Application for Amendment to the Official Plan and Zoning Code -

Zanini Developments, 4185 Dundas Street West

The Etobicoke Community Council, after considering the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (April 1, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District, recommends that the application by Zanini Developments for amendment to the Etobicoke Official Plan and Zoning Code to permit the development of thirty-six freehold townhouses on the south side of Dundas Street West, east of Prince Edward Drive be approved, subject to fulfillment of the conditions outlined in the report (April 1, 1998), as amended by the following:

(i)Condition 1(i) to be amended to read:

ASubmission of revised plans to show visitor parking spaces 2.7 m (8.8 ft) in width, to the satisfaction of the Staff Advisory Committee on Development Control.@; and

(ii)Condition 4(v) to be amended by deleting the words Aif approved@.

The Etobicoke Community Council reports having:

(i)requested the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District, in concert with the staff of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department, to develop a standard for freehold developments across the new City of Toronto;

(ii)requested the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District, in concert with the staff of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department, to also investigate standards for private roads;

(iii)requested the Commissioner of Works, Etobicoke District, to report back to the Etobicoke Community Council on the implementation of measures to improve turning movements on Dundas Street West in the vicinity of Prince Edward Drive; and

(iv) received the following supplementary report (May 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District:

The Etobicoke Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 6, 1998 in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Etobicoke Community Council submits the following report (April 1, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Development Etobicoke District:

Purpose:

To review a proposal to amend the Official Plan and Zoning Code with respect to the property located on the south side of Dundas Street West, east of Prince Edward Drive, from General Commercial (CG) and Second Density Residential (R2) to Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) to permit the development of thirty six freehold townhouses.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

City funding is not required. There are no impacts on capital or operating budgets.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(i)the application by Zanini Developments be the subject of a Public Meeting to obtain the views of interested parties and, if approved, that the conditions outlined in this report be fulfilled including an amendment to the Official Plan; and,

(ii)that the Community Council make a recommendation regarding the acceptability of the proposed freehold nature of the project.

Background:

In March, 1993, The City of Etobicoke Council considered and refused an application by Ferracuti in Trust for the development of a six storey rental apartment building containing 102 units on a portion of the subject site. The property at that time was irregular in shape and 0.48 hectares (1.19 acres) in size. The lands were subsequently purchased by Zanini Developments who then assembled the rear 24.3 ha (80 ft.) of the adjacent residential properties to the south to create a rectangular development parcel of 0.6 hectares (1.4 acres).

On October 14, 1997, a community meeting was held to allow area residents and surrounding property owners an opportunity to review a proposal for 36 townhouses, prior to the submission of a formal application to the City. On October 21, 1997, Zanini Developments submitted their application. Comments from that meeting are provided further in this report.

Site Description and Surrounding Uses:

 The rectangular site is located on the south side of Dundas Street West, one site east of Prince Edward Drive (Exhibit No. 1). The majority of the site is zoned General Commercial (CG). The four commercial buildings on the site, which were previously occupied by two automotive garages, a landscape contracting operation and the Knights of Columbus meeting hall, have recently been demolished. The rear portion of the site (lands assembled from the adjacent residential properties to the south) is zoned Second Density Residential (R2).

Surrounding zoning categories and land uses are as follows:

North:General Commercial (CG) - a variety of commercial uses in low rise buildings

outh:Second Residential Density (R2) - single detached dwellings

East:General Commercial (CG), Second Residential Density (R2) - commercial buildings fronting onto Dundas Street West with single detached dwellings fronting onto Earlington Avenue

West:General Commercial (CG), Second Residential Density (R2) - the property fronting onto Dundas Street West is occupied by a single storey restaurant with parking in front and single, detached homes fronting on Prince Edward Drive

Proposal:

Zanini Developments has requested a rezoning from General Commercial (CG) and Second Density Residential (R2) to Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) to permit the development of 36 freehold townhouse units. All the units would be four storeys in height (13.4 m [44 ft.]) and contain three bedrooms.

The project would consist of three townhouse blocks, containing 11, 12 and 13 units, respectively. Two blocks would be oriented perpendicular to Dundas Street West with the third block oriented parallel to the southerly lot line (Exhibit No. 2). Each unit would have individual garages at grade with a second parking space available on each driveway. Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a cental >T= shaped private roadway from Dundas Street West with six visitor parking spaces provided towards the rear of the site.

