Draft By-law - Zoning By-law Amendment -

40 Colgate Avenue, 64 Colgate Avenue,

309 and 355 Logan Avenue (Don River)

The Toronto Community Council recommends that:

(1)the Draft By-law attached to the report (August 19, 1999 ) of the City Solicitor be approved and that authority be granted to introduce the necessary Bill in Council, substantially in the form of the Draft By-law, to give effect thereto, subject to receipt of an executed undertaking pursuant to Section 41 of the Planning Act in respect of the proposed 78 semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses on 40 Colgate Avenue, 309 and 355 Logan Avenue; and

(2)the report (June 18, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be adopted.

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, that notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act. The public meeting was held on September 14, 1999, and no one addressed the Toronto Community Council.

The Toronto Community Council submits the following report (August 19, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

This report provides the necessary draft by-law amendments: (1) to rezone 64 Colgate Avenue from I2 D3 to R2 Z2.0, thereby permitting residential uses on that part of the site, (2) to designate a component of the site as G (for park purposes), and (3) to permit 78 semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses on the part of the site known as 40 Colgate Avenue, 309 and 355 Logan Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The enactment of the Draft By-law has no financial implications or impact for the City. It requires no funding.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Toronto Community Council hold a public meeting in respect of the Draft By-law in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act.

Following the public meeting and in the event the Toronto Community Council wishes to approve the Draft By-law, it could recommend:

(2)the Draft By-law attached to the report (August 19, 1999 ) of the City Solicitor be approved and that authority be granted to introduce the necessary Bill in Council, substantially in the form of the Draft By-law, to give effect thereto, subject to receipt of an executed undertaking pursuant to Section 41 of the Planning Act in respect of the proposed 78 semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses on 40 Colgate Avenue, 309 and 355 Logan Avenue.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Toronto Community Council at its meeting of July 15, 1999 adopted the recommendations contained in the Final Report of the Commissioner Urban Planning and Development Services (June 18, 1999) concerning the above-noted subject. This report recommends a Zoning By-law Amendment which will: (1) rezone 64 Colgate Avenue from I2 D3 to R2 Z2.0, thereby permitting residential uses on that part of the site, (2) designate a component of the site as G (for park purposes), and (3) permit 78 semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses on the part of the site known as 40 Colgate Avenue, 309 and 355 Logan Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

This report contains the necessary Draft By-law, which, if enacted, will give effect to the Planning Report.

Conclusions:

N/A

Contact Name:

Stephen M. Bradley, Solicitor

Telephone:(416) 392-7790

Fax: (416) 397-4420

E-mail:sbradley@toronto.ca

--------

DRAFT BY-LAW

Authority:Toronto Community Council Report No. , Clause No. ,

as adopted by Council on

Enacted by Council:

CITY OF TORONTO

BY-LAW No. ________1999

To amend the General Zoning By-law No. 438-86 of the former City of Toronto with respect to the lands known as 40 Colgate Avenue, 64 Colgate Avenue, 309 and 355 Logan Avenue

The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1.District Map No. 52H-312 contained in Appendix "A" of By-law No. 438-86, being "A By-law To regulate the use of land and the erection, use, bulk, height, spacing of and other matters relating to buildings and structures and to prohibit certain uses of lands and the erection and use of certain buildings and structures in various areas of the City of Toronto", as amended, is further amended by,

(1)redesignating to R2 Z2.0 the lands shown as R2 Z2.0 and outlined by heavy lines on Map (insert no.) attached to and forming part of this by-law, and

(2)redesignating to G the lands shown as G and outlined by heavy lines on Map (insert no.) attached to and forming part of this by-law.

2.None of the following provisions of the said By-law No. 438-86, as amended: the definition of parking space as found in Section 2(1), Sections 4(4)(b), 6(3) Part I 1, 6(3) Part II 2, 6(3) Part II 3, 6(3) Part II 4, 6(3) Part II 5,6(3) Part II 7(ii) A, 6(3) Part II 7(iii), 6(3) Part III 1(a), and 6(3) Part VII 1(ii), shall apply to prevent the erection and use of 75 semi-detached houses and uses accessory thereto on Block A provided:

(1)not more than 75 semi-detached houses are erected or used on the lots within Block A and the said lots are used for no purpose other than semi-detached houses and uses accessory thereto;

(2)each lot upon which a semi-detached house is erected or used has a minimum width of 5.2 metres;

(3)the depth of each semi-detached house, measured between the closet point thereof to the front lot line and the closet point thereof to the rear lot line, is not more than 17.5 metres;

(4)the residential gross floor area of each semi-detached house does not exceed 210square metres and the maximum aggregate residential gross floor area of all semi-detached houses and row houses within Block A, Block B and Block C does not exceed 16,540square metres;

(5)no part of any semi-detached house, above grade, is located within 1.0 metre of the front lot line;

(6)no part of any semi-detached house, above grade, is located within 0.45 metres of the side lot line;

(7)no part of any semi-detached house, above grade, is located within 1.2 metres of the rear lot line provided that this section shall not apply to any projection permitted within set backs from rear lot lines by Section 6(3) PART II 8 of By-law No. 438-86, as amended;

(8)no part of any semi-detached house, above grade, within a corner lot is located within 0.7 metres of the flank of the lot;

(9)not less than one parking space is provided and maintained, for each semi-detached house, at the rear of the lot containing the semi-detached house with vehicular access to, and only to, the lane at the rear of the said lot;

(10)no part of any garage provided as an accessory use to a semi-detached house is located within 3.9 metres of that semi-detached house or within 3.9 metres of any other residential building;

(11)a minimum of 26 square metres of landscaped open space is provided and maintained on each lot containing a semi-detached house;

(12)the maximum number of storeys within a semi-detached house is three; and

(13)for the purposes of this Section, parking space has the same meaning ascribed to it in By-law No. 438-86, as amended, except that the minimum length of the parking space shall be 5.79 metres.

3.None of the following provisions of the said By-law No. 438-86, as amended: Sections 4(4)(b), 6(3) Part I 1, 6(3) Part II 2, 6(3) Part II 3, 6(3) Part II 4, 6(3) Part II 5, 6(3) Part II 6, 6(3) Part II 7(ii) A, 6(3) Part II 7(iii), 6(3) Part III 1(a), and 6(3) Part VII 1(ii), shall apply to prevent the erection and use of 28 row houses and uses accessory thereto on Block B provided:

(1)not more than 28 row houses are erected or used on the lots within Block B and the said lots are used for no purpose other than row houses and uses accessory thereto;

(2)each lot upon which a row house is erected or used has a minimum width of 4.195 metres;

(3)the depth of each row house, measured between the closet point thereof to the front lot line and the closet point thereof to the rear lot line, is not more than 17.0 metres;

(4)the residential gross floor area of each row house does not exceed 162square metres and the maximum aggregate residential gross floor area of all semi-detached houses and row houses within Block A, Block B and Block C does not exceed 16,540square metres;

(5)no part of any row house, above grade, is located within 1.0 metre of the front lot line;

(6)no part of any row house, above grade, is located within 0.45 metres of the side lot line;

(7)no part of any row house, above grade, is located within 1.0 metre of the rear lot line provided that this section shall not apply to any projection permitted within set backs from rear lot lines by Section 6(3) PART II 8 of By-law No. 438-86, as amended;

(8)not less than one parking space is provided and maintained, for each row house, at the rear of the lot containing the row house with vehicular access to, and only to, the lane at the rear of the said lot;

(9)a minimum of 7.0 square metres of landscaped open space is provided and maintained on each lot containing a row house;

(10)no part of any row house, above grade, is located within 0.9 metres of a side wall of a building on an adjacent lot;

(11)the maximum number of storeys within a row house is three; and

(12)each row house has a single entrance fronting on the street shown on Map No. (insert no.) attached hereto.

