TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES
AND OTHER COMMITTEES
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on October 1 and 2, 1998
SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL
REPORT No. 9
1Ontario Hydro Corridor LandsOfficial Plan Amendment 1001Graywood Investments
Ltd./Norstar Development Corp.
City of Toronto
REPORT No. 9
OF THE SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL
(from its meeting on September 22, 1998,
submitted by Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti, Chair)
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on October 1 and 2, 1998
1
Ontario Hydro Corridor Lands
Official Plan Amendment 1001
Graywood Investments Ltd./Norstar Development Corp.
(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report
(September 14, 1998) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, subject to
adding the following recommendations:
"(5)that the possible 6 metre (20 foot) widening of the linear trail system, where it is
proposed on the Consumers' Gas pipeline corridor, onto the adjacent Graywood lands,
be included in further land acquisition negotiations;
(6)that any widening of the trail system be on the basis of maintaining lot areas
comparable to the abutting neighbourhoods;
(7)that the density of the proposed Medium Density Residential Block on the north side
of Huntingdale Boulevard be limited to 37.2 units per hectare (15 units per acre);
(8)that the proposed Medium Density Residential Block on the south side of Sheppard
Avenue be deleted and replaced with a Place of Worship designation, and the area for
this purpose be expanded to 2.5 acres;
(9)that the exiting off-street (C), shown on Figure 10, be redirected from Highhill Drive
to Palmdale Drive;
(10)that, if the Ontario Municipal Board strikes out the City's resolution of "Open
Space", and agrees to deal with the Graywood application, then the following
recommendations of the North Bridlewood Residents' Association be approved, subject
to a maximum of 45 townhouses (15 units per acre) and parkland in the Huntingdale
core, compatible to the existing townhouses in the vicinity:
"1.The area north of Beverly Glen Boulevard would be only detached housing on 50
foot lots. Also that 4 pedestrian links be provided between the proposed trail on the west
side of the development with the north connection going to Brookshire Boulevard. A
connection should also be secured on the east side of the development connecting
through the townhouses to Glen Springs Drive.
2.That medium density housing representing approximately 60 townhouses is built in
the area immediately north of Huntingdale Boulevard.
3.That parkland is provided immediately south of Beverly Glen Boulevard and adjacent
to Beverly Glen Junior Public School and in the north of the new development as shown
on the city plan. The parkland would be at least the minimum required but should be
increased to reflect the large number of units being added to the area north of Finch
Avenue. The parkland would be exclusive of any storm water retention areas.
4.That 20 feet of land would be provided adjacent to the Consumers Gas right of way to
provide through the subdivision a safe, continuous and attractive trail with appropriate
trees and lighting. The city to start immediate negotiations with Consumers Gas to
secure access to the trail.
5.The association requests final review of the urban design guidelines and landscape
design.
6.Secure the 25 foot backyard extensions for the affected residents on Glen Springs
Drive."
(11)that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to carry out
the following work in the Dorset Park and Maryvale communities adjacent to the
Ontario Hydro Corridor:
(a)monitor groundwater level and test water quality;
(b)install monitoring equipment in storm sewers and use data to refine the model of the
storm sewer system to clarify storm drainage issues;
(c)perform closed circuit television inspection of the storm sewer system; and
(d)report back by January 1999;
(12)(a)that the $50,000.00 grant, authorized by City Council at its meeting held on June
3, 4 and 5, 1998, be divided among the following six Community Associations, on a
matching basis, to a maximum of $8,333.00, subject to the conditions previously
established by City Council:
-North Bridlewood Residents' Association;
-South Bridlewood Residents' Association;
-Wishing Well Acres Community Association;
-York Condominium Corp. No. 337 (3151 Bridletowne Circle);
-Terraview/Willowfield Residents' Association; and
-Dorset Park Community Residents' Association;
(b)that, once the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing has been completed, if there are
funds remaining from the $50,000.00 grant, the Treasurer, in consultation with the City
Solicitor, be requested to report to The Scarborough Community Council respecting the
amount left over, together with information as to how much in the way of matching
funds each organization raised; and
(13)that City Council reconfirm its position with respect to Open Space."
The Scarborough Community Council reports having requested:
(1)that the Director of Community Planning, East District, report directly to Council, at its
meeting scheduled to be held on October 1, 1998, on the concerns of the Wishing Well area
residents with respect to:
(i)flooding;
(ii)grading;
(iii)compatible housing;
(iv)low water pressure;
(v)traffic;
(vi)pollution;
(vii)hospital; and
(2)that the City Solicitor report directly to Council at its meeting scheduled to be held on
October 1, 1998, clarifying the position taken by City Council on "Open Space".
The Scarborough Community Council further reports having requested that the Director of
Community Planning, East District, investigate ways and means by which negotiations can
take place with the developer on the opportunities for land transfer of the former Scarborough
Transportation Corridor lands that will be the subject of a report to be provided to
Scarborough Community Council on October 14, 1998.
Recorded Votes:
Upon the question of the adoption of the aforementioned Recommendation (13), that City
Council reconfirm its position respecting Open Space:
Yeas:Councillors Balkissoon, Berardinetti, Duguid, Mahood, Shaw, Tzekas - 6
Nays:Councillor Kelly - 1
Upon the question of the adoption of the aforementioned report (September 14, 1998) from
the Director, Community Planning, East District, as amended:
Yeas:Councillors Berardinetti, Duguid, Kelly, Shaw - 4
Nays:Balkissoon, Mahood, Tzekas - 3
The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (September 14,
1998) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:
Purpose:
The report recommends a planning position to be taken for the upcoming Ontario Municipal
Board hearing respecting the Graywood-owned lands north of Highway 401 and advises on
the status of Norstar's development applications following the third Prehearing Conference on
September 8, 1998. The recommendations have been formulated having regard to the City's
environmental study and comments from agencies and City staff, and suggest possible sites
the City may wish to pursue acquiring.
Financial Implications:
Unknown at this time.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that Scarborough Community Council recommend that City Council:
(1)instruct the City Solicitor and staff to seek Ontario Municipal Board approval for the
alternative plans of subdivision for the Graywood Investments Ltd. portion of the former
Ontario Hydro Corridor north of Highway 401, as described in this report and illustrated as
Figures 3, 4, 5a, 6 to 8 inclusive, 9a, 10a and 11;
(2)if it wishes to acquire the additional lands identified for environmental purposes indicated
on Figures 5a, 9a and 10a of the staff report, direct appropriate staff to continue to negotiate
the City's acquisition of those lands with Graywood and report further to the October 1, 1998
meeting of Council;
(3)further to the above instructions, authorize appropriate staff to explore both the current
financial and alternative land acquisition options available to the City as outlined in the staff
report, for continued discussion with Graywood; and
(4)direct staff to continue discussions and report further on the Norstar applications for the
corridor lands south of Highway 401.
Background:
Council's direction of July 31, 1998, which is appended, followed a series of Preliminary
Evaluation Reports considered by Scarborough Community Council and City Council. Staff
were directed to explore the appellant's interests without prejudice to resolve their appeals
based on the achievement of comparable and compatible low density residential reflecting the
built character of the abutting neighbourhoods, and identification of appropriate park and
other facilities to enhance the environment.
