of the North York Centre. A portion of these contributions is specially allocated for the construction of the Service Road.

The applicant will also convey a 10 metre strip of land at the south end of the site which represents half of a future access. The development to the south also conveyed a 10 metre strip of land to make up the balance of the requirement. This future access is illustrated on the block concept plan in Schedule "E". Lands will be held by the City until such a time as the front part of the block is redeveloped.

The temporary cul-de-sac on Lorraine Drive prohibiting access onto Blakeley Road resulted from the Ghods rezoning application to the south of the site and the concerns of the residents of the Edithvale neighbourhood to the west of the Uptown. The temporary cul-de-sac is intended to prevent traffic infiltration into this stable residential neighbourhood to the west from new development. The accompanying landscaping around the cul-de-sac will form part of the permanent landscaping next to the Service Road when it is built. The construction of the cul-de-sac is a condition of approval for the Ghods development. Currently, Lorraine Drive is blocked off by concrete barriers but will be replaced by a properly constructed cul-de-sac this year. The Fire Department has been made aware of the emergency access concerns of the residents of Lorraine Drive. The concerns can be further addressed through signs at the Finch Avenue West and Lorraine Drive intersections.

In the long term, Lorraine Drive will be closed at Finch Avenue West when the Service Road is constructed as a new point of access to Finch Avenue West and the temporary cul-de-sac at Lorraine Drive and Blakeley Road removed. Approvals for any necessary road closing and the opening of the Service Road will be coordinated to ensure ongoing access to Finch Avenue West for all residents on the block.

6.4.1Traffic Certification

It is the policy of Council not to approve a rezoning for a development having more than 5,000 m² of total floor space unless a traffic certification is completed and acceptable to Council and in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan. It must be shown that:

• traffic resulting from the development will not significantly contribute to reducing the level of service on nearby arterial roads and their intersections with local and collector roads to below a generally acceptable level;
• the project can be accommodated by the existing and planned transportation infrastructure;
• the project will not increase local residential road traffic significantly;
• the project provides enough parking so that occupants and visitors will be unlikely to disrupt off-site roadways and unaffiliated parking areas, but does not provide so much parking as to discourage achievement of the transit modal split targets of this plan; and
• the site layout provides adequately for the movement needs of visiting pedestrians, automobiles and commercial vehicles without disrupting bordering streets and properties.

Traffic certification has been provided by the applicant and is attached as Schedule "O". The Transportation Department has reviewed the Traffic Impact Studies which accompanies this certification and has no objections.

6.5Community Services and Facilities

6.5.1 Parkland

The applicant had originally proposed that 12 Lorraine Drive be used for parks purposes. The Parks and Recreation Department determined that the conveyance of 12 Lorraine Drive was not acceptable because it represents an isolated parcel of land which is far removed from any existing parkland in the area and is of little practical use for parkland development. The Parks and Recreation Department subsequently advised that a parcel of land in the vicinity of 29 or 31 Lorraine Drive would be more appropriate as they had been identified as potential parkland sites abutting St. Cyril Separate School in the Parkland Acquisition Strategy. The City has since purchased 29 Lorraine Drive.

The development will also be subject to 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland.

6.5.2Private Amenity Space

The applicant has proposed private indoor recreational uses in both the north and south towers as discussed in the section regarding incentives. This type of space in encouraged by both the policies of the Uptown Plan and Official Plan Amendment 447.

The applicant has also proposed some outdoor recreational space. A pre-school playground of 278 m² has been proposed next to the south tower at the southeast corner. A second floor outdoor terrace of 332 m² is proposed on the north tower. Minimum indoor and outdoor amenity space requirements are reflected in the draft zoning by-law.

6.5.3School Facilities

The Metropolitan Separate School Board objects to the rezoning application due to the lack of permanent facilities and overcrowding at Brebeuf College, Loretto Abbey and St. Joseph Morrow Park Catholic Secondary Schools. The Board has not identified required lands or facilities to address this situation. It should be noted that the western portion of St. Cyril's Separate School is required for a portion of the Service Road in this general location.