A typical unit would contain 3 bedrooms with an average unit size of approximately 163.5 m² (1,760 sq. ft.). The units would be between 4.8 m (16 ft.) and 5.4 m (17.9 ft.) in width with minimum front and rear yards of 6.0 m (19.6 ft.) and 7.0 m (22.9 ft.), respectively.

The following is a summary of information relevant to this application:

Official Plan:Commercial Residential Strip

Zoning:Existing:General Commercial (CG) Second Density Residential (R2)

Proposed:Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G)

Site Area0.6 ha (1.48 ac)

Units36

Density60 uph (24.3 upa)

G.F.A.:5 884.9 m² (63,345 sq. ft.)

F.S.I.0.98

Coverage2 283.7 m² (24,582 sq. ft.)27.8%

LOS2 045.9 m² (22,022 sq. ft.)34.1 %

Paved Area1 669.3 m² (17,969 sq. ft.)27.8%

Parking:Required: tenant: 51 spacesProvided:tenant: 72 spaces

visitor: 7 spacesvisitor: 6 spaces

total: 58 spacestotal:78 spaces (short 1 visitor space)

Comment:

Official Plan:

The commercial properties fronting onto Dundas Street West are designated Commercial Residential Strip in the Official Plan. This designation permits mixed commercial/residential developments up to a maximum height of six storeys with sufficient building stepping, buffering or separation to protect adjacent low density residences. Stand alone residential buildings are also permitted, provided the use does not interrupt the continuity of the commercial frontage to a significant degree. The maximum height and density of such developments shall have regard for the relevant criteria for stand alone residential projects, as outlined in Section 4.4.6 of the Plan, and shall be regulated by an absolute height limit as well as a 45 degree angular plane requirement from the adjacent Low Density designations (see Exhibit No. 5 of this report).

Section 4.4.7 of the Official Plan provides for the consolidation of directly abutting residential properties within the Commercial Residential Strip designation without amendment to the Plan in order to achieve satisfactory development standards for redevelopment projects with respect to site design, servicing and the creation of larger parcels of land. In these cases, zoning amendments may be considered, subject to the criteria of Section 4.4.6 and, the provision of adequate landscaping and screening to buffer the proposed parking and loading areas from surrounding residential uses. Further, the height and form of the development should not create any adverse undue impacts with respect to overshadowing and loss of amenity. Therefore, for the purposes of this application, the entire site has been evaluated based on the relevant provisions of the Commercial Residential Strip designation.

Based on a review of the criteria of the Official Plan, staff are satisfied that while the proposal does not meet all of the criteria, it does meet the overall intent of the policies for residential development within a Commercial Residential Strip (Exhibit No. 5). A stand alone residential development at this location would not interrupt the continuity of the commercial frontage to a significant degree as the uses within this section Dundas Street West are more automobile oriented than the commercial uses to the west of Prince Edward Drive. The project would also not adversely impact or compromise the surrounding commercial uses. In terms of land use and building height, the applicant=s proposal would generally conform to the provisions of the Official Plan with limited impact on adjacent residential properties. Further, sufficient traffic capacity would be available on the adjacent roadways to accommodate the development, with parks and social services available within the established community.

However, while the proposal is generally satisfactory from a land use standpoint, staff have concerns regarding the massing and development standards exhibited by the project. In addition, the project as proposed would not comply with the angular plane provisions of the Official Plan and an amendment to the Plan would be required. A draft of the Official Plan amendment is attached as Exhibit No. 6. A detailed discussion of these items is provided below under >Site Design Considerations=.

Zoning Code:

The property is zoned General Commercial (CG) and Second Density Residential (R2). In the event of approval, staff suggest that the site be rezoned to Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) which would provide for the proposed townhouse dwelling type. Site specific development standards should be incorporated to reflect the approved plans.

Site Design Considerations:

As previously noted, the proposal consists of three, 4-storey townhouse blocks. Blocks A and B would be oriented perpendicular to Dundas Street and Block C would be located parallel to the southerly property line (Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3).

As result of the orientation of Blocks A and B, side wall conditions would be presented to Dundas Street West. Although a facing front wall condition would be preferable to address the streetscape, the applicant has submitted building elevations which indicate that the facade of the units adjacent to Dundas Street West would be detailed with additional windows and a side door entrance (Exhibit No. 4).