Comments:
Results of the September 8, 1998 Prehearing Conference of the Ontario Municipal Board:
The purpose of this third Prehearing was to settle the details of the Procedural Order for the
upcoming hearing commencing on October 5, 1998. There were a variety of results which
influence the following discussion and which warrant clarification at the outset.
The Board had originally set 4 weeks aside for the full hearing on all related appeals, with the
exception of the appeal by First Alliance Church on Official Plan Amendment 1001 which
had previously been deferred to early-1999. The Board is now committing those 4 weeks
entirely to the Graywood appeals. The hearing will deal first with those lands north of Finch
Avenue, then with the lands between Finch Avenue to Sheppard Avenue, and finally the lands
from Sheppard to Highway401 to reflect the interests of the three resident associations
involved, as opposed to hearing Graywood's three subdivision applications individually. The
Board has also set the evening of Tuesday, October 13, 1998 and as much of the day on
Wednesday, October 14, 1998 as is necessary to deal with submissions from the public.
Ontario Hydro has withdrawn from the hearing for the lands north of the 401. Similarly, the
community groups north of the 401 have withdrawn from proceedings affecting lands south of
the 401.
The hearing on the appeal by First Alliance Church has been deferred to late May 1999. This
decision enables further review and negotiation of the church's applications by the City as has
previously been directed by Community Council, and affords the very desirable opportunity to
avoid a hearing altogether with respect to these lands.
A great deal has changed with respect to the lands south of Highway 401. Three new interests
presented themselves at the Prehearing seeking Party status. These include the
Terraview/Willowfield Residents Association in Maryvale Community, and the Dorset Park
Community Residents Association. Both are new groups in the process of incorporation. The
latter group appears to be replacing the Dorset Park Centre Community Association, which we
understand is presently inactive, and has been made a party to the Graywood proceedings, but
only in respect to drainage issues. The Board has directed the submission of undertakings that
an individual representing each group will assume personal responsibility for any potential
cost awards during these proceedings, until submission of the letters of incorporation for each
group.
Both groups requested, and were granted, a deferral of the hearing with respect to the Ontario
Hydro/Norstar applications south of the 401, to enable them time to prepare. This request was
consistent with the City's position discussed further below, and the hearing with respect to
these lands has therefore now been scheduled for 2 weeks commencing Monday, February 22,
1999. (A Prehearing Conference is also scheduled for Tuesday, December 8, 1998 in this
regard to settle the Procedural Order). Norstar has committed to a process of community
consultation on their applications in the interim.
The third party, also granted Party status, is Birchmount Boarding Kennels Limited at
1563Birchmount Road in the Dorset Park Community, which is concerned about the
compatibility of its operation with the encroaching residential development proposed by
Graywood. The veterinary and boarding kennel is currently a legal non-conforming use and
has recently purchased a portion of the abutting former Ontario Hydro corridor fronting
Birchmount Road to expand its operation. In this regard, they have recently filed applications
for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment, and for Site Plan Control approval, to
recognize and enable expansion of their operation. A Preliminary Evaluation Report on these
new applications will be submitted to the Scarborough Community Council meeting of
October 14, 1998.
The current Board Chair is seized to conduct this further hearing for the lands south of
Highway 401, and has advised all concerned that a decision on the Graywood appeals could
well issue prior to commencement of the further hearing.
Status of Negotiations with the Appellants:
Community Planning and Legal Services staff met with Graywood and Norstar
representatives separately on August 20, 1998 to explain the City's concerns with their
applications. Both were amenable to further discussion, however, until the City's
environmental review and alternative development proposals now set out in this report
became available, neither would commit to making specific changes to their proposals.
The timing of the recent submission of the consultants' environmental study and ensuing
preparation of this report has not permitted further detailed negotiations. The solicitor for
Graywood advised the Board at the Prehearing, however, that he is prepared to apprise the
City of his client's position with respect to the proposals contained in this report prior to the
full hearing. A further report to the City Council meeting of October 1, 1998 on those
discussions can be provided if necessary.
The scheduling of the Norstar appeals for February 1999 provides additional time to continue
negotiations and for further reporting on progress in that regard.
Status of Monies Available for Land Acquisition:
As of June 19, 1998, $11.981 million remained in the parkland reserve fund of the former City
of Scarborough, the expenditure of which is limited to parks related expenditures only within
the former municipality. This amount includes:
Park development projects currently underway
as committed through previous year approvals: $584,000
1998 approved capital for park development
upgrades and major renovations:1,040,000
Chinese Cultural Centre Gardens (balance) 115,000
Heron Park Recreation Centre4,280,000
Approved parkland acquisitions2,167,000
Of the remaining balance of $3.795 million, $3.625 million has been allocated in the strategic
plan approved by the former City of Scarborough Council for various projects over 1999,
2000 and 2001 involving playground replacements, facility upgrades, paving for tennis courts
and parking lots, and particularly including $1.28 million for the Maryvale/Wexford
Community Centre.
The remaining balance, coupled with approximately $88,000 remaining in the "2 percent"
Parks Commercial Development Reserve Fund, is, therefore, approximately $258,000 with a
very modest additional amount anticipated to be collected from unbuilt developments
approved prior to amalgamation. Any redirection of these monies to the corridor will require
adjustment to the above commitments.
Further monies would have to be identified through the parkland acquisition fund of the larger
City. Real Estate Services advises that $675,000 remains for watercourse acquisition in
Scarborough, after committed transactions and Council's directions on other acquisitions from
its meeting of July 29, 1998 are deducted. No monies have yet been committed for this
purpose for 1999 and beyond.
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority advises that there is currently no money
available to assist in land acquisition although that could change in future as a result of the
Highland Creek Watershed Management Study currently underway.
The Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism has also made enquiries
with respect to possible Provincial or Federal partners to assist the City in this regard. All
Scarborough Members of Parliament and the Legislature have been contacted, together with
the appropriate Provincial Ministries and the Management Board of Cabinet, as well as
various Federal Ministries.
No responses have been received to date advising of any programs or funding available to
assist the City at this time.
Time has not permitted the identification and complete canvass of other possible
non-government organizations or corporate sponsors. Typically, however, such groups require
formal proposals and full project justification, plus substantial lead time often exceeding one
year, before considering the commitment of such funds.
Results of the City's Environmental Review:
XCG Consultants Limited, in association with consultants Hough Woodland Naylor Dance
Leinster and Anthony Usher, have submitted their final report on the Investigation of
Stormwater Management, Naturalization and Open Space Opportunities presented by the
surplus corridor lands. Copies of the report have been provided to the appellants, The Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority and is available to the public at the Planning and
Buildings Information Counter in the Scarborough City Centre. Executive Summaries have
also been distributed.
The study addresses both opportunities for environmental enhancements that are now possible
and perhaps more importantly, those that would be irrevocably lost should the corridor be
developed. In this regard, existing problems identified by the study include erosion in the
Bendale and Dorset Park Branches of Highland Creek, fish barriers and limited aquatic habitat
in these streams, in-stream and outfall water quality concerns at certain locations, flood
vulnerability within the Dorset Park Community and downstream of both branches beyond the
corridor, basement flooding in the Dorset Park and Sullivan Communities, and the need to
maintain or achieve linkages and programmable parks spaces.
The study provides conceptual plans for open space use of all of the corridor for stormwater,
renaturalization and other environmental purposes, should Official Plan Amendment 1001 be
approved. The study recognizes, however, that protection of the entire corridor for open space
is ideal although not necessarily achievable, due to the high land acquisition costs involved.
