February 23, 1999

To:Toronto Community Council

From:Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services

Subject:5 Castle Frank Crescent: Application for consent under Chapter 276, Article I of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to allow the retention of a deck within the Rosedale Valley Ravine at the rear of the new house which is located outside the Ravine. (Ward 23 -Midtown)

Purpose:

To obtain City Council's consent to Application No. 098054 respecting the retention of a deck at the rear of the existing house.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1.City Council consent to Application No. 098054 respecting 5 Castle Frank Crescent to permit the construction of a deck located within the Rosedale Valley Ravine, on the condition that the owner enter into a Ravine Control Agreement requiring:

(a)that the owner shall provide and maintain the landscaping and ravine improvements substantially in accordance with Plan No. L1, date stamped as received on October 19, 1998, as redlined on November 30, 1998, prepared by Lloyd & Nodwell Landscape Architects, as on file with the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services; and

(b)that the rain water leaders, at the rear of the building, remain connected to the existing drainage system;

2.the City Solicitor be authorized to prepare the necessary agreement; and

3.the owner be advised to contact the Forestry Section, Parks and Recreation Division, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Services, at 392-1900, upon the completion of all work as indicated on the approved plans.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Comments:

1.PROJECT: To maintain a deck located within the Rosedale Valley Ravine at the rear of the existing house.

2.LOCATION: On the west side of Castle Frank Crescent to the south of Bloor Street East.

3.SITE: The property is generally rectangular and very deep, sloping at the rear of the house down to the floor of the Rosedale Valley Ravine and Rosedale Valley Road. The current owner of the property wishes to legitimize the construction of the existing deck at the rear of the house . This deck was constructed by the previous owner of the property.

4.COMMENTS FROM CIVIC OFFICIALS (see Appendix A)

(a)The Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services has indicated that the proposed deck does not comply with the requirements of the Zoning By-law in that it exceeds the maximum depth of a building. The applicant has previously applied to the Committee of Adjustment to allow this variance. The Committee of Adjustment has adjourned the hearing on this application until the ravine consent application has been dealt with by Council.

(b)The Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services indicated his satisfaction with the proposal subject to conditions related to drainage and slope stability.

(c)The Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Services stated that the current proposal satisfactorily addresses their concerns regarding the preservation of the natural vegetation within the ravine.

5.PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Conclusions:

The applicant has proposed the upgrading of indigenous plant material within the ravine portion of the site and the removal of non-native Norway Maple trees. In this instance I believe that the current proposal for the maintenance of the existing deck at the rear of the new house is both reasonable and within the intent of Chapter 276, Ravines, of the former City of Toronto's Municipal Code. Therefore, I recommend that City Council give consent to the proposed development, subject to the owner entering into a Ravine Control Agreement.

Contact Name:

Angus M. Cranston

Telephone: (416) 392-0425

Fax: (416) 392-1330

Beate Bowron

Director of Community Planning

South District

(p:\1999\ug\uds\pln\to991832.pln)-ms

APPENDIX A

Reports of Civic Officials

1.Urban Planning and Development Services (September 2, 1998)

Our comments concerning this proposal are as follows:

Description:Erect deck addition at rear

Zoning Designation:R1 Z0.35Map:51H-323

Applicable By-law(s):438-86, as amended

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 rear 15 metres of the building/addition exceeding the depth of 17 metres will be set back 0.0 metres from the west and east side lot lines instead of the minimum required 7.5 metres.

Other Applicable Legislation and Required Approvals

1.The proposal does not require the approval of Heritage Toronto under the Ontario Heritage Act.

2.The proposal requires Site Plan approval under Section 41 of the Planning Act because the property is located within an area of ravine control. Please call (416) 392-7352 for an application or further information.

3.The proposal is not subject to the provisions of the City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 165, Article I (Parks Levy).

4.The proposal does not require City Council's approval pursuant to the Rental Housing Protection Act, 1989.

2.Works and Emergency Services (September 8, 1998)

Recommendations:

1. That the owner be required, as a condition of approval of the plans and drawings for the Project, to submit a slope stability analysis for the review and approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

2. That the owner be advised 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.

Comments:

Location

West side of Castle Frank Crescent, south of Bloor Street East.

Proposal

To maintain a wooden deck addition at the rear of a single-family dwelling within the designated ravine lands.

Ravine Control Area

The southerly portion of the site, containing most of the wooden deck, is located within the lands designated as ravine and is subject to Municipal Code Chapter 276, Article I (Rosedale Valley Ravine).

Accordingly, it will be necessary for the owner to submit a slope stability analysis for the review and approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, to ensure the slope can withstand the footings and that there will be no future erosion of the slope caused by the installation of the terrace.

