Amendment to the Etobicoke Official Plan and Zoning Code
Fieldgate Apartments, 2 Triburnham Place - File No. Z-2255
(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, deferred consideration of this Clause to the
next regular meeting of City Council to be held on November 25, 1998.)
The Etobicoke Community Council, after considering the deputations and the findings
of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (September
16, 1998) from the Director of Community Planning, West District, recommends as
follows:
(1)the application for amendment to the Etobicoke Official Plan to correct a technical
mapping error that occurred during the drafting of maps associated with the review of
the Official Plan, be approved; and
(2)the report of the Director of Community Planning (September 16, 1998) pertaining to
the proposed Official Plan Amendment, be adopted:
The Etobicoke Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting in
accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting
was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.
The Etobicoke Community Council further reports having deferred consideration of the
application for amendment to the Zoning Code and requested the Director of Community
Planning, West District to submit a further report to a continuation of the public meeting on
November 12, 1998, with respect to the staff reports and an Ontario Municipal Board
Decision made in 1965 regarding the subject property.
The Etobicoke Community Council submits the following report from the Director of
Community Planning, West District:
Purpose:
To consider an amendment to the Zoning Code to permit the development of 14, two-storey
condominium townhouse units to be developed in conjunction with an existing 10-storey
rental apartment building municipally known as 2 Triburnham Place. An amendment to the
EtobicokeOfficial Plan has also been requested in order to correct a technical mapping error
that occurred during the drafting of maps associated with the review of Etobicoke's Official
Plan.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
City funding is not required. There are no impacts on capital or operating budgets.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the application by Fieldgate Apartments be the subject of a Public
Meeting to obtain the views of interested parties and, if approved, the conditions outlined in
this report be fulfilled.
Background:
The subject property was rezoned from Second Density Residential (R2) to Fourth Density
Residential (R4) in 1966 by Zoning By-law 14,915. A 10-storey, rental apartment building
(2Triburnham Place), containing 137 units, was constructed in 1967.
On June 25, 1997, the applicant notified Council that the existing apartment building property
was designated as "Medium Density Residential" on Map 4, Land Use, of the Official Plan.
Staff reviewed this matter and confirmed that the previous Consolidated Official Plan had
designated this property as Residential High Density, and that a 'technical' error occurred as
part of the 1990 Official Plan review process, which resulted in the site's current designation
as Medium Density Residential. In the absence of a formal development proposal by the
applicant, Council at its meeting of October 6, 1997, decided that no action be taken.
In December, 1997, an application for an amendment to the Zoning Code was received
requesting permission to develop 14, two-storey condominium townhouses on the northerly
portion of the property. An amendment to the Etobicoke Official Plan has also been applied
for order to correct the technical mapping error.
Site Description and Surrounding Uses:
The total site is approximately 1.54 ha (3.80 acres) in size with frontage on two roadways;
Burnhamthorpe Road and Triburnham Place (Exhibit No. 1). Access to the property is taken
off Triburnham Place. A water feature and circular drive are located at the front of the existing
10-storey, 137 unit rental building, south of which is an above ground swimming pool,
located at the southeast corner of the property.
Parking is located in an underground garage accessed by one ramp and on surface parking
areas towards the north end of the site directly behind the existing building. The site contains
a considerable amount of landscaped open space (62%) and a number of mature trees.
Surrounding zoning categories and land uses are as follows:
North:Second Density Residential (R2) - single detached dwellings
South:Planned Commercial Local (CPL) - local shopping plaza on the south side of
BurnhamthorpeRoad
East:Second Density Residential (R2) and Planned Commercial Local (CPL) - single
detached dwellings and automobile service station
West:Third Density Residential (R3) and Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) -
ElmcrestCreek and townhouses beyond.
Proposal:
Fieldgate Apartments are proposing to amend the Zoning Code to permit the development of
fourteen condominium townhouse units, 2 storeys in height, to be developed in conjunction
with an existing 10-storey, 137 unit rental apartment building for a combined total of 151
units. The applicants propose to sever a portion of the existing apartment site (Block A) to
create a smaller development parcel to the north (Block B), adjacent to the neighbouring
single detached housing.
Exhibit No.1 is a map showing the location of the property. Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3 are
reductions of the site and elevation plans submitted by the applicant. A summary of site
statistics is provided in Table 1. The proposed condominium townhouses would be located at
the north end of the property accessed off of Triburnham Place. Each of the townhouses
would contain three bedrooms and would be approximately 6 m (20 ft.) in width and 143.5 m²
(l, 544.7 sq.ft.) in size. Two blocks of townhouses are proposed: one block of nine units and
one block of five units.