Accordingly, the study also attempted to identify and distinguish between "essential open
space" opportunities, those predominantly related to stormwater quantity and quality
management having significant local and regional benefit, that would be lost if not protected
now, and other opportunities such as strategic park and trail enhancements that could still be
achieved within a development scenario.
The consultants examined the corridor on a block by block basis against seven criteria, such as
potential for erosion control, channel renaturalization or open space linkage (see attached).
Each block was then rated from 1 to 3 for each of the criteria, and cumulatively ranked to
identify those blocks having the greatest potential, and therefore priority, to contribute to
environmental enhancement. Staff's block-by-block analysis of the developer's applications
and preparation of alternative plans of subdivision discussed in further detail took the report
into account.
The highest priority blocks, being lands that should be withheld from development if those
opportunities for significant environmental enhancement are to be realized, have been
identified as the lands from Finch Avenue to south of Pinemeadow Boulevard which contain
the Bendale tributary, and the three blocks between Birchmount Road and Kennedy Roads
associated with the Dorset Park Branch. The priority ratings for all blocks are illustrated on
Figures 1 and 2, and will be discussed in greater detail in the staff subdivision proposals
below.
The study presents concepts presented based on a preliminary assessment and analysis. It
states that further detailed analysis will be required to finalize the size or extent of stormwater
management facilities, connections to existing systems and impact on downstream
infrastructure.
Lastly, the study addresses various mechanisms available to the City to pursue acquisition of
portions of the corridor. A number, such as Section 37, restricted zoning of private lands, the
use of alternative standards under Section 42 of the Planning Act or expropriation are not
supported. The City can of course use its parkland and watercourse land acquisition funds to
acquire land, although as noted above these resources are extremely limited. Other options
offer more promise.
The City could negotiate land the dedication of lands beyond the parkland dedication
requirement to be credited against future developments by the developer in this City, in return
for reduced development standards or on the basis of a density transfer from other lands in
Toronto owned by the developer. The City could also negotiate a land exchange from its
current holdings. In addition to easements which are normally negotiated, the Conservation
Land Act now permits landowners to enter an agreement with a "conservation body"
(including conservation authorities and municipalities) for conservation, maintenance,
restoration or enhancement of land or wildlife and access to these lands, although this does not
ensure access will be available to the public. A Foundation could be established to raise funds
from the private sector, private donors, and environmental groups, although this requires time,
the commitment of resources and expertise. Lastly, the federal Income Tax Act enables the
dedication of land by an owner to a public body in return for a tax receipt.
Planning the Corridor:
Much work has been done to date to provide Council with a very broad basis on which to
assess appropriate land use alternatives for the corridor. This work ranges from the intensive
year long Ontario Hydro Corridor Land Use Review as reported in June, 1997 through to the
applicant's own visions for its development, a number of previous Preliminary Evaluation
Reports on those proposals and the latest consultant's study.
As previously reported, a fundamental policy (2.4.1.3) of the Scarborough Official Plan is
that:
"Council shall maintain the stable residential character of existing neighbourhoods and
communities. New development proposals shall have regard for compatibility with adjacent
land uses and designations, particularly with regard to dwelling units type, density and
height."
Any in-fill development should respect the established nature and character of the abutting
neighbourhoods, in terms of built form and density, consistent with the fundamental planning
principles inherent in the initial design of those subdivisions. As reflected in Council's
direction, this includes such matters as the mix of unit types, lot dimensions and area, road
widths, building setbacks, streetscape, location of parks, et cetera.
From the standpoint of compatibility with the abutting neighbourhoods, both applicant's
proposals are of concern. In general terms, the proposed densities, lot sizes, frontage and in
many cases depths, unit types and mixes, proposed building setbacks and street widths will
result in built forms, character and streetscapes that are inconsistent with the abutting
neighbourhoods. The proposals clearly will not satisfy the compatibility intent of the Official
Plan.
Similarly, while low density residential in-fill of the corridor should not inherently destabilize
the abutting established and already fully developed neighbourhoods, allowing corridor
development at reduced development standards could encourage neighbouring property
owners to seek similar standards. Should that occur, there is a distinct risk that the "stable
residential character" of those neighbourhoods could indeed change as well.
The Official Plan also speaks to the protection of valleys, watercourses and ravines. In
particular, Policy 2.5.1.1 states:
"Special attention shall be directed at the protection of environmentally significant areas
related to trees and vegetation, wildlife habitat, wetlands and the protection of areas
susceptible to inherent environmental hazards such as flooding or erosion."
Preservation of the corridor for these purposes is an unique opportunity and can clearly be
deemed under both MetroPlan and that of the former City of Scarborough as being in public
interest. This interest must be weighed against land purchase costs and on-going operations
and maintenance costs of surface versus below grade engineering solutions.
In developing alternative approaches for corridor development, staff have identified a number
of key criteria and assumptions regarding fit and compatibility to best achieve the intent of the
Official Plan as follows:
(1)The communities south of the 401 were basically planned as low density residential
neighbourhoods based on the traditional grid street system. Commercial and higher density
residential uses are located on the perimeter arterial roads and at major intersections in these
communities. In contrast, the newer communities north of the 401 were planned around a
community core consisting of commercial facilities and higher density residential
development, surrounded by lower density residential development. In both areas,
neighbourhoods are focussed on combined school and park sites. Any new infill development
of the corridor should reflect that thinking.
(2)Any new lots being created should be comparable in size to existing lots in the abutting
neighbourhoods, resulting in similar net density, to accommodate units and outdoor amenity
spaces of comparable size as well with similar building separations. The typical single family
parcel in the neighbourhoods south of the 401 is 12 by 38 metres (40 by 125 feet), or 456
square metres (5,000 square feet). North of the 401 they are 15 by 33.5 metres (50 by
110feet), or 500 square metres (5,5000 square feet).
(3)Reduced road allowances coupled with reduced front yard setback requirements below
6metres (20 feet), as requested by both applicants, will create distinctly different streetscapes
than the abutting neighbourhoods. (A reduced road allowance may be acceptable, however
where streets are "single loaded" with housing on one side only.)
(4)Residents want to know what the new housing will look like and whether it will be
compatible with their own. Architectural control was applied by the original developer to
achieve the diverse and very distinct character of those neighbourhoods. It would be quite
appropriate to apply architectural control as a condition to any approval of plans of
subdivision in the corridor as a mechanism to maintain that character.
(5)The subject neighbourhoods are very pedestrian friendly with sidewalks and walkway
connections to parks and schools. The notion of a larger pathway system on the corridor has
also been advocated by residents and accepted most recently by Toronto City Council's
approval of recommendations from the Urban Environment and Development Committee on a
report addressing cycling trail opportunities in rail and Hydro corridors across the new City.
The subject corridor has been identified as an integral link in such a system.
Consumers Gas is purchasing lands running down the west side of the corridor north of the
401 from Hydro, which contains an existing gas pipeline. We understand Consumers Gas is
amenable to accommodating a public pathway system in its pipeline corridor, however we do
not yet have formal confirmation of this. Any redesign of the new subdivisions should
consider possible use of the pipeline corridor where appropriate as well as integration of the
system into the new neighbourhoods in other ways wherever possible.
