Application for Amendment to the Zoning Code

Simcoe Construction, 505 The West Mall - File No. Z-2245

 The Etobicoke Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (May 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District, and for the reason that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands, recommends that:

 (1)the application submitted by Simcoe Construction regarding a zoning by-law amendment for 505 The West Mall, be approved;

 (2)the following report from the Commissioner of Urban Development, Etobicoke District (May 6, 1998) with respect to the application be adopted, as amended by the addition of the following:

 (i)to Condition 3(ii) therein:

 "the introduction of enhanced landscaping for The West Mall street frontage, as well as a wooden fence on the south side of the property"; and

 (ii)Condition 3(x) as follows:

 "Approval subject to the resolution of financial contributions toward the provision of school services."; and

 (3)staff explore the issue of a public art contribution, and that this be brought forward at the time of approval of the draft plan of condominium:

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

 Recommendations 1, 2 and 3 were carried on the following recorded vote:

 Yeas:E. Brown, M. Giansante, D. Holyday, I. Jones, B. Kinahan, G. Lindsay Luby, D. O'Brien and B. Sinclair - 8

Nays:Nil

Purpose:

 To consider a site specific proposal to amend the Zoning Code with respect to the property located at the southeast corner of The West Mall and Holiday Drive, from Fifth Density Residential (R5) to Sixth Density Residential (R6) to permit the development of an additional 93 unit, 10-storey residential condominium apartment building on a site containing a 6-storey apartment.

 Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

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

 Recommendation:

 It is recommended that the application by Simcoe Construction 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.

 Background:

 On June 4, 1997, prior to the submission of an application, a community meeting was held to allow area residents and surrounding property owners an opportunity to review a preliminary proposal for the development of an 18-storey, 166 unit condominium apartment building on a site containing a 6-storey, 59 unit rental apartment building. On August 12, 1997, Simcoe Construction submitted a formal application to the City proposing a 14-storey, 120 unit condominium apartment. Following a second community meeting on February 10, 1998, and further discussions with staff, the proposal was revised to a 93-unit, 10-storey condominium building with stepping at the eighth floor. Comments from the community meetings are discussed further in this report.

 Site Description and Surrounding Uses:

 The rectangular site is located at the southeast corner of The West Mall and Holiday Drive (Exhibit No. 1). The lands are designated High Density Residential and zoned Fifth Density Residential (R5). The site is occupied by a 6-storey, 59 unit rental apartment building which was built in 1964. The front door to the apartment faces The West Mall and two side doors exist at the north and south ends. The area to the south of the existing apartment building is used for surface parking and parking garages. Access to the site occurs off The West Mall via two driveways at the south end of the site. The building is generally in good condition and the property use officer for this area has confirmed that there are no outstanding work orders which apply to this site.

 Surrounding zoning categories and land uses are as follows:

 North:Fourth Density Residential (R4) and Planned Commercial Preferred (CPP) - a number of apartment buildings ranging in height from 14 to 19-storeys and the Ramada Hotel

South:Fourth Density Residential (R4) - two high rise, 15-storey apartments .

East:Fourth Density Residential Group Area (R4G) - 3-storey, condominium townhouses.

West:Fifth Density Residential (R5) and Public Open Space (OS) - 5-storey apartment and Broadacres Park.

 Proposal:

 The applicant has requested a site specific amendment to the Zoning Code from Fifth Density Residential (R5) to Sixth Density Residential (R6) to permit the development of an additional 93-unit, 10-storey condominium building. The proposed building would be situated on a 0.3 hectare

(1 acre) parcel at the south end of the site, where surface and garage parking is currently provided (Exhibit No. 2). The condominium units would consist of 1- and 2-bedroom units with an average size of 78 m² (858 sq. ft.). This parcel would later be severed from the property for condominium registration purposes.