4.None of the following provisions of the said By-law No. 438-86, as amended: Sections 4(4)(b), 6(3) Part II 2, 6(3) Part II 4, 6(3) Part II 5, 6(3) Part II 6, 6(3) Part II 7(ii) A, 6(3) Part II 7(iii), and 6(3) Part VII 1(ii), shall apply to prevent the erection and use of 3 semi-detached houses and uses accessory thereto on Block C provided:

(1)not more than 3 semi-detached houses are erected or used on the lots within Block C and the said lots are used for no purpose other than semi-detached houses and uses accessory thereto;

(2)each lot upon which a semi-detached house is erected or used has a minimum width of 3.5 metres;

(3)no part of any semi-detached house, above grade, is located within 1.0 metre of the front lot line;

(4)no part of any semi-detached house, above grade, is located within 4.5 metres of the rear lot line provided that this section shall not apply to any projection permitted within set backs from rear lot lines by Section 6(3) PART II 8 of By-law No. 438-86, as amended;

(5)not less than one parking space is provided and maintained, for each semi-detached house, at the rear of the lot containing the semi-detached house with vehicular access to, and only to, the lane at the rear of the said lot;

(6)no part of any garage provided as an accessory use to a semi-detached house is located within 0.0 metres of that semi-detached house or within 3.9 metres of any other residential building;

(7)the maximum number of storeys within a semi-detached house is three; and

(8)the residential gross floor area of each row house does not exceed 162square metres and the maximum aggregate residential gross floor area of all semi-detached houses and row houses within Block A, Block B and Block C does not exceed 16,540square metres.

5. For the purpose of this by-law:

(1)"Block A", "Block B" and "Block C" mean those lands respectively delineated and identified as Block A, Block B and Block C on Map (insert no.) attached to and forming part of this by-law;

(2)each other word or expression which is italicized in this by-law shall have the same meaning as each such word or expression as defined in By-law No. 438-86, as amended.

(Maps to be inserted)

The Toronto Community Council also submits the following report (June 18, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

To permit the construction of 106 semi-detached houses and townhouses with rear yard parking.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1.The former City of Toronto Zoning By-law, By-law 438-86 as amended, be amended as it applies to 309 and 355 Logan Avenue and 40 Colgate Avenue, so as to:

(a)exempt the site from sections 2(1) respecting the definition of "parking space" and "row house", Sections 4 (4) (b), 6(3) Part I 1. residential gross floor area, 6(3) Part II 2. front lot line setback, 3. flanking lot line, 4. rear lot line setback, 5. building depth, 6, 7 A (ii) and (iii), 6(3) Part III 1 (a) landscape open space, 6(3) Part VII 1 (ii) minimum lot frontage, of the aforesaid By-law No. 438-86;

(b)permit the erection and use of 78 semi-detached houses and 28 row houses provided that:

(i)no part of the building above grade extends beyond the area shown on Map No. 1 attached to this report;

(ii)no more than 78 semi-detached houses are erected;

(iii)no more than 28 row houses are erected;

(iv)the height of the houses does not exceed three storeys;

(v)the density does not exceed 16,540 square metres; and

(vi)one parking space is provided for each unit;

(c)permit the conveyance of 1272 m2 of land to the City of Toronto for park purposes; and such land shall be remediated and improved by the applicant to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism; and

(d)permit the conveyance of a .7 hectare portion of the site to the City of Toronto for public highway purposes.

2.The former City of Toronto Zoning By-law, By-law 438-86 as amended, be amended as it applies to 64 Colgate Avenue to rezone the land from I2 D3 to R2 Z2.0 to facilitate the conveyance of the parkland to the City.

3.The owner enter into an undertaking under Section 41 of the Planning Act prior to the introduction of the Bills in Council.

4.The City Solicitor give statutory notice of the attached two draft by-laws for the next meeting of Toronto Community Council.

5.The owner be advised:

(a)of the need to convey the new street and lanes to the City, free and clear of all encumbrances, including rights-of-way, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor;

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

(c)of the requirement to comply with all relevant provisions of the Ontario Building Code prior to issuance of the building permit;

(d)to submit to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for approval information verifying that soil conditions within the proposed road allowances are acceptable for use for public highway purposes; and

(e)of the need to receive the approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for any work to be carried out within the abutting road allowances.

Background:

On April 28, 1999, Toronto Community Council endorsed the Plan of Subdivision Application No. 498031 for the division of land to permit a public park approximately 1300 square metres in size, a new public street and two public lanes to provide access to 78 semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses with rear yard parking, as well as one mid-rise residential building.

This proposal replaces an existing vacant parcel of land that previously held the Colgate-Palmolive Company plant. The project will contribute to the creation of a new neighbourhood within the existing community and knits the new and old communities together with a compatible built form.

Comments:

1.Location

The property known as 60 Colgate Avenue, 309 and 355 Logan Avenue, is located on the east side of Logan Avenue and the north side of Colgate Avenue.

2.Site and the Surrounding Context

To the west of the site is a traditional stable Low Density Residence Area. To the east and north of the site is the former South Riverdale industrial area that now contains a mix of residential and live/work units and some quasi-industrial type uses. With renewed interest and reinvestment occurring in the area, the neighbourhood has been undergoing a successful transformation from a former industrial area to a lively and popular residential community. A mix of uses, including residential, exists south of the site.

4.Proposed Development

The project involves 78 new semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses with a variety of parking options. These parking options include parking pads, integral garages and stand alone garages all with access from two proposed rear lanes. The combination of parking options permits houses to be offered for sale at more affordable prices. Parking for visitors to the site will be provided on the new street.

5.Public Review

A public meeting was held in the community on January 5, 1999, with approximately 65 residents in attendance. A number of planning issues were raised at that time including parking and traffic on Logan Avenue. These issues are discussed in section 7 of the report. The main concerns expressed by the residents involved the height, density and overlook of the proposed live/work building proposed on the east portion of the site at 64 Colgate Avenue. A separate application for an Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning is being processed for 64 Colgate Avenue and will be the subject of a future report.

6.Civic Comments

This application has been circulated to the various departments and agencies. Copies of the comments received in writing to date are attached as Appendix A. Verbal comments have been reflected in the report.

7.Planning Issues

7.1.Current Planning Controls

The site has recently been redesignated to a Low Density Residence Area under the Part I Official Plan which permits residential development up to l times the lot area. The density for the entire west parcel does not exceed 1 times the area of the lot.

The site is zoned R3 Z1.0, which permits a wide range of residential uses to a maximum density of 1.0 times the lot area. The height limit is 12.0 metres. The proposal does not comply with many of the Zoning By-law provisions with respect to setbacks, landscaped open space, minimum lot frontage, and building depth, but does meet the intent of the overall Zoning By-law. A site-specific Zoning By-law amendment is required to implement this proposal.