Parking

Although details with respect to the parking facility are not included with this application, the application, indicates that parking for 2 vehicles is provided within an attached garage. This satisfies the estimated parking demand for 1 parking space and, as far as can be ascertained, the Zoning By-law requirement for a like number.

Refuse Collection

The City will continue to provide this project with regular curbside refuse collection in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code, Chapter 309, Solid Waste. This will require the provision of a rodent proof storage area on private property to separately store recyclable and non-recyclable material generated between collections.

Work within the Road Allowance

Approval for any work to be carried out within the street allowance must be received from this Department.

(January 22, 1999)

Comments:

The proposal for this site, located on the west side of Castle Frank Crescent, south of Bloor Street East, was dealt with in a Departmental report dated September 8, 1998.

Mr. Frank Ferenczi, Architect, has submitted on behalf of Brenda Jean Cathrea, a geotechnical investigation report dated October 2, 1998, prepared by Terraprobe Limited, on the slope stability and foundation design for a wooden deck addition at the rear of a single-family dwelling located within the designated ravine lands.

The slope stability analysis has been reviewed by this Department and is acceptable, providing the rain water leaders, directed to grade at the rear of the building, remain connected to the existing drainage system.

As a result of the foregoing, Recommendation No. 1 of the September 8,1998, Departmental report has been satisfied and Recommendation No. 3 should be added as follows:

3.That the rain water leaders, at the rear of the building, remain connected to the existing drainage system.

3.Economic Development, Culture and Tourism (Parks and Recreation Division) (December 18, 1998)

This is to confirm the details of a meeting on November 30,1998 between Paul Nodwell, Angus Cranston and Bruce Gordon.

The revisions to the upper area of the slope just below the deck were red-lined on the plan to show where the additional planting will take place. Approximately 10 Lady ferns (Athyrium filix-femina) and 10 Christmas Fern (Polystichum acrostichoides) are to be planted 3' apart. Quantities of the plant material may change at the time of planting.

The Geotechnical Slope Report prepared by Terraprobe (page 6, paragraph 4) recommends that a thin layer of gravel 1 to 2 inches thick should extend beyond the perimeter of the deck at a distance of 3 feet to help prevent soil erosion. This recommendation is not acceptable as it is not in keeping with natural appearance and character of the ravine. The above mentioned recommendation must be removed from the report and a copy of the page showing the revision must be sent to us at which time our department will approve the ravine application.

If you should have any further questions or comments regarding these requirements, please do not hesitate to contact Bruce Gordon at 392-1900.

(February 12, 1999)

This will acknowledge the revision pertaining to the above noted development application which was circulated to Forestry Services on February 10,1999. I have reviewed the material and advise that:

-The revision made to page six of the report, prepared by Terraprobe and faxed by Frank Ferenczi Architect meets the approval of this Department.

4.The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (September 1, 1998)

This will acknowledge receipt of the above noted applications. It is our understanding that this proposal is for a deck/terrace addition. We offer the following comments.

The subject property is traversed by a valley corridor associated with a tributary of the Don River (Rosedale Valley). Enclosed please find a part print of the Authority's Flood Plain and Fill Regulation line map, sheet No. 2 of the Don River, on which we have plotted in red the subject property; in blue the regional flood plain; and in green the Authority's fill regulation limit. As you will note the subject property is located within the Fill Regulation area. In accordance with Ontario Regulation 158 a permit is required from the Authority prior to any of the following works taking place:

-place or dump fill or permit fill to be placed or dumped in the areas described in the schedules whether such fill is already located in or upon such area, or brought to or on such area from some other place or places.

The Authority's "Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program" (VSCMP) sets out policy criteria for development adjacent to and within valley corridors. Section 3.1.1 of VSCMP defines the valley corridor boundary by a line established 10 metres inland from the stable top of bank. In accordance with Section 4.1 of VSCMP, a new development is not permitted within the valley corridor boundary.

A review of the submitted drawings appears to indicate that the proposed deck/terrace addition extends over the top of bank. The Authority's policies do not allow for any proposed development to encroach over the top of bank. Based upon the above, we cannot support these applications at this time.

Authority staff is prepared to meet on-site with the applicant to discuss the Authority's policy requirements and assess the site conditions.

We trust this is satisfactory. However, should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned or Gaspare Ritacca at extension 324.

(January 20, 1999)

Further to our letter dated September 1, 1998, City staff has advised that the purpose of these applications is to recognize the existing deck/terrace and that no new development is proposed. On this basis, we would have no objections to the approval of these applications.

We trust this is satisfactory. However, should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned or Gaspare Ritacca at extension 324.