The applicant is proposing a minimum building setback of 1.5 m (5.0 ft.) from Dundas Street West, whereas the development standards in a Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) zone would require a building setback of 13.5 m (44.2 ft.) from the street line. Staff acknowledge that commercial developments are generally encouraged to locate at the street line to maintain the continuity of the streetscape and create a pedestrian environment. However, the reduced setback proposed by the applicant would result in a loss of privacy for the affected units and preclude the opportunity to provide a suitable streetscape of tree planting and privacy fencing.

It is recommended that an increased setback of 4.0 m (13.0 ft.) be provided from Dundas Street West which would allow for a greater separation between private residential areas and the public boulevard with additional space available for the development of an appropriate streetscape. A greater setback from the street would also improve the operation of the driveway allowing for a 6.0 m (19.6 ft.) clear Athroat distance@ between the property line and the closest driveway. Staff suggest that a combination of fencing and landscaping could be implemented during the Site Plan Control Approval process to maintain the continuity of the street edge.

The applicant would provide each townhouse unit with a minimum 7.0 m (22.9 ft.) rear yard which would not allow for the provision of a 45 degree angular plane from the abutting Low Density Residential neighbourhood which surrounds the southerly portion of the site. Staff acknowledge that the size of the proposed rear yards would be comparable to the development standards recently approved by Council for similar townhouse developments. However given the residential context of this site and the proposed 13.1 m (43 ft.) building height, staff are of the opinion that in order to reduce overlook and prevent a loss of privacy in the rear yards of the adjacent low density neighbourhoods, the project should be revised to meet angular plane requirements for all facing rear yard conditions to the south and east for Blocks A and C.

With respect to Block A, to the west, there is a finger of land, owned by the abutting restaurant property, which runs down a majority of the westerly property line, allowing for a separation of 11.5 m (38 ft.) between the subject site and the abutting low density residential properties to the east. This separation would be sufficient to reduce any impact from the proposed townhouses which would be in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan; therefore, the provision of a 45 degree angular plane would not be required for Block A.

The side yard of Block C would maintain a maximum of 1.26 m (4.1 ft.) from the abutting rear lot lines of the residential properties to the east and west. These properties are occupied by single, detached homes on lots of approximately 45.7 m (150.0 ft.) in depth. The requirement for a 45 degree angular plane would also apply in this instance; however, as this would not be a facing condition, the potential for overlook would be reduced. Therefore, staff recommend some relief from the angular plane provisions in this instance but, to reduce the visual impact of the 4 storey townhouse units on the rear yards of these abutting properties, the height of the proposed end units should be reduced to a maximum eave height of 6.5 m (21.3 ft) and a maximum building height of 9.5 m  (31.1 ft.) which would be consistent with the height requirements applicable to the abutting single detached dwelling.

Each of the three townhouse blocks would be between 58.7 m (192.5 ft.) and 64 m (210.0 ft) in length, and contain between 11 and 13 townhouse units. To reduce the visual impact and massing of these blocks, as they relate to the internal private drive and the surrounding land uses, a break between units should be provided at approximately the mid-point in each Block. In addition, a sidewalk is to be introduced along one side of the private road to facilitate safe pedestrian movements through the site.

Staff=s concerns with respect to building setbacks, block length and the provision of an internal sidewalk should be addressed through a redesign of the project which may result in a reduction in the number of units. The requested modifications to the project would be similar to those standards exhibited by recently approved townhouse developments on Skeens Lane and Dundas Street West at Donnybrook Lane. As previously noted, as a 45 degree angular plane is not proposed adjacent to the low density residential properties, an amendment to the Official Plan would be required. The applicant has been advised of these concerns and may wish to address the matter before the Community Council in deputation.

Agency/Department Circulation:

In response to the circulation of plan submitted in support of this application, no objections have been expressed by the following departments:

Fire DepartmentToronto Hydro

Toronto Transit CommissionBell Canada

Health Department

Comments from The Toronto Separate School Board, Parks and Recreation Services, and the Toronto Police Department remain outstanding.