7.2Height, Built Form and Density

The design of the western portion of this new subdivision includes three storey houses that reflect both the height and built form of the surrounding area. The proposal has been designed to fit with the existing neighbourhood and to respond to comments from planning staff and the community. The height of the new houses, although 3 storeys, will be in keeping with the neighbourhood and does not exceed the existing height limit.

The mix of housing types, semi-detached and row houses, in a tight compact pattern is an efficient use of the land. It is an appropriate location for housing. Shopping on Queen Street is close by and sufficient school capacity, community facilities and transportation are readily available. This project will help in the revitalization of the area already underway in the surrounding community.

7.3Parking, Traffic and Vehicular Access

The development will provide 1 parking space for each unit in either a parking garage, integral garage or parking pad. All parking spaces are accessed off the new rear lanes with access to the lanes from Logan Avenue. This is acceptable to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

Area residents requested at the public meeting that consideration be given to the replacement of the existing parallel parking spaces on the north side of Colgate Avenue. These spaces could be replaced with angled parking spaces to increase parking capacity in the area. This matter is still under investigation by Traffic Operations of Works and Emergency Services and will be reported on separately.

7.4Parkland

As part of the Plan of Subdivision approximately 1300 m2 of land will be coming to the City with the approval of this site. The applicant has requested that the live/work building proposed for 64 Colgate Avenue be processed at a later date. In order to move the application for the low rise houses to the building permit stage, I have attached a by-law in Appendix B to change the industrial zoning on 64 Colgate Avenue to residential in order to be able to secure the parkland contribution now and allow the applicant some certainty of the future use of this land. The final built form details of the live/work building will come forward in the fall once revisions are complete.

The contribution of parkland to the City under the Plan of Subdivision will mean that the applicant has met the Parks Levy requirement. It is the intention of the applicant to finish the park with plant material and playground equipment. The final details of the park design will be discussed in the final report on 64 Colgate Avenue and secured with a Section 37 agreement.

7.5Application No. 298008 - 64 Colgate Avenue

The proposal for 64 Colgate Avenue is for 230 units in a six storey live/work building with 230 underground parking spaces. Residents are concerned with the details of the project and issues of overlook, density and height of the proposed live/work building.

Following the Plan of Subdivision application that was dealt with by City Council on May 11 and 12,1999, a further public meeting will be held in September, 1999 to discuss possible changes to the plans and the Official Plan Amendment needed. However, in order to secure the total park at one time, a draft by-law is attached to this report to rezone the parcel of 64 Colgate Avenue from I2 D3 to R2 Z2.0. The height limit of 18.0 metres remains unchanged. This zoning would be in keeping with the Official Plan designation of Mixed Industrial-Residential Area that permits R2 through an application. Further details of the live/work building, such as the at grade treatment of the entrances and relationship of the building to grade will be reviewed further. All of these issues will be addressed in my final report following the public meeting in September on the matter.

7.6School Capacity

The Toronto District School Board staff have indicated that there is sufficient enrolment capacity for the new students that will be generated from the new houses in this development. Although there is a current enrolment problem at the secondary school level, there will be enough lead time to ensure spaces for students entering the public school system in the lower grades to have space secured by the time the students reach the high school level.

7.7Affordable Housing

The affordable housing consideration for this site will be addressed on the 64 Colgate Avenue portion of the site.

8.Other Issues

The Buildings division has indicated that Site Plan Approval is required for this application. The applicant has now submitted plans and I will be preparing the Undertaking once all the civic comments are available.

Conclusions:

A Draft Plan of Subdivision was approved by City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999. The first half of the development proposal is for 78 semi-detached houses and 28 townhouses to be located on the west portion of the site. A Zoning By-law amendment is required to facilitate this half of the proposal and it is attached to this report for Council's consideration.

As part of the Plan of Subdivision for this site, a park approximately 1300m2 in size, will be conveyed to the City. The second half of the development on the eastern portion of the site will come forward as a separate planning report to deal with the Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning application. Until then, I am recommending that the eastern portion of the site be rezoned from industrial to residential to secure the entire parkland parcel up front and in one piece. The low rise development is appropriate for the site and the overall redevelopment scheme represents good planning for the area and should be approved in principle.

Contact Name:

Denise Graham

City Planning, East Section

Telephone:392-0871

Fax:392-1330

E-mail:dgraham1@toronto.ca

--------

Application Data Sheet

Confirmed Municipal Address:40 and 64 Colgate Avenue; 309 and 355 Logan Avenue.

Planning Controls (For verification refer to Chief Building Official)

Official Plan Designation:	Low Density Residence Area	Site Specific Provision:	No
Zoning District:	R3 Z1.0	Historical Status:	No
Height Limit (m):	12.0	Site Plan Control:	Yes

Project Information

Site Area:	17433.0 m2		Height:	Storeys:		3
Frontage:				Metres:		12.00
Depth:
				Indoor		Outdoor
Ground Floor:	5747.0 m2		Parking Spaces:	106
Residential GFA:	16542.0 m2		Loading Docks:
Non-Residential GFA:			(number, type)
Total GFA:	16542.0 m2

Dwelling Units					Floor Area Breakdown
Tenure:	Private				Land Use	Above Grade	Below Grade
Total Units:	106				Residential	16542.0 m2

Proposed Density
Residential Density: 0.95	Non-Residential Density:	Total Density: 0.95

--------

Appendix A

Comments of Civic Officials

1.Urban Planning and Development Services, dated May 27, 1999

Our comments concerning this proposal are as follows :Description: Subdivide property into 106 lots.

Zoning Designation:R3 Z1.0 AND I2 D3Map:52H 312

Applicable By-law(s):438-86, as amended by 239-1998, as amended

Plans prepared by:Fliess Gates McGowan Easton ArchitectsPlans dated: April 16, 1999

Zoning Review

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

1.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is3.5 metres, 4.195 metres, 4.4 metres, 4.75 metres, 5.2 metres and 5.9 metres.. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

2.The by-law requires the proposed lot(s) to be capable of being conveyed in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. The proposed lots require severance consent from the Committee of Adjustment prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Section 6(3) PART IX 1(a))

Other Applicable Legislation and Required Approvals

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

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

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

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

April 7, 1999

Our comments concerning this proposal are as follows:

Description:Construct 78 Semi-Detached Houses and 28 Row Houses

Zoning Designation:R3 Z1.0Map:52H 312

Applicable By-law(s):438-86, as amended by 239-1998, as amended

Plans prepared by:Fliess Gates McGowan Easton Architects

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.