We have previously reported on concerns with the public safety aspects of such a system and
the need to provide for visibility, frequent escape points (such as walkway linkages) and
security for abutting properties. In this regard, further refinement and implementation of any
trail system should be undertaken in consultation with abutting residents, the police and the
City's cycling interest groups now providing input into the citywide trail system.
Graywood Investments Limited:
To date, beyond the usual subdivision requirements of a number of agencies we have received
the following agency concerns in response to the circulation of these applications, some of
which are qualified by responses to the City's environmental review:
The Toronto District School Board indicates no school capacity concerns with the
applications, with the exception of Beverly Glen Public School north of Finch Avenue. Due to
Council's decision last year to designate the corridor for Open Space, the Board elected to
transfer approximately 200 French immersion students to the school to utilize available
capacity. As a result, any pupil generation from development of the corridor lands will require
student placement via bussing in other schools in the vicinity which do have adequate
capacity. The Board has not yet commented on the acceptability of a public walkway system
adjacent to its lands.
The Toronto Catholic School Board advises of capacity constraints due to lack of permanent
facilities and overcrowding at Holy Spirit Catholic School with respect to the Graywood
proposals between Huntingwood Drive and Highway 401 in the Sullivan Community.
The Toronto Ambulance Service advises of concerns with the turning radii to accommodate
emergency vehicles at certain intersections of the new roads proposed with existing roads.
This concern can addressed through further conditions of draft approval of the proposed
subdivision.
Consumers Gas has not yet confirmed the availability of, or terms for public use and access
for walkway or bicycle trail purposes to, the lands it is acquiring separately from Ontario
Hydro.
The Toronto Hydro Electric Commission advises that, subject to further confirmation at the
detailed design stage, the water system should be adequate to support development of the
corridor. Previous complaints about low water pressures have typically resulted from older
undersized, often shared, service connections, as well as obstructions in those connections.
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has provided comments pertaining strictly to
the Graywood subdivision proposals. (Other comments may be forthcoming that reflect the
results of the City's environmental report.) The Authority has identified additional
information requirements to be addressed by the owner's consultants. Additional comments
are reflected in the discussion on certain corridor blocks below.
The following proposals endeavour to address all of the above considerations including the
results of the City's environmental review, agency comments discussed further below, public
input, the City's 1996/1977 land use review of the corridor, and the results of the latest
Prehearing Conference of the Ontario Municipal Board. The discussion commences at the
north end of the corridor and proceeds southerly on a block by block basis.
Figure 3.
The City's environmental study concludes this portion of the corridor has potential to
contribute to a linear pathway system, particularly because it connects to other larger trail
opportunities presented by the Finch Transmission Right-of-way and the remaining Hydro
corridor which continues northerly to Markham. Of the remaining 6 criteria evaluated, few
other significant environmental opportunities were identified, and this block was assigned a
Priority 4 rating.
Substantial concern with the Graywood proposals has also been expressed by the community,
in that no new parkland is identified for this area as part of the subdivision proposal. The June
1997 staff report concluded that development of this block should be limited to single and
semi-detached dwellings of a scale and built form that would blend in with the adjacent
neighbourhood, and that street townhouses could be considered adjacent to the townhouses on
Glen Springs Drive.
On the basis of the above, this block can be viewed as clearly having development potential.
These lands should be viewed as being oriented more to the interior of the neighbourhood
with its park and school than to Bridletowne Circle which generally supports medium and
high density residential development associated with the core of this community. The staff
proposal provides for its development with semi-detached units to provide for a gradation in
built form and density between the adjacent uses, together with pathway and park
components.
Staff are proposing Street J as a through street from Beverly Glen Boulevard to McNicoll
Avenue to provide alternate neighbourhood access to McNicoll for existing and the new
residents. Due to the road reconfiguration suggested, lot depth in the northern portion can be
increased to about 40metres (131 feet), and the width reduced to 12.8 metres (42 feet) to
maintain overall lot area consistency. Rear lot extensions for 38 lots on Glen Springs Drive
continue to be provided for in this concept.
A number of walkway links to the new trail are indicated, however as we have previously
reported, reliance should not be given solely to walkways to provide linkages between the
community and the new trail system. The staff proposal indicates a new 0.6 hectare (1.5 acre)
park at the southerly intersection of Streets J and K which would provide additional exposure
and accessibility to the trail at two awkward bends in the pipeline corridor, and improve the
park supply for this neighbourhood. As the park could otherwise accommodate up to 12 single
family parcels, this block is recommended for acquisition through the overall 5 percent
parkland dedication.
This approach would yield 140 semi-detached units as opposed to the 197 single family and
semi-detached units proposed by Graywood.
Figure 4.
The consultant's study identifies the potential for extension of Beverly Glen Park to the east
side of Beverly Glen Junior Public School, including the possible integration of a naturalized
stormwater pond. This is supported by comments from the TRCA that Graywood's
stormwater management strategy does not meet the Authority's quality and quantity control
requirements, and that a pond block is recommended here to treat all of the lands north of
Huntingdale Blvd. Protection of the corridor at this location would be particularly convenient
for passive use by residents on Bridletowne Circle, would retain a green space on this entry
into the neighbourhood and provide an attractive terminal view from Street J. We have
identified a 0.7 hectare (1.7 acre) block for this purpose, however further discussion is
required among the interested parties to determine the size of any stormwater facility and
whether any usable land might remain for shared parks use, if not dedication. Additionally,
there may also be an opportunity to negotiate with the Toronto District School Board a
relocation of its parking lot from the west side of Beverly Glen Junior Public School to this
block, to provide enhanced programmable space for Beverly Glen Park.
The City's study does not identify any essential uses for the lower portion of this block which
lies between high rise apartment buildings to the east and semi-detached dwellings to the
west. Townhouses exist to the southwest and a current proposal by the First Alliance Church
on the south side of Huntingdale Blvd. is under review for 54 units of apartment housing.
Accordingly, it would be appropriate to consider multiple-family townhousing on this block
which has convenient access to Bridletowne Mall and transit routes, as a natural extension of
the higher density development associated with the core of this community. With possible
densities ranging from 50 to 100 units per hectare (20 to 40 units per acre), this block could
yield approximately 60 to 120 units of housing. This compares to the 56 units of
predominantly semi-detached housing proposed for this block by Graywood.
We are also proposing that the new trail/pathway run easterly on Huntingdale and down
Bridlewood to the signalized intersection at Finch Avenue for safety reasons and to avoid the
First Alliance Church property. The extension of the pathway south of Finch on the east side
of the corridor is discussed further under Figure 5 below.
Figure 5.
The City's study has identified this block and the block south of Pinemeadow Blvd. as
Priority 1 blocks given their potential to contribute to channel renaturalization, water quality
and erosion control, and particularly to address downstream flooding problems. It should be
noted that the rear 10 metres (33 feet) of the lots proposed by Graywood adjacent to the
watercourse also fall within the Valley and Stream Corridor identified in MetroPlan, requiring
the developer to demonstrate that the environmental integrity of the stream and its function as
an integral link in the greenspace system will be maintained and enhanced.
The Bendale Branch of Highland Creek emerges from a culvert on the south side of Finch
Avenue and runs as an open channel southerly toward Collingsbrook Park. The flood line for
the Bendale Branch at this location is currently within the existing embankment. Acquisition
of the entire block as shown on Figure 5 protects for the greatest opportunity to realize
numerous environmental benefits. If this cannot be achieved, Graywood should be challenged
to respond with a more limited development proposal that would achieve similar benefits. The
Conservation Authority suggests that, while preservation of the full width of the corridor at
this location is desirable, a minimum 10metre (33 foot) environmental buffer should be
provided adjacent to the top of bank or regional flood line to promote naturalization and
regeneration of the watercourse.