The Transportation Planning section of the Works Department comments are attached as Exhibits 7 and 8. Transportation staff advise that the level of service on the boundary roadway will not be negatively impacted by the development proposal and that the driveway layout and parking supply as shown is satisfactory subject to minor modifications to the site plan. Given the surplus amount of tenant spaces, Transportation staff have advised that the visitor parking shortfall of one space is not significant. In the event that the freehold nature of the project is found acceptable, mutual rights of way for the driveway must be registered for each unit to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

The Development Engineering section of the Works Department has advised that the existing storm sewer on Dundas Street West does not have the capacity for the proposed development. The applicant has been advised to review possible solutions for storm drainage and present viable options for review by City staff. Works staff has advised that the preferred engineering solution for storm drainage would be to provide a break in the middle of Block C to allow for storm sewer and surface flows towards Dundas Street West (Exhibit No. 9). Works staff are recommending the installation of an internal walkway for public safety and the existing sidewalks on Dundas Street are to be continuous through the driveway.

The applicant is required to provide an environmental report for peer review to ensure that the property is suitable for residential development. The Development Engineering Section also recommends condominium registration for this development rather than the freehold tenure proposed. This issue is discussed in the following section on A Tenure@.

The Etobicoke Board of Education does not object to the application but has advised that additional space would be required at Etobicoke Collegiate Institute to accommodate students from the proposed development (Exhibit No. 10). The Board has requested that the applicant make contributions towards capital costs for school facilities. The applicant has been advised of this request, however, as the Board does not have a development charges by-law in place, this request has not been included as a condition to approval.

Urban Development staff request that details of tree preservation methods be submitted during the Site Plan Approval Process to protect trees on adjacent properties. The applicant would be required to pay the prevailing development charges in effect at the time of the issuance of the building permits, as well as a five percent cash-in-lieu of parkland contribution.

Tenure

Council has in the past approved freehold developments on a private roadway. Notwithstanding these approvals, staff of the Urban Development Department, the Works Department and the Solicitor for the Etobicoke Office continue to have concerns regarding the long term suitability of freehold developments utilizing common facilities such as roadways and underground services. City staff remain of the opinion that developments which share common facilities are more appropriately dealt with under the provisions of the Condominium Act through the registration of a condominium corporation.

Staff have reviewed this matter with the other the district offices, the majority of whom discourage this type of ownership arrangement.

Should the application for a freehold ownership arrangement on a private road be approved, a private mutual use and maintenance agreement, including cost sharing arrangements and the establishment of a reserve fund for the repair and or replacement of common services and facilities should be to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

Community Meeting

On October 14, 1997, approximately 30 persons attended a community meeting to review the proposed plans prior to the submission of a formal application to the City. The residents in attendance were generally receptive to the concept of townhouses but expressed concerns regarding traffic generation, lack of visitor parking, the safety of the access onto Dundas Street West, effects on property values, preservation of trees on adjacent properties and had questions regarding the maintenance of private roads and common elements in a freehold situation.

Conclusions:

It is the opinion of Urban Development staff that the application for townhouses would generally satisfy the Official Plan criteria for considering residential development within a Commercial Residential Strip designation.

However, staff recommend a number of modifications to address the angular plane requirements of the Official Plan and concerns regarding the massing and length of the townhouse blocks, the proposed building setback from Dundas Street West as well as the requirement for an internal walkway to ensure safe pedestrian movements through the site. Staff anticipate that such a redesign may result in the loss of units, however, these modifications would also serve to address a number of the comments from the Development Engineering Section of the Works Department and be more consistent with recent approvals by Council and the Ontario Municipal Board for townhouse developments within the Etobicoke area. Subject to the requested modifications, staff are of the opinion that the proposal would represent good planning.

In order to avoid difficulties for the City with respect to the long term maintenance of freehold developments, staff recommend that the proposal be dealt with by way of condominium registration.

In the event of approval the following conditions should apply:

Conditions to Approval:

1.Fulfilment of the following conditions prior to the enactment of an Official Plan amendment and amending by-law:

(i)Submission of revised plans to include an increased setback to Dundas Street West, an internal sidewalk, compliance with 45 degree angular plane requirements and building heights as outlined in the staff report, revised curb radii, a maximum block length of seven units and visitor parking spaces 2.7 m (8.8 ft.) in width, to the satisfaction of the Staff Advisory Committee on Development Control.

(ii)The submission of environmental reports for peer review in accordance with the Etobicoke Policy and Procedures for Potentially Contaminated Sites.

(iii)Confirmation form the Development Engineering Section of the Works Department that servicing constraints have been satisfactorily addressed

(iv)Signing of a Development Agreement and the payment of the necessary fees associated with the preparation execution and registration of same, if required by the Works Department.