Lots 33 & 64 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the lot area (125.96 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 201.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 2.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required setback of 6.0 metres from the flanking lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 0.7 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 3A)

4.The minimum required rear lot line setback of 7.5 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

5.The maximum permitted building depth of 17.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.45 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

6.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (37.77 sq metres) has not been provided. Proposed is 25.4% (32.0 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

7.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.9 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 1 and 32 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the lot area (136.76 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 201.5 sq metres. (S. 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 4.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required setback of 6.0 metres from the flanking lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 0.7 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 3A)

4.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

5.The maximum permitted building depth of 17.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.45 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

6.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.9 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lot 106 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the lot area (130.39 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 201.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 2.75 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required 6.0 metre setback from the flanking lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 0.7 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 3 A)

4.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

5.The maximum permitted depth of 17.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.45 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

6.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (39.11 sq metres) has not been provided. Proposed is 27.6% (36.0 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

7.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.9 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 2,7,8,13,14,19,20,25,26,31 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (121.4 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 210.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 4.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required 7.5 metre rear lot line setback has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 34,39,40,45,46,51,52,57,58,63 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (111.0 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 210.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 2.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required 7.5 metre rear lot line setback has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (33.3 sq metres) has not been provided. Proposed is 24.8% (27.6 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

5.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

6.The minimum required length of 5.9 metres for a parking space has not been provided. Proposed is 5.79 metres. (Section 2 - "parking space")

Lots 97,98,105 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (114.9 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 210.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 2.7 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required 7.5 metre rear lot line setback has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (34.47 sq metres) has not been provided. Proposed is 26.9% (31.0 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

5.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 3,6,9,10,11,12,15,18,21,22,23,24,27,30 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (121.4 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 145.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 3.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 35,36,37,38,41,42,43,44,47,48,49,50,53,54,55,56,59,60,61,62 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (111.0 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 145.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 96,99,100,103,104 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (114.9 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 145.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 101,102 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (114.9 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 145.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The proposed garage will not be a minimum of 4.5 metres to another residential building, as required. Proposed is 3.9 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 7(ii)A)

4.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 4,5,6,16,17,28,29 (Semi-Detached)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (121.4 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 145.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.6 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The distance from the proposed garage to the next residential building has not been clearly shown, as required. (Section 6(3) Part II 7(ii))

4.The distance from the proposed garage to the main building has not been clearly shown, as required. (Section 6(3) Part II 7(iii))

5.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

6.Elevation drawings are required clearly showing the height of the proposed garage from grade. (Section 4(2)(d))

Lot 93 (Semi-Detached)

1.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 3.8 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

2.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 4.5 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

3.The proposed garage will not be a minimum of 4.5 metres to another residential building, as required. Proposed is 3.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 7(ii)A)

4.The minimum required distance of 1.2 metres from the detached garage to the main building has not been provided. Proposed is 0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 7(iii))

5.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 3.5 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lot 94 (Semi-Detached)

1.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 3.2 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

2.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 3.5 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lot 95 (Semi-Detached)

1.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

2.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 4.4 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lot 65 (Row House)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (120.0 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 162.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 2.7 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The maximum permitted depth of 14.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

5.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (36.0 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 26.6% (32.0 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

6.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 5.2 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 66,69,72,73,74,77,80,81,82,83,86,87,88,89,90 (Row House)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (81.17 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 162.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The maximum permitted depth of 14.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

5.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (24.35 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 8.6% (7.0 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

6.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 4.195 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 70,71,78,79,84,85 (Row House)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (91.9 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 159.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The maximum permitted depth of 14.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

5.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (27.57 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 16.6% (15.3 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

6.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 4.75 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lots 67,68,75,76,91 (Row House)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (81.17 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 126.5 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 3.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

4.The maximum permitted depth of 14.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

5.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (24.51sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.8% (14.5 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

6.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 4.195 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Lot 92 (Row House)

1.The maximum permitted residential gross floor area of 1.0 times the area of the lot (91.9 sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 130.0 sq metres. (Section 6(3) Part I 1)

2.The minimum required front lot line setback of 6.0 metres has not been provided. Proposed is 3.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 2)

3.The minimum required 0.9 metres side lot line setback has not been provided. Proposed is 0.45 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 3 C)

4.The minimum required setback of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line has not been provided. Proposed is 1.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 4)

5.The maximum permitted depth of 14.0 metres is being exceeded. Proposed is 17.0 metres. (Section 6(3) Part II 5)

6.The minimum required landscaped open space of 30% of the area of the lot (27.57sq metres) is being exceeded. Proposed is 25.8% (23.8 sq metres). (Section 6(3) Part III 1(a))

7.The by-law requires the lot to have a minimum lot frontage of 6 metres. The proposed lot frontage is 4.75 metres. (Section 6(3) PART VII 1(ii))

Requirements/Comments Applying to all Lots

1.The by-law requires the proposed lots to be capable of being conveyed in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. The proposed lots require severance consent from the Committee of Adjustment prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Section 6(3) PART IX 1(a))

2.All eaves, chimney breasts and safety railings shall comply with Section 6(3) Part II 8

3.The height of all dwelling buildings shall be measured between the "average elevation of the natural or finished level of the ground, whichever is lower, along the side lot lines or flank opposite the building".

Other Applicable Legislation and Required Approvals

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

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

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

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

2.Urban Planning and Development Services, Municipal Licensing and Standards, dated March 23, 1999

I have reviewed the Noise Impact Statement dated March 16, 1999 prepared by J. E. Coulter Associates Ltd., for the above noted Rezoning Application, and find it satisfactory.

As you are aware, the Noise Impact Statement is one of a number of reports required to process your application. At the time of preparation, final construction designs may not be completed. Therefore, on approval of the application and when construction plans are finalized, I require a letter from your architect or acoustical consultant which certifies that the building plans accompanying your building permit application are in conformity with the Noise Impact Statement, with particular reference to the impact of any H.V.A.C. equipment on neighbouring properties.

Please direct any inquiries to Mr. J. Prashad of the Noise Section.

3.Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, dated March 26, 1999

Recommendations:

1. That the owner be required to:

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

(b)Comply with the parking requirements of the Zoning By-law;

(c)Provide minimum road allowance widths as follows:

(i)Street A: 15 m; and

(ii)Public lanes: 5 m;

(d)In connection with the new public streets/lanes and the municipal services and facilities:

(i)Engage the services of a qualified Municipal Consulting Engineer satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for the design and field supervision of all underground and surface public works services and facilities;

(ii)Prepare and submit for the approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services detailed design drawings in accordance with the City's design policies and specifications for all underground and surface public works services and facilities including a site grading plan, and construct all such services and facilities in accordance with the approved drawings and specifications;

(iii)Provide, upon completion of the work, "as constructed" drawings of all underground and surface public works services and facilities, certified by the Municipal Consulting Engineer that such services and facilities have been constructed in accordance with the approved drawings and specifications;

(iv)Provide letters of credit in the amount of 120% of the estimated cost for all municipal infrastructure for the development (sewers, waterworks, streets including intersections with existing City streets/lanes, sidewalks, lanes, street lighting, street furniture, etc.) or such lesser amount as the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services may approve, as determined by the Municipal Consulting Engineer and approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, prior to the earlier of issuance of a building permit or commencement of construction of the infrastructure for the development until completion of the work;

(v)Provide letters of credit in an amount equal to 25% of the value of completed municipal infrastructure as a maintenance guarantee for a period of two years from the date of completion of the work as certified by the Municipal Consulting Engineer and acceptance by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(vi)Construct all utilities underground;

(e)Submit suggestions for a suitable name for the new streets in accordance with the guidelines set out in Clause 4 in Executive Committee Report No. 22, adopted by the former City of Toronto Council at its meeting of July 11, 1988;

(f)Remonument the street limits and proposed lot/block corners after completion of construction, if necessary;

(g)Submit to and have approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services information verifying that soil conditions within the proposed road allowances are acceptable for use for public highway purposes;