Should the City not be able to negotiate acquisition of this entire 2.6 hectare (6.4 acre) block,
Figure 5a provides for a maximum of 28 semi-detached dwellings, consistent with the
semi-detached dwellings on Longford Crescent to the west, on a single loaded street. This
would retain a 21.6metre (71 foot) open space buffer totalling 1 hectare (2.5 acres) adjacent to
the watercourse for other channel widening and renaturalization solutions, which is wider than
that recommended by TRCA. Some of this work could also be integrated into part of the road
allowance, or the block further widened by reducing the width of the road allowance. As part
of the renaturalization effort, clearly the best routing for a pathway through this
neighbourhood would be down the east side of the corridor to provide for enhanced
accessibility and exposure.
Staff continue to strongly oppose the commercial block proposed by Graywood on the south
side of Finch Avenue. The 0.3 hectare (0.8 acre) block can only support a Neighbourhood
Commercial scale of development on this major arterial site which is very close to the
community core focussed on Bridlewood Mall. The 32, 790 square metres (353,000 square
feet) of existing retail development around the Finch and Warden intersection already provide
ample commercial service to this community. As recommended last year, staff continue to feel
the appropriate use for this block, if developed, would be for Medium Density Residential
purposes only. With possible densities ranging from 50 to 100 units per hectare (20 to 40 units
per acre), this block could yield approximately 16 to 32 units of housing. Works and
Emergency Services will require any driveway to be located at the western extremity of the
block.
The staff options that do provide for development would therefore enable 44 to 60 units of
semi-detached and medium density housing on this block, as compared to the 64 units of
predominantly semi-detached housing proposed by Graywood, would continue to provide for
enhanced naturalization opportunities and would avoid further commercial development on
Finch Avenue.
Figure 6.
This block also represents a very significant opportunity for stormwater and environmental
enhancement. The 1997 staff report recognized the desirability of linking North Bridlewood
Park to Collingsbrook Park to provide additional programming opportunities. The report also
indicated the need to address stormwater and flooding issues associated with the Bendale
tributary, and the potential for integrating necessary works with the park connection.
Focussing such effort on this 2 hectare (5 acre) block could enable some development on the
block to the north as discussed under Figure 5a above while improving downstream flow and
flooding problems and maintaining green space on this neighbourhood entry street. The full
potential of this block to contribute to environmental enhancement will, however, require
further concerted discussion among the affected agencies and negotiation with the developer
to identify specific land requirements and the extent of land suitable for park dedication. Such
an approach should clearly be given a high priority by Council.
The southern portion of this block, identified as only a Priority 4 by the City's consultant
study, could then potentially accommodate 22 single family units on a cul-de-sac running
north from CollingsbrookBlvd., as compared to the 53 single family units overall on this
block proposed by Graywood, while maintaining a reasonable length of pathway on the
Consumers Gas pipeline adjacent to North Bridlewood Junior Public School.
Figure 7.
The block from Collingsbrook Boulevard to Huntingwood Drive is approximately 463 metres
(1,520feet) long, and could be broken up by creating two cul-de-sacs, in part to discourage
through traffic shortcutting. Indicated are 54 single family lots, compared to the 81 single
family lots proposed by Graywood. Walkways are provided for between the streets and to
connect with the linear trail system. Failing a solution for the pathway, this is a stretch of the
pipeline that should be fenced and secured, with any cycling trail located along the new
streets.
There is no express accommodation in the staff proposal for expansion of the Bridlewood
Brethren in Christ property between Huntingwood Drive and Morgandale Crescent, although
the church has previously expressed interest in obtaining additional lands. The opportunity
remains, however, for the church to continue to pursue acquisition with from Graywood.
Figure 8.
Bridlewood Park is a higher order facility, with a field house, illuminated field, splash pool,
etc. Accordingly it would be appropriate to continue the park's currently heavily landscaped
frontage easterly over the corridor to enhance both park exposure and the streetscape in this
area. Economic Development, Culture and Tourism staff advise the park expansion indicated
would accommodate a new parking lot and a new baseball diamond, and this opportunity is
recognized by the Priority 2 rating of the consultants' study.
The southern portion of this block, identified as Priority 4 in the consultants' study, could then
be considered for development with 19 single family units on a cul-de-sac running north from
Bridletowne Boulevard, compared to Graywood's 56 units of predominantly semi-detached
units. A pathway on the Consumers Gas lands could continue to be provided which is well
integrated with the park and Bridlewood Public School.
Figure 9.
The Graywood proposal shows 14 single family lots, most situated on a cul-de-sac off
Bridlewood Boulevard, together with an extension to the City's existing stormwater pond
north of the proposed commercial use on the Sheppard frontage. The consultant's study
identifies this block as Priority 2 to provide for enlargement of the pond to accommodate new
development and naturalization. As with the block south of Pinemeadow Blvd. discussed
under Figure 6 above, further concerted discussion among the affected agencies and
negotiation with the developer is necessary to identify specific land requirements and any
residual development and pathway opportunities.
The proposed Graywood block on Sheppard should not be considered for the proposed
commercial use, particularly at a Neighbourhood Commercial scale, given the 20,320 square
metres (219,000square feet) of existing commercial development already concentrated on the
nearby Sheppard/Warden intersection. The staff position continues to support the use of this
parcel for Medium Density Residential purposes, potentially yielding 18 to 36 units of
housing at 50 to 100units per hectare (20 to 40 units per acre). Works and Emergency Services
will require any driveway to be located at the western extremity of the block.
Should the area served by Street D be confirmed as developable, a maximum of 11 single
family parcels could be provided as shown on Figure 9a. Under this development scenario, the
staff proposals could realize a maximum of 51 units of housing, compared to the 14 units
proposed by Graywood.
Figure 10.
As with the north side, staff do not support the use of the block on the south side for
commercial purposes, and we continue to feel Medium Density Residential is the most
appropriate use, with any access located to the western extremity of the block. At a density of
50 to 100 units per hectare (20to 40 units per acre), the block could yield 16 to 32 units of
housing.
Staff looked at providing a through street down the remainder of this section versus two
cul-de-sacs. Both options raise access questions at the north end of the block. Should the
connection be made to Highhill Drive, Sheppard Avenue over the pipeline corridor, or
possibly to Palmdale Drive over lands owned by the Toronto Hydro Electric Commission?
Each has implications. Highhill Drive is a single family residential street which would
experience an increase in traffic. A connection to Sheppard requires an awkward jog and there
may be sight line problems due to the grade of Sheppard. The viability of a connection over
the Hydro Commission lands is not known at this time. If a cul-de-sac approach were used,
access to the street from Highhill or Sheppard could be obstructed during pipeline repairs. The
staff concept illustrated, therefore, requires further refinement and consultation with various
interests. The City's study ranked this block as Priority4.
The study further ranked the block north of Vradenberg Drive as Priority 2, largely because of
the potential to expand the park as recommended in the June 1997 staff report, with the
possibility of also integrating a naturalized stormwater management facility. This entire block
amounts to 2.2hectares (5.4 acres).