Access to the townhouse parking spaces would occur via a new 7.0 m (23 ft.) wide driveway
off the Triburnham Place right-of-way. Two parking spaces would be provided for every
townhouse, one in the garage and one on the driveway. An additional 5 visitor parking spaces
will be provided at-grade near the entrance to the development.
The proposed development of Block B would cause the displacement of some landscape open
space and a number of surface visitor parking spaces currently utilized by the existing
10storey apartment building. The applicant proposes to relocate the visitor parking spaces
around the driveway system at the front of the building on Block A. A 1.8 m (6 ft.) wood
screen fence will be installed along the north property line which would limit the impact on
privacy and views for the adjacent residential properties.
Comment:
Official Plan:
The site is designated as "Medium Density Residential" on Map 4, Land Use, of the (1990)
OfficialPlan. Staff have reviewed this matter and confirm that the previous Consolidated
Official Plan had designated this property as Residential High Density, and, that a 'technical'
error occurred as part of the 1990 Official Plan review process, which resulted in the site's
current designation as MediumDensity Residential.
As there was no intention to down-designate this property, it is suggested that an amendment
to the Official Plan be initiated to restore its rightful designation as High Density Residential
which generally permits multiple unit housing of all types to be developed within the range of
70-185uph (28-75 upa) to a maximum floor space index (FSI) of 2.5. A draft of Parts 1 and 2
of a proposed Official Plan Amendment to rectify this 'technical' error is attached (Exhibit No.
11).
The existing apartment site at 2 Triburnham has been developed at a density of 89 uph (36
upa) with a corresponding FSI of 0.98. As a result of the proposed condominium townhouse
development and associated realignment of property boundaries, BlockA would exhibit a
density of 119 uph (48 upa) and a FSI of 1.32. A density and FSI of 36 uph (15 upa) and 0.52,
respectively, would be provided on Block B. The proposal would comply with the low end of
the density provisions contained within the Official Plan for Residential High Density.
Residential Intensification Policies:
Section 4.2.17 of the Official Plan provides for the intensification of High Density Residential
designations through the provision of additional residential units on apartment sites, provided
that the level of development is within the density limits of the Plan. The townhouses would
be located on a vacant portion of the site between the existing 10-storey apartment building
and the low density residential neighbourhood to the north with sufficient separation from
adjacent buildings and surrounding land uses. The project would provide an appropriate
transition between the Low Density Residential community to the north and the existing
10-storey building (Exhibit No. 3).
Section 4.2.18 of the Official Plan recognizes the potential for additional residential
development at higher densities. Proposals to amend the Official Plan or Zoning Code for
these purposes shall be subject to the criteria outlined in Section 4.2.19. Staff have evaluated
the proposal within the context of these criteria which have been appended as Exhibit No.4.
Based on this review, staff are satisfied from a land use point of view that the proposal meets
the criteria for High Density Residential Development and Housing Intensification. The site is
directly adjacent to an arterial roadway with sufficient capacity to support the proposed
development. In terms of height, density, floor space index and landscape open space, the
project could be accommodated on the site with limited impact on the existing apartment
building and surrounding developments. Residents of the proposed development would have
access to local social services, retail facilities and parks.
Zoning Code:
The application would require the repeal of Site Specific Zoning By-law 14,915, as it applies
to the subject lands, and the introduction of a new site specific zoning by-law. This by-law
should provide the necessary exemptions to reflect both the existing and the proposed
developments, as well as take into consideration the anticipated land severance application.
Landscape Open Space and Recreational Amenities:
The proposed site plan would allow for 53 percent of Block A and 45 percent of Block B to be
devoted to landscape open space, with an average of 51 percent over the combined site. This
would be consistent with the landscape percentages associated with other recent approvals for
housing intensification. The applicant is proposing to refurbish areas surrounding the existing
swimming pool, patio area, and provide a new passive recreation area for the residents of the
existing apartment building. Intensified landscaping is also proposed in certain areas around
the existing building and water feature.
Notwithstanding these percentage figures, the amount of useable on-site landscape space and
recreational amenities on Block A would be only marginally reduced for residents of the
existing building. Each Block would be self sufficient in terms of its provision of landscape
open space and recreational amenities.