(v)Receipt of comments from, and subject to any requirements of, Parks and Recreation Services, the Toronto Separate School Board and the Toronto Police Department.

2.Enactment of an amendment to the Official Plan to introduce a Special Site Policy to grant relief from Section 4.4.5 of the Plan with respect to angular plane requirements.

3.The amending by-law shall rezone the lands from General Commercial (CG) and Second Density Residential (R2) to Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) and shall provide development standards to include: floor space index, building height, setbacks, coverage, parking, landscaping, internal sidewalks and a maximum number of units.

4.Further detailed consideration of the proposal under Site Plan Control to include inter alia:

(i)Signing of a Site Control Agreement which may include, among other matters, provision of indemnity clauses to the City regarding liability and property damage with respect to units on the private road or any contamination problems, and payment of necessary fees associated with the preparation, execution and registration of same, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

(ii)Submission of a landscaping plan detailing fencing, curbing, grading, retaining walls, street trees, planting, and tree preservation methods for trees on abutting properties, to the satisfaction of the Staff Advisory Committee on Development Control, and posting of an appropriate financial guarantee to ensure compliance with the approved plans.

(iii)Provision of on-site services, including storage of waste and recyclable materials, the provision of stormwater management facilities or cash-in-lieu payment, the signing of agreements, and the posting of financial guarantees, if required by the Works Department.

(iv)Confirmation that the site plan is satisfactory to Bell Canada, Etobicoke Hydro and Canada Post.

(v)Freehold units sharing common services, if approved, be required to have a Mutual Use and Maintenance Agreement addressing the mutual right-of-way, cost-sharing for maintenance of common services and the establishment of a reserve fund for the eventual replacement of services on private property, to the satisfaction of the Works Department and City Solicitor.

(vi)Confirmation that the site decommissioning and cleanup has been carried out to the satisfaction of the Works Department in accordance with Ministry of Environment and Energy guidelines, if required.

(vii)The developer to pay the prevailing development charges in effect at the time of issuance of building permits and five percent cash in lieu of parkland dedication.

(viii)A construction site management plan to the satisfaction of the Staff Advisory Committee on Development Control.

Contact Name:

Jacquelyn Daley, Planner, Development and Design

Tel: (416)394-8229 Fax: (416)394-6063

(Copies of Exhibits referred to in the foregoing report are on file in the office of the City Clerk, Etobicoke Civic Centre.)

The Etobicoke Community Council further submits the following supplementary report (May 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District:

Purpose:

To respond to a request from Etobicoke Community Council for additional information regarding the development of freehold townhouses on private roads elsewhere in the City.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

City funding is not required. There are no impacts on capital or operating budgets.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Background:

During the Etobicoke Community Council meeting held on April 1, 1998, additional information was requested regarding the extent to which approvals have been granted for freehold townhouse developments on private roadways in other areas of the City of Toronto.

Comment:

Based on a survey of the District Offices in the City of Toronto, the following is a list of the number of freehold townhouse projects and related numbers of units within the projects that have been rezoned for development on private roadway systems since January 1995:

As noted in the staff report dated April 1, 1998, the district offices contacted discourage freehold developments on private roadways.

Conclusion:

That this report be received for information.

Contact Name:

Jacquelyn Daley, Planner, Development and Design

Tel: (416)394-8229 Fax: (416)394-6063

The Etobicoke Community Council also report having had before it the following communications:

-(May 1, 1998) from Mr. W. N. Bernard, on behalf of the tenants of the Lambton Business Centre, expressing concern about the impact of the proposed development on the traffic flow in the area and the adverse effect it will have on those who occupy and use the commercial buildings on Dundas Street West; and

 -(May 6, 1998) from Mrs. C. Torneiro, concerned about the future private road, privacy, overshadowing and the overflow of parking onto neighbouring streets.

The following individuals appeared before the Etobicoke Community Council:

-Ms. I. Catsibris, on behalf of Zanini Developments;

 -Mr. D. Butler, Planning Consultant, on behalf of Zanini Development;

 -Mr. W. N. Bernard, who reiterated the concerns expressed in his communication about the impact on existing traffic conditions, particularly the difficulty in make left turns into both east- and west-bound traffic;

 -Mrs. C. Bromstein, who expressed support of the proposal; and

 -Mr. G. Schrader, who support the comments made about traffic issues.