Should some development be considered, the staff proposal illustrated on Figure 10a suggests
an extension of Vradenberg Park through to the pipeline corridor, providing increased
accessibility and exposure for the proposed pathway together with the potential for some
stormwater works. This would result in two relatively short cul-de-sacs to minimize traffic
concerns. In view of the apartment building to the east, 30 semi-detached units are proposed
on Street C, while 13 single family lots are proposed on Street B to the south. The park is
further extended southerly on Street B to the rear limit of lots on Vradenberg Drive. The
existing walkway to Vradenberg Drive could then be eliminated and through further
negotiation perhaps offered to Graywood to deepen the two new lots indicated on Street. The
43 units indicated overall compare to the 87 units proposed by Graywood.
Figure 11.
The City's study has identified the need and opportunity for a stormwater management facility
on the south side of Lowcrest Blvd. (i.e., Priority 3), as has Graywood's own proposal. The
Gore and Storrie study commissioned by the City last year also recognized the need for this
facility and identified a capacity requirement for such a pond. The potential benefit of such a
facility, which could possibly eliminate the need for underground pipes and some
stormceptors proposed by Graywood, has also been suggested by the TRCA. Similarly, the
benefit of such a facility located here as opposed to one integrated with Vradenberg Park, or
the need for both, requires further consideration and discussion with appropriate agencies
including the TRCA and Ministry of Transportation. Until this work has proceeded, any
subdivision of the block on the south side of Lowcrest should be viewed as premature. In the
interim, the staff proposal illustrated shows 36single family parcels, compared to the 63 units
proposed by Graywood.
Parkland and Other Land Acquisitions:
Graywood is proposing to dedicate 1.672 hectares (4.1 acres) of parkland to the City. At 5
percent residential and 2 percent commercial, the normal City requirement would be for 1.633
hectares (4.0acres), although commercial dedications continue to be waived under the former
City of Scarborough's "Going to Bat for Business" policy.
Should approved development exceed 490 units, it would be beneficial to apply the alternative
higher 1 hectare (2.5 acres) per 300 unit provision of the Planning Act and Scarborough
Official Plan to the entire proposal, on the basis that, similar to the application of the higher
standard to Port Union Village, residential development of the subject lands was never
contemplated in the original planning for these neighbourhoods and their parks.
Graywood has also identified a further 3.2 hectares (8 acres) of land for open space,
stormwater management and walkway purposes. Such lands required to service an applicant's
own development are normally be dedicated to the City as a condition of any Draft of
Subdivision approval. With the parkland, this would bring Graywood's total dedication to 4.9
hectares (12.1 acres), or approximately 15 percent of the corridor.
The staff proposals illustrated on Figures 3 to 11 identify 13.5 hectares (33.4 acres) of land for
parks, stormwater and renaturalization purposes, largely reflecting the XCG proposal, which
is 8.7hectares (21.4 acres) in excess of Graywood's own proposal. Most of the blocks
identified reflect potential for integration of these uses, however the exact areas for each type
of use cannot be determined until the specific nature and extent of all environmental works,
including those necessary to service Graywood's own development as well as the area of
remaining lands suitable for programmable parks purposes, are known.
The alternative staff proposals shown on Figures 5a, 9a and 10a provide for some additional
residential development and would reduce overall park, stormwater and renaturalization
requirements to 9.6 hectares (23.8 acres), or 4.8 hectares (11.9 acres) in excess of Graywood's
plans.
As there may be significant implications on land acquisition costs to the City, Council's
direction is required as to which of the quantum of land for parks and environmental purposes
identified by Graywood or either of the staff scenarios discussed above best meets the City's
objectives for the purposes of its case at the Ontario Municipal Board.
Norstar Development Corporation:
Clearly, the Norstar applications are not as well advanced as Graywood's. Their Zoning and
Subdivision applications are not appealable until October 5, 1998 which is the day the full
hearing was scheduled to commence. Very few agency responses have been received to our
recent circulation of the applications. In particular, the necessary technical documentation in
support of the subdivision proposals was just submitted to the City on September 4, 1998 and
is only now being circulated to our commenting agencies. While those responses are likely
some time away, we are already aware that the Dorset Park portion of the applications falls
within the regulated floodplain which, in accordance with provincial policy, prohibits any new
development. Norstar's response to that one issue in particular will require considerable
further review and discussion among the affected interests, including the community. As
further reflected by the Board's deferral of the hearing on these applications to February 1999,
there has also been minimal opportunity for public consultation in either the Maryvale or
Dorset Park Communities.
Under these unique circumstances, it is not appropriate at this time to comment further on
"comparable and compatible" development alternatives for this portion of the corridor. Given
the scheduling of the hearing on their applications, and the time now available for full agency
review of their technical supporting documentation as well as community consultation, staff
anticipate reporting to you further at your November 12, 1998 meeting prior to the next
scheduled Prehearing Conference in this regard.
Conclusions:
The staff proposals illustrated on Figures 3 to 11 could result in 392 to 486 units of housing,
depending on the final densities approved for the Medium Density Residential blocks. This
represents a 27.0 to 41.1 percent reduction in the 666 units proposed by Graywood.
With the alternative additional development indicated on Figures 5a, 9a and 10a, 460 to 570
units could result, subject again to the specific Medium Density Residential densities
approved. This alternative approach overall would represent a 14.4 to 30.9 percent reduction
from Graywood's proposal.
The City's primary concern at this juncture must be the Graywood appeals. The proposals in
this report seek to balance the City's interest in environmental enhancement with the obvious
expectations of the developer, concerns of the community and sound planning principles. In
the opinion of staff these proposals represent a fair and reasonable basis on which to actively
continue negotiations with Graywood to seeking negotiated settlement on their applications
before the Ontario Municipal Board and to secure the optimum solution on the future use of
these very significant lands.
Contact Name:
Rod Hines, MCIP, RPP
Scarborough Civic Centre
Telephone: (416) 396-7020
Fax: (416) 396-4265
E-mail: hines@city.scarborough.on.ca
The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (September 22,
1998) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:
Purpose:
Subsequent to the report of the Director of Community Planning, East District dated
September 14, 1998, on the above-noted matters, this will further report on the results of
recent consultations with the community and Graywood Investments Limited.
Financial Implications:
Unknown at this time.
Recommendations:
It is recommended:
(1)that the recommendations contained in the September 14, 1998 staff report be approved;
(2)that Scarborough Community Council determine a position with respect to the remaining
issues as set out in the Conclusions to this report.
Background:
Scarborough Community Council had before it for consideration the staff report, dated
September14, 1998, which outlined alternative draft plans of subdivision as directed by City
Council on July 31, 1998. The alternative plans developed sought to provide for comparable
and compatible residential in-fill development and identification of appropriate park and other
facilities to enhance the environment.
It was the decision of the Committee to defer consideration of the report to this special
meeting to enable further consideration of the proposals by, and consultation with, the affected
community associations.
The Committee also directed that Notice for this meeting, the above noted staff report and the
XCG Consultants study be provided to the members of the resident working committees
involved in the City's Hydro Corridor Land Use Review process last year. In view of the time
constraints, this material was hand-delivered by staff last weekend.
Comments:
Meetings of the three community associations, at which staff were available to make
presentations and answer questions, and with the respective Ward Councillors in attendance,
have now been held with the following results. Certain concerns will be addressed in further
detail below in discussion on individual sections of the corridor.