The proposed rear yards of the townhouses would be generally 7.5 m (25 ft.) in depth, with
the exception of those units backing onto Elmcrest Creek, where the rear yards would be 10 m
(33 ft.) in depth, measured to the long-term stable slope line. (This matter is discussed further
in the ValleyImpact Zone Section of this report.)
As the site contains a significant number of mature trees, the applicant will be required to
submit a tree survey during the Site Plan review process, in the event of approval. The survey
shall identify the size, species and health of each tree and indicate which trees are to be
preserved, relocated or removed. Tree protection and preservation details will also be
required.
Parking and Traffic:
The Transportation Planning Section of the Works Department has advised that due to the
modest scale and limited trip generating potential of the development, a traffic impact study is
not required. Transportation staff are satisfied with the driveway layout, traffic circulation and
parking supply proposed by the applicant (Exhibit Nos. 5 and 6).
Transportation staff are also satisfied with the location of the proposed driveway which gains
access via the northerly end of Triburnham Place, subject to the submission of a report to the
satisfaction of the Division regarding the condition of the below grade parking structure and
its ability to accommodate the added weight of the roadway and vehicle traffic.
Valley Impact Zone:
Section 6.1.2 of the Official Plan establishes a Valley Impact Zone which includes all land
within a valley, from top-of-bank to top-of-bank and all lands in between. In accordance with
these policies, all structures, including paved surfaces, are to be located 10 m (33 ft.) from the
long term stable slope line.
Toronto Region Conservation Authority staff have concluded that the location of the proposed
townhouse units flanking Elmcrest Creek is acceptable, provided that a survey is submitted
which identifies the top-of-bank limit and that the site specific by-law prohibits any principal
structures within the 10 m (33 ft.) setback and restricts the use of the lands below the
top-of-bank to passive recreational (Exhibit No. 7).
TRCA and Parks staff recommend that lands beyond this limit be conveyed to the appropriate
public authority, and that such conveyance would not be eligible to offset credit against the
associated parkland dedication requirement. Such lands should also be rezoned to Public Open
Space (OS), consistent with the valleyland acquisition policy set out in Section 6.1.12 of the
Official Plan.
Agency Comments/Department Circulation:
In response to the circulation of plans submitted in support of this application, the former
Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, Fire Department, Realty Services and Canada
Post Corporation, have expressed no objections.
Comments from Parks and Recreation Services, Toronto Hydro, Toronto Police Department
and BellCanada remain outstanding.
The Development Engineering Section of the Works Department has advised that there are
existing watermains, storm and sanitary sewers available on Triburnham Place (Exhibit No.
8). Storm water management shall be to the satisfaction of the Works Department.
The Toronto District School Board has advised that the students anticipated from the
proposed development can be accommodated at Mill Valley Junior School, Bloordale Middle
School, and Silverthorn Collegiate Institute, but the Board may be required to make
alternative accommodation arrangements for some or all of these students once the local
schools reach their capacity (ExhibitNo.9). The Toronto Catholic School Board has objected
to the proposal due to the lack of permanent facilities and overcrowding at Nativity Catholic
School (Exhibit No.10). Staff note that neither Board has adopted a Development Charges
By-Law on which to base such contributions. In accordance with the practise adopted in the
rest of the City, Planning staff do not recommend that such a condition be imposed.
The project would be subject to the prevailing development charges in effect at the time of the
issuance of the building permits, as well as a 5 percent cash-in-lieu of parkland contribution.
Community Meeting:
On February 16, 1998, approximately 40 people attended a community meeting to review the
subject proposal. Concerns expressed by area residents related to loss of trees and landscape
open space, lack of parking, traffic generation, density, loss of views and privacy, loss of
wildlife, and cost of townhouse units.
The concerns related to planning matters have been discussed in this report.
Conclusions:
The subject application has been evaluated within the context of the housing intensification
and High Density Residential provisions of the Official Plan. Urban Development staff are of
the opinion the proposed development is within the density limits of the Official Plan and
would comply with the criteria for housing intensification. In the event of approval, it would
be appropriate to incorporate development standards with respect to height, floor space index
and density into the amending by-law.
The proposed development would have limited impact on surrounding developments and
would provide an appropriate transition between the Low Density Residential community to
the north and the existing apartment building. Recreational facilities will be improved for the
existing apartment building while the proposed townhouses will enjoy private amenity spaces.