(h)Agree to defer the installation of the final coat of asphalt on the new street until the substantial completion of construction of buildings on the street, or at such earlier timing as may be required by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, acting reasonably;

(i)Deposit the final plan of subdivision, in the appropriate Land Registry Office, such plan to be in metric units with all lot/block corners integrated with the Ontario Co-ordinate System, such plan to provide for the strata conveyance of the southerly portion of "Lane C" to a minimum depth of 0.8 m below existing grade;

(j)In the event that after construction of the southerly portion of "Lane C" the depth of the land to be assumed as "Lane C" in conjunction with the Plan of Subdivision is less than 0.8 m below the finished grade of the lane, convey to the City, at nominal cost, for public lane purposes, the residual land located between the lands already defined as part of the subdivision as "Lane C" and a plane lying 0.8 m below the finished surface of the lane, such lands to be conveyed to the City free and clear of all encumbrances;

(k)In the event that additional lands are to be conveyed, pursuant to Recommendation No. 1(k) above, provide a strata Reference Plan of Survey, indicating as a separate PART, the additional lands to be conveyed for public lane purposes;

(l)Provide a digital copy of the final plan of subdivision to the City;

(m)Apply for revised municipal numbering to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services prior to filing a formal application for a building permit;

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 abutting road allowances;

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

4. That the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to ensure that Parks staff maintain the continuation of the "Street A" sidewalk through the park, including winter maintenance;

5.That in connection with the proposed strata conveyance of the southerly portion of "Lane C", the owner be required to convey to the City an easement of support rights in the lands located below the proposed lane;

6. That the owner be advised that, in the event that the owner elects to construct the subject parking garage beneath a portion of "Lane C", on lands to be retained by the owner for this purpose, it will be necessary for the owner to:

(i)execute an indemnity agreement with the City, terms for which will be set out as conditions of approval of the apartment building to be constructed on the east side of the lane; and

(ii)design and construct the structure to the requirements of the Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code, (latest edition);

7. That the owner be advised of the need to convey the new street and lanes to the City, free and clear of all encumbrances, including rights-of-way, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

Comments:

Proposal

Creation of a new subdivision comprised of a new public street and two new public lanes and 107 building lots for 78 semi-detached units 28 townhouse units and 1 apartment building with 230 live-work units. Comments on Rezoning Application No. 199003 for the park, semi-detached and townhouse units are embodied in this report. The apartment building is the subject of Rezoning Application No. 298008, which will be the subject of a separate report by this Department.

Street System

The proposed road allowances are acceptable. It will be necessary for the detailed design to provide for 4 m curb radii at intersections, while maintaining continuous sidewalks within the road allowances. This is feasible within the proposed road allowances.

The owner has requested that the Street A sidewalk meander through the park on the east side of the park. A "No Kill Strip" is proposed along the east street line to protect adjacent sodded area within the park. This is acceptable in principle, subject to the "sidewalk" through the park being maintained by Parks staff, including winter maintenance. The exact width of the "No Kill Strip" will be determined as part of the review of the detailed design drawings for Street A.

Two 5 m wide public lanes are proposed to serve this subdivision. This is acceptable for residential use. Given the proposal to use the southern segment of the public lane on the east side of the park for access for City garbage trucks serving the proposed apartment building on the east side of the lane, it will be necessary to maintain a paved area/setbacks on the east side of this segment of the lane in order to enable trucks, to pass oncoming or stopped vehicles. This will be secured in connection with the Rezoning Application submitted for the proposed apartment building.

Proposed Encroachment of Parking Garage Beneath Public Lane

Under the current proposal, the garage for the apartment building will encroach under a portion of one of the proposed public lanes. This will require the construction of the lane drain through the public park. The applicant has already undertaken discussions with engineering staff to establish the feasibility of this approach. Specific engineering requirements will be worked out as part of the review of the detailed design drawings.

It will be necessary for the top of the roof of the underground garage to be located at least 0.5 m below the underside of the concrete lane pavement, and be designed to Ontario Highway Bridge Code (latest edition).

Recommendation No. 1(j) above provides for the strata conveyance of this public lane, so that the owner can retain ownership of the garage, if constructed as currently proposed. In order to provide for sufficient depth of the proposed garage structure, this recommendation requires that the depth of the conveyance to be at least 0.8 m beneath existing grade. Given that detailed lane designs have not been completed to date, it is not possible to determine the finished grade of the lane at this time. Accordingly, Recommendation Nos. 1(k) and 1(l) provide a mechanism whereby the owner will be required to convey additional lands to the City, for public highway (lane) purposes in the event that after construction the depth of the conveyance for public lane purposes is less than 0.8 m from finished grade.

Recommendation No. 5 above requires the owner to provide the City with an easement of support rights through the lands located beneath the proposed lane. The owner will also be required to enter into an indemnity agreement with respect to the garage. The requirements for the indemnity agreement will be set out as conditions of approval of the Rezoning application for the apartment building.

Given that the current phasing proposal is to obtain draft approval for the entire subdivision and the Rezoning Application for the semi-detached houses and townhouses component of the subdivision, and then proceed with the Rezoning Application for the apartment building, it is possible that the lane will be constructed prior to the apartment building garage. If the owner does proceed with the construction of the garage after the conveyance of the public lane to the City (by registration of the plan of subdivision), it will be necessary for the owner to obtain appropriate approvals from this Department for the construction of the garage beneath the public highway. In this regard, the owner may want to consider design options, such as the pre-building of the roof slab of the garage beneath the lane in order to avoid the necessity of temporarily closing the public lane during garage construction.

Parking

The parking for the semi detached and townhouse units should comply with the parking requirements of the Zoning By-law, which requires the provision of a minimum of 1 parking space per residential unit. Parking requirements for the apartment building will be established in connection with the Rezoning application submitted for that site.

Area residents have requested that consideration be given to the replacement of the existing parallel parking spaces on the north side of Colgate Avenue with angled parking spaces. This matter is under investigation by the Traffic Operations, East Area Section of this Department, and will be the subject of a separate letter to your Department.

Refuse Handling, Storage and Disposal

The City will provide the project with the semi detached and townhouse units with regular curbside refuse and recyclable collection service in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code, Chapter 309, Solid Waste.

Refuse collection requirements for the apartment building will be established in connection with the Rezoning application submitted for that site.

Municipal Services and Storm Water Management

The existing water distribution and sewer systems located within the existing public road allowances are adequate to accommodate the development.

It is the policy of City Council to require the infiltration of storm water run-off into the ground for all new buildings, whenever possible. Therefore, storm connections to the City sewer system will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that infiltrating storm water into the ground is not feasible. In this regard the owner will be required to design the buildings without down spout connections, as no storm drain connections will be permitted for the buildings. Further information regarding storm drainage can be obtained by contacting the Engineering Branch (telephone no. 392-6787).

Soil Conditions

On the basis of correspondence on file from the Medical Officer of Health, it would appear that the site has been remediated to residential standards. Accordingly, one could assume that the soil conditions in the proposed road allowances would be acceptable for public highway purposes. However, given City policy that it not accept contaminated lands for public highway purposes, the owner should be required to submit documentation to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services verifying that the soil has been remediated to City standards for public highway purposes, as set out in Recommendation No. 1(g) above.