 The existing northerly driveway off The West Mall would be maintained as a mutual right-of-way for both properties and would provide access to service areas and the three levels of underground parking. The first level of parking would provide, by way of an easement registered on title, 44 reserved parking spaces for tenants of the apartment in a segregated portion of the garage. It is proposed that tenants of the existing building would exit the garage to the surface by way of a stairwell located at the northwest corner of the garage. The remainder of the first garage level would provide 19 parking spaces for visitors to the condominium. The second and third levels would supply 116 parking spaces for condominium residents. A second driveway would be created off Holiday Drive and would provide access to 21 surface parking spaces for tenants and visitors of the existing apartment. The remainder of the site would be landscaped and a fence would be provided between the properties to the south and east.

 Exhibit No. 1 is a key map of the area. Exhibit Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are reductions of the proposed site plan and elevations. A summary of information as provided by the applicant, including a comparison of existing and proposed densities is listed in Table No. 1.

  TABLE No. 1

   Comment:

 Official Plan:

 The Etobicoke Official Plan designates the subject site as High Density Residential, which permits multiple unit housing of all types to be developed within a range of 70-185 uph (28-75 upa), to a maximum floor space index of 2.5. The site is currently developed to a density of 72 uph (30 upa) with a floor space index of 0.9. The applicant is proposing to increase the overall net density to 185 uph (75 upa) with a corresponding floor space index of 2.0 (Table No. l). As the Official Plan permits density to be calculated over the entire property and as both development parcels would maintain an FSI of 2.5 or less, the proposal would comply with the maximum density provisions contained within the Official Plan.

 The project also complies with the Housing policies contained within the Metropolitan Toronto Official Plan and the former Metro Planning Department has not identified any concerns with the application.

 Residential Intensification Policies

 The Etobicoke Official Plan supports housing intensification as a means of achieving housing targets, subject to certain criteria and provided that the level of development is within the density limits of the Plan.

 Planning staff have evaluated the application based on the criteria established for considering high density residential proposals, as contained in Section 4.2.19 of the Plan. This evaluation has been attached as Exhibit No. 5 and generally reviews the following:

l.The appropriateness of the site for intensification.

2.The ability of the parcels to accommodate the density.

3.The off-site impacts generated by the proposed development.

 Staff's review of this application confirms that the locational attributes of this site would support intensification. The site is well positioned in terms of public transit, access to road networks, parks, and open space facilities. It is also located along a corridor containing High and Medium Density Residential uses. The site is within close proximity to retail, public and community services. The Fire Department, Toronto Police Department, Works Department, and Parks and Recreational Services have not identified any concerns with respect to the provision of hard or soft services to accommodate the additional residents generated by the proposal.

 However, with respect to educational facilities, the former Etobicoke Board of Education has indicated that additional space may be required at local schools and financial contributions will be required to cover the anticipated capital cost of accommodating the students generated from this proposal (Exhibit No. 6). The Metropolitan Separate School Board (MSSB) has indicated in their preliminary comment that the Board is not able to accommodate elementary and secondary school students generated by the development (Exhibit No. 7). Neither Board has adopted a Development Charge By-Law on which to base such contributions. In accordance with the practise adopted in the rest of the City, Planning staff do not recommend that such a condition be imposed.

 The application was also reviewed to determine if each parcel, in terms of size and shape could suitably accommodate the proposed densities and the uses normally associated with high density residential development such as landscaping, recreational facilities and servicing and was found to be acceptable. The proposed parking supply has also been determined to be adequate, notwithstanding the mutual use driveway and overlapping parking arrangements on the proposed condominium site.

Traffic analysis indicates that there would not be any significant impacts on the local road network or intersections. Height/built form relationships with developments along The West Mall corridor are acceptable. However, the site's relationship with the townhouse block located directly behind and to the east of the proposed building is affected by the proximity of the proposed 10-storey building. The proposed building height results in some shadowing being cast easterly on some of the existing townhouses during the late afternoon all year long. Although this situation is of some concern, it is a condition which currently occurs within the townhouse development as a result of existing apartments and it a situation which is not uncommon in transitional areas between High and Medium Density Residential designations.

Based on this review, staff are satisfied from a land use point of view, that the proposal would generally meet the criteria for High Density Residential development and Housing Intensification.

 Zoning Code:

 The property is zoned Fifth Density Residential (R5). In the event of approval, staff suggest that the site be rezoned to Sixth Density Residential (R6) which would reflect the higher densities proposed. The amending by-law should provide the necessary exemptions to reflect both the existing and the proposed developments, as well as take into consideration the anticipated land severance application.