The North York Board of Education has indicated accommodation pressures on their facilities will result from this proposal being built, but have not objected to the application.

Conclusions:

The proposal to develop the Finch Avenue West and Lorraine Drive site with two 18 storey residential towers is appropriate development which is consistent with the policies of the Uptown Plan. The applicant is contributing lands for the future Service Road and associated buffer area as well as land for an access to service the Lorraine Drive block. This will assist the City in achieving the infrastructure and open space objectives of the Secondary Plan. The development is consistent with both the Uptown Plan policies and the policies in Official Plan Amendment 447 known as the North York Centre Secondary Plan.

In accordance with Council policy, a Site Plan application has been processed concurrently with the rezoning application. The applicant has provided detailed plans and drawings that demonstrate the proposal satisfies the urban design objectives of the Uptown Plan.

Contact Name:

Karen Whitney, Planner

Phone: 395-7109Fax: 395-7155

(A copy of the schedules, appendices, 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 reports:

(i)(July 10, 1998) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services regarding a strategy for the implementation of the North York Centre Plan Service Road, in response to North York Community Council's requests at its meetings of May 6, 1998 and June 24, 1998;

(ii)(July 10, 1998) from the Toronto Transit Commission reporting on the estimation of the percentage of transit versus auto use at this location both with and without a direct subway connection, in response to North York Community Council's request at its meeting of May 6, 1998;

________

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

-Ms. Kim Kovar, Solicitor, on behalf of the applicant, Harry Snoek, who indicated that this development does not trigger the need to build the functional section of the service road but the applicant has acquired 11 Blakeley Road so that it can be used for the future service road. She also agreed with the recommendations contained in the joint report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services regarding a strategy for the implementation of the North York Centre Plan service road. Insofar as this development was concerned, it does comply with both the Uptown Plan policies and the policies in Official Plan Amendment 447. She concluded by requesting the Community Council to approve the application.

-Mr. Peter Cheatley, Planning Consultant, on behalf of the 15 property owners on Lorraine Drive, who indicated that these residents wish to reserve their right to file an appeal. He further indicated that these property owners will be filing a rezoning application for the lands on the west side of Lorraine Drive and east of Blakeley. Mr. Harry Snoek is also one of the owners of property within that block and the residents would be discussing with him the possibility of joining their group for the rezoning of those lands. The residents will be working on the submission of their own rezoning application but wish to reserve their right to appeal at a later date regarding any amending by-law for this site.

________

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

A.Councillor Gardner, North York Centre, moved that the report (March 18, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, be adopted; and that application UDZ-96-30 - Harry Snoek, be approved as set out in the foregoing report.

B.Councillor Filion, North York Centre, moved that:

(i)the application be approved in principle;

(ii)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to prepare for the North York Community Council, a transportation analysis for this development based on the 24 percent transit use noted in the report from the Toronto Transit Commission; and that such report include any transportation improvements that may be required to deal with traffic from this site;

(iii)the by-law not be enacted until such time as Council has dealt with this report.

Part (i) of the foregoing motion by Councillor Filion was ruled by the Chair to be out of order.

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

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

AGAINST:Councillors Sgro, Li Preti, Feldman

ABSENT:Councillor Shiner

Carried

A recorded vote on Part (iii) of the foregoing motion B. by Councillor Filion was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Mammoliti, Moscoe, Augimeri, Flint, Filion

AGAINST:Councillors Sgro, Li Preti, Feldman, Berger, Gardner, Chong, Minnan-Wong, King

ABSENT:Councillor Shiner

Lost

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

FOR:Councillors Sgro, Li Preti, Augimeri, Feldman, Berger, Flint, Gardner, Chong, Minnan-Wong, King

AGAINST:Councillors Mammoliti, Moscoe, Filion

ABSENT:Councillor Shiner

Carried