Plan of Subdivision

The final plan of subdivision, which must be deposited in the appropriate Land Registry Office, should be in metric units with all lot/block corners integrated with the Ontario Co-ordinate System. The owner should be required to provide a digital copy of the final plan of subdivision to the City.

Rights of Way

The surveys submitted with the application suggest that there are still rights-of-way over portions of proposed "Lane C." It will be necessary for the new streets and lanes to be conveyed to the City to be free and clear of all encumbrance, therefore, it will necessary to the owner to arrange to have these rights of way removed from title, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

4.Public Health, dated January 6, 1999

Thank you for your request of November 30, 1998, to review and comment on the above referenced application. Staff at Environmental Health Services (EHS) have reviewed this application and offer the following comments.

The applicant proposes to construct 1 apartment building and 106 semis and townhouses on this site. EHS has previously commented on this site for a demolition application (Permit No.366900). Furthermore, EHS responded to a request from Mr. Gary Wilson of McClymont & Rak Engineers Inc. to comment on the Site Remediation Program prepared by Agra Earth & Environmental Limited (March 1996) and the subsurface investigation prepared by dames & Moore Canada (1992). For your information, I am enclosing a copy of these comments.

Recommendations:

1.(i)That the owner prepare an Excavation Dust Control Plan and submit this plan for the approval of the Medical Officer of Health, prior to the issuance of any permit;

(ii)That the owner implement the measures in the Dust control Plan approved by the Medical Officer of Health.

By copy of this letter I will inform the applicant in respect to this matter . If you have any questions contact me at 392-7685.

July 13, 1998

In response to your request of June 8, 1998 regarding the above referenced site, I provide you with the following comments on the Site Remediation Program (March 1996) prepared by Agra Earth & Environmental Limited.

Comments:

A subsurface investigation was conducted in 1992 by Dames & Moore Canada (DMC) in order to identify potential sources of environmental impact on soil and groundwater. Potential sources included underground storage tanks, areas of above ground tanks, rail tank car receiving bay, and areas below the main building. A total of 43 boreholes were advanced onto the site along with the installation of 22 monitoring wells. Representative fill and native soil and groundwater samples were collected and analysed for various organic/inorganic parameters. To assist in developing a decommissioning plan, a limited investigation was conducted by Agra in 1994. The Department of Public health previously commented on the demolition of the facility on November 7, 1994 at which time the issues of asbestos, PCBs, residual chemicals, building materials, underground storage tanks and dust control measures. This Department subsequently had no objection to the issuance of a demolition permit at that time. We also required that redevelopment of the site would not be permitted until all soil and groundwater contamination was removed. It should be noted that the decommissioning plan prepared by Agra did not address soil and groundwater issues. Results of the fieldwork conducted by DMC indicated that the site contained a fill layer of an average depth of 0.5m-1.5m which consisted of sand, gravel, cinders, brick fragments and soil. Black staining, hydrocarbon and tallow related odours were detected in localized areas within the fill material. The fill was also underlain by a layer of native sandy silt, generally 1.0m thick. A grey dense silt was also observed below the sandy silt. Groundwater was encountered in every borehole drilled at the site at depths of 0.1m-2.1m below grade. Based on DMC results, few soil samples exceeded the decommissioning guideline criteria. One sample collected at the south property boundary exceeded the criteria for oil and grease, while additional exceedances were observed for PAHs and xylene in the vicinity of the railway line along with an exceedance for lead in the fill located southwest of the warehouse area. Groundwater samples were obtained from 20 locations and analysed for the parameters identified in the Ontario Drinking Water Objectives (ODWO), the Metro Sewer Use By-Law and for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

The majority of the samples exceeded the ODWO for several parameters including iron, manganese and chloride. The report states that with the exceptions of elevated concentrations of chloride detected in 2 wells and oil and grease detected in 1 well, most of the sample tested were found to meet the Sewer Use By-Law criteria. Volatile Organic Compounds were detected in one well located at the northeast corner of the warehouse and at the un gradient boundary of the site with respect to the groundwater flow. Agra assessed soil conditions following removal of the foundations of the tank farm, the boiler house and parts of the main building. Soil samples were collected and compared to the 1989 MOEE Decommissioning Guideline. Results indicated no elevated concentrations for oil and grease and metals, except in the southwest corner of the boiler house. This soil was excavated and disposed of at the Keele Valley Landfill. The report goes on to state that the fuel impacted soil was also removed and disposed of with subsequent confirmatory samples being collected and analysed for the parameters in the Interim Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Petroleum Contaminated Sites in Ontario (1993). Results indicated that the area had been remediated to Level 1 (high sensitivity).

Analytical results for the water sampling by Greenspoon Bros Ltd indicated elevated levels of oil and grease, biological oxygen demand, phenols, total nitrogen, chloride and phosphorus. Similar results were also obtained by Agra, including aluminum, iron and copper. Analytical results conducted by Greenspoon on rubble confirmed that the material was clean and that it would be classified as non-registerable and non-hazardous with respect to Ontario Regulation 347. The 10 boreholes advanced by DMC in 1992 indicated that parameter concentrations were well below the soil quality criteria outlined in the Decommissioning Guideline for residential and industrial land uses. Based on these results, it appears that soil under the basement slab were not impaired, however, this did not include the area south of the detergent tower. Agra subsequently took one backfill sample (FIL-BASMT-1A) and one native fill sample (SOL-BASMT-1B) from the area south of the detergent tower and compared the results to the Decommissioning Guideline. The only exceedances were pH, electrical conductivity and sodium absorption ratio. However, these parameters are only significant if the site will be used for agricultural purposes. Te DMC report also recorded elevated levels of oil and grease in the soil beneath the railway receiving bay. This area was eventually excavated to a depth of 3.0m with no observed or noticeable odours. Samples were subjected to Ontario Regulation 347 analysis results of which have classified the soil as n on-registerable and non-hazardous. This area was further investigated after the removal of all the rails. Laboratory analysis did not indicate any exceedance of the oil and grease criteria. Upon removal of the floor slab and foundation of the boilers, 4 soil samples were collected and analysed for oil and grease, results of which indicated no exceedances. An additional 2 samples were collected for oil and grease outside the southwest corner of the boiler house due to the presence of tallow. Elevated levels of oil and grease (3%) were observed in the soil and tallow mixture which will classify it as non-registerable and non-hazardous. A total of 121 tonnes was excavated and disposed of at the Keele Valley Landfill. Due to the high water table, confirmatory samples could not be collected, however, the second sample from the native soil did not exhibit elevated oil and grease levels.

The report goes on to state that 4 samples were collected from the above ground storage tank area. One sample was analysed for the Decommissioning Guideline parameters, a second granular sample and two native silty clay samples for oil and grease. An elevated residential copper (150ppm) level was detected in the granular material sample. This sample was re-analysed with results indicating a concentration of 145ppm. Oil and grease was also detected at a level of 1.4% which is below the Decommissioning Guideline level of 2%. Agra was also informed that there were 2 USTs located on the site, a 22800L alcohol tank at the west end of the main building and a reported oil storage tank located at the southwest side of the silos which could not be located. Soil with fuel odour was detected in the area and samples were collected and analysed for BTEX/TPH. Results have indicated a TPH level of 7463ppm which is above the Interim Petroleum Guideline. This soil was removed and disposed of at the Keele Valley Landfill. Subsequent confirmatory samples were collected from the sidewalls and bottom, with results indicating a Level 1 clean-up.