 Site and Building Design Considerations:

 The design and placement of the proposed condominium building would be consistent with the existing apartment building. The proposed condominium would be setback from The West Mall and separated from the existing building by 9.0 metres (30 feet). Staff would recommend that this separation distance be increased to the extent that the building can be shifted southward while still maintaining an acceptable side yard setback on the south side, which is currently proposed to be 7.0 metres (23 feet). A side yard setback of 5 to 6 metres (16 to 20 feet) could be acceptable given the fact that the apartment building to the south is setback approximately 18 metres (60 feet) from the same property line and located east of the proposed condominium. The overall building height is 10 storeys, however, the building would be stepped at the eighth floor on both sides.

 The proposed condominium would be located approximately 15 metres (49 feet) from adjacent townhouses to the east, which is consistent with the existing situation with the apartment building to the north.

 Landscape Open Space and Recreational Amenities:

 The proposed site plan would allow for 51 percent of the apartment lands and 57 percent of the proposed condominium lands to be devoted to landscape open space, with 53 percent over the combined site. This would be consistent with the landscape percentages associated with other recent approvals for housing intensification.

 Parks and Recreation Services (Exhibit No. 8) has indicated that the parkland dedication requirement for this development should be based on 5 percent and taken as cash-in-lieu. They further advise that the provision of a suitable on-site children's play facility should be allowed for within the scope of this development. Should the applicant feel that the provision of this feature may not be feasible to incorporate on this site, staff would be prepared to recommend the acceptance of a cash-in-lieu contribution of $20,000.00 which would be used to upgrade children's play facilities within a public park within the surrounding community. Detail describing indoor recreational amenities and a detailed landscape plan containing information with respect to outdoor recreation and amenity features would be required for their review to the satisfaction of the Staff Advisory Committee on Development Control prior to the passing of a by-law. Planning staff also recommend that the applicant be required to enter into an Amenities Agreement to secure all on-site amenities proposed for the existing buildings and the condominium development.

 Parking and Traffic:

 A Traffic Impact Study, conducted by the BA Consulting Group, concludes that the additional volume of traffic expected to be generated by the development has no significant impact on the level-of-service of the adjacent road network. The study also recommended a reduced parking rate of 1.15 spaces per unit for the existing building and 1.45 spaces for the proposed condominium.

 The Transportation Planning section of the Works Department comments are attached as Exhibit Nos. 9 and 10. Transportation staff concur with the conclusions of the Traffic study and are satisfied with the driveway layout, traffic circulation and parking supply proposed by the applicant. The submission of underground parking plans and a construction management plan, outlining the management of vehicle parking during construction would be required. In this regard, use of the abutting public roadways will not be permitted.

 Transportation staff have also identified some concerns with respect to the parking and pedestrian exit arrangement for tenants of the existing building within the first level of the underground garage. Although handicapped access to the existing apartment would be available from the north end of the building adjacent to the proposed parking area, improvements should be made to enhance access to and from the garage for all tenants. Garbage containment facilities shall be provided in accordance with the comments provided by the Co-ordinator of Waste Management (Exhibit No. 9).

 The Ministry of Transportation has indicated that a building entrance permit will be required for the Holiday Drive driveway (Exhibit No. 11). The former Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department and the Fire Department have no transportation or access related concerns

 Noise:

A noise study prepared by S. S. Wilson Associates, dated March 10, 1998, was submitted by the applicant. The study found that indoor and outdoor noise control measures would be required as a result of noise from Highway 427 and The West Mall. The study conclusions are as follows:

 1.An acoustical sound barrier with a maximum height of 2.5 metres (8 feet) will be required at the southeast corner of the proposed condominium site (Wall would not extend behind existing townhouses).

 2.The proposed condominium units must be equipped with central air conditioning.

 3.Noise warnings must be registered on title and included in all development agreements and Offers of Purchase and Sale or Lease of these properties. Warnings are required for indoor, outdoor and balcony areas.