South Bridlewood Community Association:
At its meeting on Tuesday, September 15, 1998, the Association passed the attached
resolution, which calls for any development plan of the corridor to include residential uses on
lots and of unit sizes comparable to the surrounding neighbourhood, maximize parkland
through investigating opportunities to acquire the additional lands, include a greenbelt
recreational trail through the corridor, and address all environmental, sewage, water pressure
and traffic concerns.
North Bridlewood Residents Association:
From its meeting on Thursday, September 17, 1998, the Association's position (attached) is
that only single family detached units be provided for north of Beverly Glen Blvd. on 15
metre (50 foot lots), with 4 walkway links to the linear trail down the west side of the corridor
and a fifth walkway link to the townhousing on the west side of Glen Springs Drive. For the
lands north of Huntingdale Boulevard, the group supports townhousing to a maximum of 60
units as provided for in the September 14, 1998 staff report. The parkland which staff have
identified on the south side of Beverly Glen is supported but should be dedicated exclusive of
any stormwater detention facilities. Similarly, they would like to see the proposed trail down
the west side of the corridor widened by approximately 6 metres (20 feet) to provide for a
safer and better designed trail. The group wants input into the architectural and landscape
design of the subdivision, and to ensure the rear yard extensions for the homes on Glen
Springs Drive proceed.
Wishing Well Acres Community Association:
The community met last night, Monday, September 21, 1998. The Association passed a
resolution (also attached) which is very similar to South Bridlewood's, with the addition of a
request to have a Place of Worship added to the Medium Density Residential designation
proposed by staff on the Sheppard frontage of the corridor. Substantial discussion at the
meeting focussed on the issue of past flooding problems in the Wishing Well area and
possible additional stormwater impacts from development of the corridor. In this regard, Mr.
M. A. Price, General Manager, Water and Wastewater Services, Works and Emergency
Services Department, was in attendance to assist in the discussion.
In addition to these meetings, the residents' groups requested and were granted a meeting with
Mayor Mel Lastman, the four affected Ward Councillors, the developer, and senior staff on
Friday, September 18, 1998. While the discussions were fairly brief, it was agreed that a
representative of each association, their lawyers, the developer and Planning and Legal staff
would continue the meeting on a working group basis without the Ward Councillors or other
observers present to discuss the residents' concerns in greater detail.
This represented the first such collective discussion between the parties since the original
submission and subsequent appeals by Graywood of its applications and proved to be very
helpful, although not conclusive within the time frame available.
Graywood has agreed to consider and respond to the community positions with respect to the
ideas regarding lot sizes, walkways links to the trail system, a widening of that trail and for
medium density housing on the block north of Huntingdale Boulevard. Significantly,
Graywood also indicated that, while it is not interested in many of the alternative parkland
acquisition arrangements discussed in the September 14, 1998 staff report, it is amenable to
considering any offers to purchase additional lands by the City, or for possible land exchanges
with the City, on a fair market value basis.
On the issue of architectural control, Graywood advised its preferred approach is the use of
development guidelines, with a control architect identified to ensure compliance by individual
builders. This would afford both the City and residents an opportunity for input into the
development of the guidelines, and should be requested as a condition of any draft plan of
subdivision approval.
Graywood will make its engineering consultants available for discussions with City staff on
servicing and stormwater related issues, which is required under the OMB Procedural Order in
any event, and the results will be conveyed back to the working group.
The various alternative subdivision proposals set out in the September 14, 1998 staff report
were a further refinement of proposals contained in an earlier report to this Committee, based
in part on the City's recently completed environmental study of the corridor. They were
developed and reported, however, without the benefit of full community consultation,
particularly regarding the study results.
To prepare for the upcoming hearing, the three community associations are now assisted by
their own planning and engineering advisors, in addition to legal counsel. The groups have
developed reasoned and thoughtful positions that now accept the notion of infill residential
development on the corridor if it will result in development that is comparable and compatible
with the abutting neighbourhoods. That position is qualified, however, by the continued desire
to realize all possible parkland, open space and environmental opportunities.
Clearly, the above recent discussions have proven to be very helpful, have generated some
new ideas and particularly have enabled staff to give further consideration to the alternative
land use and subdivision proposals previously reported, as follows:
Figures 3 and 4:
North Bridlewood continues to strongly advocate only single family development on this
block shown on Figure 3, given that other housing forms greatly predominate the area. They
note in particular that all streets connecting to Beverly Glen Boulevard consist of single
family units and that the introduction of a new street of semi-detached units would be
inconsistent with that character. Council may, therefore, wish to direct staff to explore and
advance an alternative which provides for single family units on the southern portion of this
block in proximity to Beverly Glen with semi-detached units in the wider northern portion of
the block.
The community is also advocating an additional 6 metre (20 foot) wide strip adjacent to the
Consumers Gas pipeline be reserved for pathway purposes to enhance landscaping
opportunities, overall safety and spaciousness of the trail system. This proposal has merit,
although if pursued, similar consideration should be given to all portions of the corridor where
the pathway system continues to be indicated over the Consumers' lands. This approach
would have implications on the depths of new lots in the narrower southern portion of the
block. Shallower lots would either result in lots smaller than the abutting neighbourhoods if a
specific unit yield is to be maintained, or fewer units on slightly wider lots to maintain
comparable lot areas. .
Graywood has agreed to look at this proposal, but did advise that these additional lands would
only be provided to the City through parkland dedication or purchase. Given the implications
on subdivision design and negotiations to acquire even further lands, Council direction in this
regard is needed.
The community remains concerned about the overall distribution of parkland among the three
communities, particularly since no parkland was proposed north of Finch Avenue by
Graywood. They feel that at a minimum, parkland should be taken at 5 percent of the area of
this one plan of subdivision, as opposed to being blended with the overall dedication from
Graywood's three plans of subdivisions. Additional parkland should also be identified given
the greater proportion of units being proposed in this community. The community supports
this land being provided as proposed by staff on the south side of Beverly Glen, and that it
should be exclusive of any stormwater retention areas.
The 0.6 hectare (1.5 acre) park identified in the staff report in the northern part of this block
would actually represent a 6.4 percent dedication for this one plan of subdivision north of
Finch Avenue, which is sufficient to satisfy Graywood's obligation. (A 5 percent dedication
only would result in a 0.5hectare, or 1.2 acre, park, potentially enabling 2 additional single
family lots to be identified.) The acquisition of additional pathway lands suggested by the
community, as well as park and/or stormwater management lands on the south side of Beverly
Glen, will have to be negotiated separately with Graywood.
The community has also suggested an additional walkway link be identified between the
townhouses on Glen Springs Drive and the east side of Street J. This suggestion merits further
consideration, but will require the participation of the two affected condominiums and the
acquisition of further land or an easement by the City.
The community supports the Medium Residential designation proposed by staff on Figure 4,
if limited to townhousing only. They also support a density of 50 units per hectare (20 units
per acre), or 60 units on the 1.2 hectare (3 acre) block illustrated. (The size of this block could
vary slightly depending on the ultimate size of the open space lands to the north as may be
negotiated.)