Conclusions:

Based on the information provided, I would indicate to you that the soil and groundwater analysis conducted by DMC and Agra appear to be satisfactory in terms of their scope, findings and compliance with the appropriate regulations. It should be noted that this Department has compared many of the results to the current MOE Guideline for Use at Contaminated Sites (revised February 1997) residential/parkland land use for a non-potable groundwater condition. This comparison has indicated no exceedances. It is our understanding through conversations with Mr. Gary Wilson of McClymont & Rak Engineers, Inc. that the site will be redeveloped for residential land use and that our comments and concurrence with the submitted report will form part of the purchase agreement for the property. The owner/purchaser should be informed that in providing these comments, the City of Toronto, the Board of Health for the City of Toronto assume no liability for the completeness and accuracy of the information provided in the report with respect to concerns such as the likelihood of residual contamination in the soil and groundwater at a particular location. I would further add that the owner/purchaser should also contact the MOE for any comments.

If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 392-7685.

5.Parks and Recreation, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, dated March 2, 1999

This will acknowledge the 'Arborist Report for Development Applications' form pertaining to the above noted development applications which was submitted directly to Forestry Services by the applicant under cover of a letter dated December 21, 1998. I have reviewed the report and the previously circulated plan and advise that:

-There are twenty-five (25) City owned trees involved with this project which are situated on the City road allowance adjacent to the development site. These trees must be protected at all times in accordance with the 'Specifications for Construction Near Trees' contained in the Tree Details Section of the City of Toronto Streetscape Manual.

-If sufficient space exists, the applicant should provide large growing shade trees to be planted within the City road allowance as part of this application. A detailed landscape plan must be provided which indicates the exact location of all existing City owned trees and any proposed trees to be planted within the City road allowance including details with respect to proposed tree species, caliper and quantity. A planting plan should provide the best possible, natural, planting environment for trees. It is preferred that trees be planted in turf when possible. If no room exists for turf boulevards with trees, raised planting beds or continuous tree pits should be considered. Trees indicated for planting on the City road allowance must be planted in accordance with the Tree Details Section of the City of Toronto Streetscape Manual as per the details noted below. Please note that the applicant must conduct an investigation of underground utilities prior to proposing tree planting within the City road allowance. If planting is not possible due to a utility conflict, a utility locate information sheet from the respective utility company should be provided to the City.

Street Trees in Turf:In accordance with Planting Detail No. 101 for Balled and Burlapped Trees in Turf Areas, dated March, 1997.

Street Trees in Raised Planters:In accordance with Planting Detail No. 102 for Raised Tree Planter - Concept, dated March, 1997.

Street Trees in Tree Pits:In accordance with Planting Detail No.'s 103, 103-1, 103-2, & 103-3 for 1.2 m x 2.4 m Tree Pit, dated March, 1997. Tree pits must be constructed in accordance with the Continuous Tree Pit details outlined in the Construction Details Section of the City of Toronto Streetscape Manual as Drawing No.'s RE-1833M-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, and -6, 1 of 2 & 2 of 2.

-I advise that the plan prepared by Fliess Gates McGowan Easton Architects, date stamped as received by Urban Planning & Development Services on November 5, 1998 and on file with the Commissioner of Urban Planning & Development Services is acceptable provided that the above noted conditions are fulfilled.

6.Fire Prevention, dated April 28, 1999

Please be advised that when the pertinent requirements of the Ontario Building Code have been applied relative to this project, our Department may be deemed as satisfied. NOTE: Specifically fire fighting access.

7.CN, dated November 9, 1998

We have reviewed your letter dated 22 October 1998 regarding the above noted application to request that the following comment to be included in the Draft Conditions, to be cleared by CN.

1.The following warning clause shall be included in the Subdivision Agreement and inserted in all Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease for each dwelling unit. Provisions must be included in the Subdivision Agreement to ensure that the warning clause survives the release of the Owner's obligations under the Subdivision Agreement and remain on title.

"Warning :Canadian National Railway Company or its assigns or successors in interest has or have a right-of way within 300 metres from the land the subject hereof. There may be alterations to or expansions of the rail facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that the railway or its assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CNR will not be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid right-of-way."

2.The owner is required to engage a consultant to undertake an analysis of noise and vibration and to recommend abatement measures necessary to achieve the maximum level limits set by the Ministry of Environment and Canadian National Railway to the satisfaction of the Municipality, Canadian National Railway and the Ministry of Environment.

We would appreciate the opportunity to review the draft conditions prior to approval, and ultimately, we request receiving a copy of the Approved Draft Conditions.

Should the application be approved without incorporating the above requirements, we have no alternative but to request that this application be referred to the Ontario Municipal Board pursuant to the provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.P.13.

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (416)217-6961.

8.Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, dated March 26, 1999

The following comments are provided with respect to the proposed residential development at the above-noted location. The applicant is requesting approval for a Plan of Subdivision which will include construction of a six storey live/work building containing 230 units and a mix of 106 freehold semi-detached and townhouses dwellings. The addition of these new residents will generate an increased demand on the existing parks in the area such as Jimmie Simpson Park and Community Centre and Hideaway Park.

In order to address this additional demand the applicant has agreed to provide the land for and construct a Public Park of approximately 1300 square metres (0.3 acres). The parkland will abut the north edge of Colgate Avenue and will be bordered by the new street serving the residential development on the west side and a public lane on the east, giving the park three frontages on public thoroughfares. A Preliminary Design has been agreed on through discussions with this Department, this plan will serve as the plan upon which the Final Design Plan and construction drawings are to be based. The necessary drawings for the park and the construction will be undertaken by the applicant. The City will secure rights of approval over the final drawings and supervision of construction through the Subdivision Agreement to be executed as between the City and the applicant.

Economic Development, Culture & Tourism has discussed the matters relating to the timing, conveyance, park elements, use of the site for construction staging and project supervision with the applicant and have reached general agreement on these matters. It is intended that the final terms and conditions be set out in the Subdivision Agreement. The following principles have been agreed to as an approach to ensuring the establishment of the parkland on this site and as such should be endorsed at this time, the final details to be set out in the Subdivision Agreement:

a)the Preliminary Design Plan will be as shown on Colgate Park Landscape Plan denoted as P-1, prepared by Insite Landscape Architects, dated January 12, 1999 and date-stamped received March 17, 1999 by the Commissioner of Planning and Urban Development Services and such final area of the Parklands will be a minimum of 1272 square metres;

b)the conveyance of the Parkland will occur prior to issuance of the first above-grade building permit for any portion the project subject to the Subdivision Agreement, the site will be available to the applicant for use as a construction staging area, the Park Improvements must be installed to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture & Tourism , the owner will post a Letter of Credit equal to 120% of the value of the Park Improvements as agreed to by the Owner and the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture & Tourism as security for the installation of the Park Improvements;

c)the Owner has agreed to submit funds in the amount of $20,000 for the City to install a playground apparatus in the park;

d)in view of the conveyance of parkland, contributions to improvements and other payments, that City Council will authorize an amendment to exempt the Owner's Lands from Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 165, Article 1, Conveyance of Lands for Parks Purposes enacted pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act to exempt therefrom such development as is permitted and only to the extent permitted by the Zoning By-law Amendment. Should the owner apply for and receive permission to develop residential or commercial densities in excess of those presently permitted in the Zoning By-law Amendment, then the Owner may, respecting those increased densities and as a condition of receiving such increased densities, be required to transfer further lands for parks purposes or pay monies in lieu thereof in accordance with the City's aforementioned Municipal Code provisions enacted pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act which are then applicable.