 4.The potential additional sound reflections from the proposed apartment building will be acoustically insignificant and is predicted to result in no appreciable increase to the existing sound levels at the neighbouring properties.

 The noise abatement requirements recommended in the noise study shall be included in the development agreement and the acoustical noise barrier shall be required in the zoning by-law.

 Agency Comments/Department Circulation:

 In response to the circulation of plans submitted in support of this application, no objections have been expressed by the Fire Department, Toronto Police Department Realty Services, Canada Post Corporation and the former Metro Planning Department.

 The following agencies have no objection to the development subject to their listed conditions of approval: Bell Canada, Consumers Gas, Toronto Hydro (Exhibit Nos. 12, 13, 14).

 The Development Engineering Section of the Works Department has advised that storm and sanitary sewers are available on The West Mall (Exhibit No. 15). The site contains an easement for an existing storm sewer and overflow swale. This easement may not be encumbered by structures, fences, large trees or obstructions. The revised site plan reflects these requirements. They also advise that storm water management, incorporating quantity and quality control measures, will be a requirement for the development of the site and details will be required at the Site Plan review stage. The building shall be constructed to condominium standards.

 Urban Development staff note that, the applicant would be required to provide details of lighting and security and safety features on-site and within the underground garages during the Site Plan Approval process. A screen fence shall be required along the abutting property lines. The project would be subject to the prevailing development charges in effect at the time of the issuance of the building permits.

 Community Meetings:

 Community meetings were held on June 4, 1997, and February 10, 1998, to allow area residents an opportunity to review the proposal. A third community meeting has been scheduled for April 20, 1998, to present the most recently revised plans. Concerns expressed by area residents related to traffic and location of driveways; need for the signalization of Holiday Drive at The West Mall; noise from traffic and cars; location of parking areas, inadequate visitor parking; impact of car headlights; driveways and the ramp; reduced air quality and circulation; conflicts with activities at the Applewood facility; density; shadow impact; loss of views and privacy; noise refection into townhouse area; lack of children's play areas; trees; setbacks; safety; security; poor waste management practices; and, declining property values. The concerns related to planning matters have been discussed in this report, and will be further reviewed during the Site Plan Control approval process.

 Conclusions:

 The subject application has been evaluated within the context of the housing intensification and High Density Residential provisions of the Etobicoke Official Plan. Urban Development staff are of the opinion that the lands are appropriate for intensification and that the proposal would generally comply with the criteria for housing intensification. Notwithstanding that housing intensification is a City wide issue, the application represents a site specific zoning amendment.

 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 amending by-law:

 (i)Signing of a Development Agreement containing the recommended noise warnings and requirements and the payment of the necessary fees associated with the preparation execution and registration of same.

 (ii)Submission of amenity details for both proposed and existing developments and, the signing of an agreement to secure the provision of amenity facilities to the satisfaction of Parks and Recreation Services, the Urban Development Department and the City Solicitor.

 2.The site specific amending by-law shall rezone the site to Sixth Density Residential (R6). The zoning by-law shall also incorporate provisions for existing and proposed buildings specifying maximum density figures for the proposed condominium site and the apartment site and shall specify requirements for landscape open space, floor space index, setbacks, parking, acoustical noise barriers, fencing and a maximum building height of 10 storeys with stepping at the eighth floor for the proposed condominium.

 3.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 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, street trees, planting, and tree preservation details 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)Submission of a Parking Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Traffic, Transportation and Development Engineering Division of the Works Department to ensure appropriate on-site parking is provided at all phases of construction.

 (iv)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.

 (v)Submission of revised plans containing design improvements to the access arrangements for the underground parking garage, and an increase in the proposed north side building setback.

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

 (vii)Mutual Use and Maintenance Agreement addressing the mutual right-of-way driveway, garage ramp and level one of the underground parking garage to the satisfaction of the Works Department and City Solicitor.

 (viii)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.

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

 Contact Name:

 Paul Zuliani, Area Planner, Development and Design

Tel: (416)394-8230 Fax: (416)394-6063

 The Etobicoke Community Council also submits the following communication (June 15, 1998) from Mr. Allan O'Neill, Kenneth Stroud & Company:

 Enclosed herewith is a copy of a report prepared by Kenneth Stroud & Company on behalf of York Condominium Corporation No. 461. A condominium apartment building is proposed adjacent to the existing building at 475 The West Mall (York Condominium Corporation #461). Our firm has prepared a Planning review of the application on behalf of York Condominium Corporation No. 461.