Given the community's preference for townhousing as opposed to other medium density
building forms, it would be appropriate to consider the existing zoning standards applying to
similar developments in the vicinity. In this regard, the townhouse developments on the
north-west corner of Beverly Glen Boulevard and Bridletowne Circle, and on both sides of
Huntingdale Boulevard to the south-west of the subject block are both zoned to a maximum
density of 37.2 units per hectare (15 units per acre). It would be appropriate to apply a similar
development standard to the subject block, potentially yielding 45 units on the parcel
indicated.
Figures 5 to 9:
From its meeting last week, it appears that the South Bridlewood community is generally
supportive of the proposals set out in the September 14, 1998 staff report, including the
introduction of the Medium Density Residential blocks on the Finch and Sheppard frontages
proposed for commercial use by Graywood. It appears this includes the alternative proposals
illustrated on Figures 5a and 9a in that report, however, as indicated by their resolution, the
community's obvious preference would be for the City to continue to seek acquisition of the
greatest amount of land possible as suggested on Figures 5 and 9. Staff believe the community
would support the Medium Density Residential designation under either scenario as a basis to
encourage continued negotiation.
Figures 10 and 11:
A major concern in Wishing Well Acres continues to be past flooding problems and concern
over the impact from corridor development. The Gore and Storrie report conducted for the
City last year concluded that the corridor can be developed for low density residential use
without aggravating those problems. Graywood's own functional servicing report appears to
confirm that, and it is, of course, the City's expectation and requirement that new
developments must accommodate their own servicing impacts without making existing
conditions worse for abutting developments. Conditions to that effect can be applied on draft
plan approval, requiring further detailed design by the proponent to the satisfaction of the City
prior to any final approval of the subdivision.
The community has requested that the intent of the Special Study Area policy applied to the
block fronting Sheppard Avenue last year through Official Plan Amendment 1001 be
maintained by adding a Place of Worship designation to the Medium Density Residential
designation proposed by staff. This position is fully consistent with the recommendations of
the June 3, 1997 staff report on the results of the City's Land Use Review of the corridor and
indeed, the additional designation is now recommended to be applied to both sides of
Sheppard Avenue.
Conclusions:
The interested community organizations have now had the opportunity to respond to the
proposals presented in the September 14, 1998 staff report, and their feedback has assisted
staff to further refine the proposals and to suggest some improvements to them. Certain
additional directions are sought as follows:
(1)a position on the possible 6 metre (20 foot) widening of the linear trail system, where it is
proposed on the Consumers Gas pipeline corridor, onto the adjacent Graywood lands, for
inclusion in further land acquisition negotiations;
(2)whether any widening of the trail system is to be on the basis of reduced lot depths or on
the basis of maintaining lot areas which are remain comparable to the abutting
neighbourhoods;
(3)whether single family and/or semi-detached dwelling types are to be advanced by the City
for the block north of Beverly Glen Boulevard;
(4)whether the density of the proposed Medium Density Residential Block on the north side
of Huntingdale should be limited to 37.2 units per hectare (15 units per acre), comparable to
other townhouse developments in the vicinity; and
(5)whether a Place of Worship designation should be added to the proposed Medium Density
Residential designations on the north and south sides of Sheppard Avenue, consistent with
past staff recommendations.
Clearly, the City's previously stated objectives for the corridor can now be further clarified
through consideration of alternative development opportunities, the recently completed
environmental review and the articulated positions of the communities that will be
accommodating the various new uses of the corridor.
The City currently has some, albeit limited, funds available for land acquisition within the
corridor, with which we should continue to negotiate with Graywood. Significantly, the
developer has already indicated a willingness to explore land exchange opportunities with the
City, and this interest also needs to be pursued with vigour. One opportunity within the former
City of Scarborough that should certainly be explored is the former Scarborough
Transportation Corridor lands in the Knob Hill Employment District. These lands are the
subject of a Public Meeting at Scarborough Community Council on October 14, 1998 to
consider possible amendment to the Official Plan to provide, in part, for primarily Low
Density Residential with some Medium Density Residential designations on approximately
11.1 hectares (27.5 acres) of City-owned lands between Midland Avenue and Brimley Road.
There may be other opportunities within Scarborough as well.
Contact Name:
Rod Hines, MCIP, RPP
Scarborough Civic Centre
Telephone: (416) 396-7020
Fax: (416) 396-4265
E-mail: hines@city.scarborough.on.ca
The following persons appeared before the Community Council in connection with the
foregoing matter:
-Mr. Phillip Egginton, President, South Bridlewood Community Association;
-Mr. William Fehr, Wishing Well area resident;
-Pastor Steve Webster, Wishing Well Acres Baptist Church;
-Ms. Sheryle Saunders, President, North Bridlewood Residents' Association;
-Ms. Ruth Jorgensen, L'Amoreaux area resident;
-Mr. Robert Brown, President, Wishing Well Acres Community Association;
-Ms. Marika Bandera, Dorset Park Community Residents' Association;
-Mr. Gilles Barbeau, South Bridlewood area resident;
-Mr. Andre Bernes, Wishing Well area resident;
-Ms. Pam Brown, Wishing Well area resident;
-Ms. Tasia Trouvlakis, Bridlewood area resident;
-Ms. Lynda Wheeler, Director, Terraview/Willowfield Residents' Association;
-Mr. Perry Fuller, Bridlewood area resident;
-Mr. Louie Ciccarelli, Bridlewood area resident;
-Mr. Don Sears, Bridlewood area resident;
-Mr. Aris Babikian, Wishing Well area resident; and
-Mr. Walter Korynkieuuicz, Wexford area resident.
A copy of the Executive Summary of the XCG Consultants' report respecting the
Investigation of Stormwater Management, Naturalization and Open Space Opportunities has
been forwarded to Members of City Council under separate cover. A copy of the full report
has previously been provided to all Members of The Scarborough Community Council, and a
copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
APPENDIX 1
JULY, 1998 COUNCIL RESOLUTION
RESOLVED THAT:
(1)the City Solicitor, in consultation with appropriate staff, explore the appellants interest
'without prejudice' to resolve the outstanding appeals based on the following City objectives:
(a)comparable and compatible in-fill residential development, having regard to the unit types,
lot dimensions and area, building setbacks, road widths and streetscapes of the abutting
quality neighbourhoods;
(b)appropriate City parks, trails, bicycle pathways and other recreational amenities; and
(c)appropriate storm water quantity and quality facilities and other environmental
enhancements as may be identified through the current study commissioned by the
Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;
(2)the results of the above negotiations and study, and the monies available for land
acquisition requirements identified, be reported for consideration by the Scarborough
Community Council at its meeting to be held on September 16, 1998;
(3)the City Solicitor advise the Ontario Municipal Board of the foregoing directions at the
next pre-hearing conference on September 8, 1998;
(4)the provisions of this legislation be extended to the entire corridor; and
(5)the confidential nature of these instructions be deleted.
APPENDIX 2
EXCERPT FROM THE AUGUST 31, 1998
XCG CONSULTANTS LTD. REPORT
1.It is the position of the Wishing Well Acres Community Association that any plan for the
development of the hydro lands:
(a)include residential housing only if lot and house sizes are similar to those in the
surrounding neighbourhood;
(d)address all environmental, sewage, water pressure, flooding, and traffic issues;
(e)include a recommendation that every effort be made for a land swap for the Ontario Hydro
Corridor (or portions thereof) and that renaturalized lands be created; and
(f)maintain a place of worship designation on the lands fronting Sheppard Avenue.
Toronto, September 22, 1998.