Attached are draft provisions dealing with Parkland matters. These provisions are largely taken from existing precedent park arrangements.

Please feel free to contact Rob Watson of my staff (2-0582) should you have any questions or require any further clarification.

--------

Appendix B

DRAFT BY-LAW

Authority:Toronto Community Council Report No. ,

Clause No. ,

As adopted by Council on

Enacted by Council on ________________

CITY OF TORONTO

By-Law No. 1999-

To amend General Zoning By-law No. 438-86

respecting the lands known as 64 Colgate Avenue.

The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1.District Map No. 52H-312 contained in Appendix "A" annexed to and forming part of By-law 438-86, being "A By-law To regulate the use of land and the erection, use, bulk, height, spacing of and other matters relating to buildings and structures and to prohibit certain uses of lands and the erection and use of certain buildings and structures in various areas of the City of Toronto", as amended, is further amended by redesignation R2 Z2.0 the lands shown on the Plan attached hereto and forming part of this By-law.

MEL LASTMANNOVINA WONG

Mayor. City Clerk.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

Draft - Carlaw and Colgate

DRAFT BY-LAW

Authority:Toronto Community Council Report No. ,

Clause No. ,

As adopted by Council on

Enacted by Council on ________________

CITY OF TORONTO

By-Law No. 1999-

To amend General Zoning By-law No. 438-86

respecting the lands known as 309, 355 Logan Avenue and 60 Colgate Avenue.

The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1. District Map No. 52H-312 contained in Appendix "A" annexed to and forming part of By-law 438-86, being "A By-law To regulate the use of land and the erection, use, bulk, height, spacing of and other matters relating to buildings and structures and to prohibit certain uses of lands and the erection and use of certain buildings and structures in various areas of the City of Toronto", as amended, is further amended by redesignating to G the lands shown hatched on the Plan attached hereto and forming part of this By-law.

2.None of the provisions of the definition of "row house " in Section 2, "parking space" in Section 2 and of Sections 4 (4) (b), 6(3) Part I1, 6(3) Part II 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (ii) A and (iii), 6(3) Part III 1(a), 6(3) Part VII 1 (ii),of the aforesaid By-law No. 438-86 shall apply to prevent the erection and use on the lands identified as Blocks "A", "B" and "C" on the Plan, attached hereto and forming part of this By-law, of the following:

BLOCK "A"

semi-detached house and uses accessory thereto provided that:

(1)not more than 38 pairs of semi-detached houses are erected or used within Block "A";

(2)the lot on which each semi-detached house is located has a width of not less than 5.2 metres;

(3)the lot on which each semi-detached house is located has a depth of not more than 17.5 metres;

(4)the residential gross floor area of each semi-detached house does not exceed 210 square metres;

(5)no part of any semi-detached house above grade is erected or used closer to the front lot line than 1 metre;

(6)no part of any semi-detached house above grade is erected or used closer to the side lot line than 0.45 metres;

(7)no part of any semi-detached house above grade is erected or used closer to the rear lot line than 1.2 metres with the exception of those projections contained in 6(3) Part II 8 of the aforesaid By-law No. 438-86;

(8)the owner of each semi-detached house provides and maintains not less than one parking space for each dwelling at the rear of each lot;

(9)the length of each parking space shall not be less than 5.79 metres;

(10)no part of any semi-detached house above grade is erected closer to the flanking lot line than 0.7 metres;

(11) no part of any garage is located closer to the main building than 3.9 metres;

(12)no part of any garage is located closer to the next residential building than 3.9 metres, and

(13)the lot on which each semi-detached house is located provides no less than 26 square metres of landscaped open space.

BLOCK "B"

row house and uses accessory thereto provided that:

(1)not more than 28 row houses are erected or used within Block "B";

(2)not more than 8 row houses are attached in a series;

(3)the lot on which each row house is located has a width of not less than 4.2 metres;

(4)the lot on which each row house is located has a depth of not more than 17 metres;

(5)in the case of a row house, the residential gross floor area shall not exceed 162 square metres;

(6)no part of a row house above grade is erected or used closer to the side lot line than 0.45 metres;

(7)no part of a row house above grade is erected or used closer to the rear lot line than 1.0 metres with the exception of those projections contained in 6(3) Part II 8 of the aforesaid By-law No. 438-86;

(8)no part of a row house above grade is erected or used closer to the front lot line than 1.0 metre;

(9)the lot on which each row house is located provides no less than 8.6 square metres of landscaped open space;

(10)the owner of each row house provides and maintains not less than one parking space for each row house at the rear of each lot; and

(11) no part of a row house above grade is erected or used closer to any sidewall than 0.9 metres.

BLOCK "C"

semi-detached house and uses accessory thereto provided that:

(1)not more than 2 pairs of semi-detached houses are erected or used within Block "C";

(2)the lot on which each semi-detached house is located has a width of not less than 3.5 metres;

(3)no part of any semi-detached house above grade is erected or used closer to the front lot line than 1 metre;

(4)no part of any semi-detached house above grade is erected or used closer to the rear lot line than 4.5 metres with the exception of those projections contained in 6(3) Part II 8 of the aforesaid By-law No. 438-86;

(5)the owner of each semi-detached house provides and maintains not less than one parking space for each dwelling at the rear of each lot;

(6)no part of any garage is located closer to the main building than 0 metres; and

(7)no part of any garage is located closer to the next residential building than 3 metres.

3.For the purposes of this By-law:

(1)"row house" shall mean one of a series of attached buildings:

(i)each building containing not more than 1 dwelling unit,

(ii)each building divided vertically from another by a party wall,

(iii)each building located on a lot, and

(iv)each building having a single entrance fronting on the new street; and

(2)the terms "accessory", "dwelling unit", "flank", "front lot line", "grade", "landscaped open space", "lot", "parking space", "private garage", "rear lot line", "residential gross floor area", "semi-detached house", or "side lot line" shall have the same meaning as those terms have for the purposes of By-law No. 438-86, being "A By-law To regulate the use of land and the erection, use, bulk, height, spacing of and other matters relating to buildings and structures and to prohibit certain uses of lands and the erection and use of certain buildings and structures in various areas of the City of Toronto", By-law No. 425-93, as amended.

MEL LASTMANNOVINA WONG

Mayor.City Clerk.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

Colgate/Logan

Insert Table/Map No. 2

Colgate/Logan

Insert Table/Map No. 3

Colgate/Logan

Insert Table/Map No. 4

Colgate/Logan

Insert Table/Map No. 5

Colgate/Logan

Insert Table/Map No. 6

Colgate/Logan

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it during consideration of the foregoing matter, the following communications, which have been submitted to Members of Council under separate cover:

-(August 24, 1999) from Mr. Peter C. Crawford; and

-(September 13, 1999) from Mr. Robert Pattillo.