 It is our conclusion that the proposed building is inappropriate for the site and should not be approved. Our reasons for this conclusion are set out in the report.

 I thank you in advance for taking the time to review our report.

 The Etobicoke Community Council also submits the following communication (June 16, 1998) from Mr. Peter McClelland, Property Manager, York Condominium Corporation No. 411:

 We appreciate the effort that Simcoe Developments has made to address the concerns of the residents of Etobicoke Estates (YCC 411) with regards to the development of 505 The West Mall. As we have discussed, there are only a few minor issues that remain.

 1.The height of the privacy fence should be at least eight feet and sufficient to provide equivalent privacy for the townhouses with rear yards at a higher grade than the fence.

 2.Precautions should be taken to screen the headlight beams of the vehicles travelling on your property from disturbing the townhouse residents.

 3.Provision should be made for all compactor, trash and recycling garbage (present and future needs) to be screened from the visibility of the townhouse residents, during storage or while waiting for pick-up.

 4.The garage ventilation should be placed so that the townhouse residents are not disturbed by the noise of the fans or the air movement.

_____

 The following persons appeared before the Etobicoke Community Council on behalf of Simcoe Construction with respect to the foregoing matter:

 -Ms. I. Catsibris, Development Consultant;

 -Mr. D. Butler, Planning Consultant;

 -Mr. R. Bond, Traffic Consultant;

 -Mr. S. Wassermuhl, Architect; and

 -Mr. A. Budrevics, Landscape Architect.

 The following persons also appeared before the Etobicoke Community Council with respect to the foregoing matter:

 -Mr. A. O'Neill, of Kenneth Stroud & Company, representing YCC #461, highlighting the details of a report prepared for the Condominium Corporation, regarding siting and setbacks, particularly with respect to the south sideyard setback; loading space (garbage pickup); location of the underground garage entrance; landscaping; unit size; shadowing and visual impacts; parking; recreation facilities; and prematurity of the development proposal;

 -Mr. P. Di Julio, Property Manager, YCC #461, who expressed the opinion that the condominium parking area would be used by the new residents rather than their own underground parking area; that children in the new building would be climbing the fence and would also create a traffic safety problem;

 -Mr. P. McClelland, Property Manager, YCC #411, the condominium townhouse development to the east of the subject site, who advised that the Board of Directors has been working with the applicant to address any concerns, with only a few minor issues to be resolved, and that they will be relying on the City to have standards in place and met;

 -Mr. J. Leggatt, representing YCC #561, who expressed concern regarding visitor parking and the impact on their parking facilities, as well as those of Applewood, the heritage facility immediately opposite; siting and shadowing; relocation of trees; ventilation of the new building; inappropriateness for the site and for the community;

 -Mr. G. Coates, who expressed the opinion that he will lose his privacy and also the view from his apartment to the west;

 -Mrs. Johnson, concerned about the access for fire trucks;

-Mr. L. Bond, who felt that the concerns of the condominium townhouse owners to the east of the subject site, may not have been met;

 -Mr. D. McGregor, concerned about over-shadowing and the safety of children;

 -Mr. B. Creasor, concerned about overdevelopment. the condition of the property in the future and the potential for its tenure to change and the building to become rundown;

 -Mr. M. Le Fort, who expressed the opinion that the development breaks the rules on all points, and asking that the project be rejected; and

 -Ms. L. Casley, in support of the proposal, expressing the opinion that the new development will also bring enhancements to the existing building on the site.

 The Etobicoke Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it the following communitions:

 -(May 20, 1998) from Ms. D. Hogbin;

 -(April 26, 1998) from Ms. B. Strzelczyk; and

 -(undated) petition from residents and owners of YCC #411, in opposition to the proposal

 (Copies of Exhibit Nos. 1-15, referred to in the foregoing report, were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Etobicoke Community Council meeting June 24, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk.)