In the event of approval, the following conditions should apply:
Conditions to Approval:
l.Fulfillment of the following conditions by the applicant prior to the enactment of an
amendment to the Official Plan and amending by-law:
(i)The submission of a survey which identifies the top-of-bank limit to the satisfaction of the
TRCA, Parks and Recreation Services and Urban Development Department. Lands beyond
this limit are to be conveyed to the appropriate public authority.
(ii)The submission of a report, to the satisfaction of the Transportation Division, on the
condition of the below-grade parking structure and its ability to accommodate the added
weight of the roadway and vehicle traffic.
(iii) The signing of a Development Agreement and/or Servicing Agreement and payment of
the necessary fees, if required.
(iv)Receipt of comments from, and subject to any requirements of Parks and Recreation
Services, Toronto Hydro, Toronto Police Department and Bell Canada .
2.The amending by-law shall provide the appropriate exemptions from, or repeal of, site
specific by-laws, and incorporate the following provisions inter alia:
(i)Development of Block A shall be limited to one apartment building with a maximum
height of 10-storeys, 137 units, a floor space index of 1.33 and a minimum landscape open
space of 53 percent.
(ii)Development of Block B shall be limited to a maximum of fourteen condominium
townhouse units, with a building height of 2-storeys, a floor space index of 0.53, and a
minimum landscape open space of 45 percent.
(iii)Development standards for Blocks A and B to reflect above and below grade building
setbacks and parking requirements.
(iv)Conveyed below-top-of bank lands be rezoned to Public Open Space (OS).
3.Further detailed consideration of the proposal under the Site Plan Control provisions to
include inter alia:
(i)Signing of a Site Control Agreement, and payment of the necessary fees associated with
the preparation, execution and registration of same.
(ii)Submission of site and landscaping plans detailing fencing, curbing, grading, upgrading
recreational facilities for Block A, planting and tree preservation to the satisfaction of the
Staff Advisory Committee on Development Control and the posting of an appropriate
financial guarantee to ensure compliance with the approved plans.
(iii)Provision of on-site facilities for storage and collection of waste and recyclable materials,
the provision of stormwater management facilities or cash-in-lieu payment, the signing of
agreements, and the posting of financial guarantees, if required by the Works Department.
(iv)Submission of a parking and construction management plan to the satisfaction of the
Works Department.
(v)Submission of necessary legal agreements, maintenance, encroachment or otherwise
between the existing rental apartment building and the proposed condominium complex
regarding the proposed location of surface parking and circulation for the condominium
complex on top of the existing below-grade parking structure to the satisfaction of the City
Solicitor.
(vi)The developer will be required to pay the prevailing development charges and parkland
dedication requirements in effect at the time of the issuance of building permit.
Contact Name:
Paulo Stellato, MCIP, RPP, Planner - Central District, Development and Design
Tel: (416) 394-6004; Fax: (416) 394-6063
(Copies of Exhibit Nos. 1-11 referred to in the foregoing report were forwarded to all
Members of Council with the agenda of the Etobicoke Community Council meeting of
October 14, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
_____
The following persons appeared before the Etobicoke Community Council with respect to the
foregoing:
-Mr. J. Dawson, Solicitor for Fieldgate Apartments;
-Mrs. J. Beames, Etobicoke, totally opposed to any development on the subject lands, which
she and her neighbours conveyed to the original developer with the understanding that it
would not be developed with anything other than the existing apartment building and would
be maintained as a buffer zone; noting the major impact on their residences by a road
realignment; the negative impact on the value and the reduction in enjoyment of their
properties;
-Mr. S. Kleynhans, Etobicoke, opposed to the application and development on the greenspace
backing onto his property, which he was assured would remain when he purchased his house;
-Ms. V. Anderson, Etobicoke, opposed to the application, noting that the history of the
property dates back to 1965; citing the loss of greenspace and wildlife, increase in traffic, loss
of property value, etc;
-Mr. D. Zeraldo, Etobicoke, who stated that in 1965 the abutting owners each sold a portion
of their land to the developer of the apartment building, to be retained as green space, pointing
out that they would never have done so had they thought it would be used for future
development; and
-Mr. I. Noble, asking that the proposal be refused, noting the impact of recent developments
on the Etobicoke Creek and the resulting loss of wildlife.
The Etobicoke Community Council reports having had before it the following
communication:
-(October 1, 1998) from Ms. M. Copes, Etobicoke, objecting to the proposal because it would
cause terrible density in the neighbourhood.