P92024/Z87116/T94005

High Glen Developments Limited/Rossland Real Estate Limited

Ontario Municipal Board Hearing

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

 The Scarborough Community Council:

 (a)recommends the adoption of the following report (June 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough; and

 (b)reports having requested that the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, report directly to Council on July 8, 1998, on the outcome of the June 29, 1998, community information meeting respecting this matter, and provide detailed recommendations on the Official Plan designation, Zoning By-law provisions and the recommended conditions of Draft Plan approval to implement the preferred Draft Plan of Subdivision for these lands:

  Purpose:

 To obtain instructions for the City Solicitor regarding the City's position at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing scheduled for July 28, 1998 for the lands shown on Figure 1.

 Recommendations:

 It is recommended that the Council of the City of Toronto direct the City Solicitor to appear at the Ontario Municipal Board on July 28, 1998 to achieve the objectives for the proposed development as described in this report.

 Background:

 High Glen Developments Limited proposes to develop 4.2 hectares (10.4 acres) immediately south of the Canadian Pacific Railway corridor, west of the Rouge Valley. The lands are currently vacant. T he applicant proposed a total of 81 dwellings units but has recently revised the proposal to provide 80 dwelling units consisting of 50 street townhouses on lots with minimum six metre (20 feet) frontages and 31 single family dwellings on lots with minimum 9 metre (29.5 feet) and 12 metre (40 feet) frontages, and a pedestrian walkway connection to the Rouge Valley as shown on Figure 2. The five partial lots created would be developed with the adjacent subdivision to the west owned by Cummer-Yonge Investments Limited.

 Two Preliminary Evaluations Reports on the subject applications and for the adjacent Cummer-Yonge Investments Limited applications, were considered by the former Scarborough Council on April 13, 1994 and June 24, 1997, respectively. The first Preliminary Evaluation Report directed staff to hold a Community Information Meeting and report further to Council on the issues of the Finch Avenue extension, the Morningside Subwatershed Study, the status of the acquisition of the Ontario Hydro lands and the Canadian Pacific Railway Pit Spur line. The second Preliminary Evaluation Report addressed the above issues and directed staff to process the applications in the normal manner and to hold a second Community Information Meeting. A Community Meeting was targeted sometime after the summer break, however with the pending elections, no meeting was held. Consequently, the applicant for High Glen Developments Limited appealed the applications for lack of Council decision. The Cummer-Yonge Investments Limited applications were not appealed. With the concurrence of the Law Department, a second Community Meeting will be held on June 29, 1998 for the appealed applications to an expanded area as directed by the former Scarborough Council.

 The subject lands are designated as Finch Avenue Realignment and Special Uses Area which allows only non-residential uses and in the vicinity of the Finch Avenue Realignment, may accommodate automobile-oriented and service uses. The lands are zoned Agricultural Uses in the Agricultural Holding By-law which permits agricultural uses and single family dwellings on lot having minimum 30 metre (100 feet) frontages and 0.8 hectare (1.9 acre) lot areas.

 The lands south of the subject lands contain single family dwellings on lots ranging between approximately 8.3 metres (27 feet) and 24.7 metres (81 feet) frontages, and semi-detached dwellings having approximately six metre (20 feet) frontages. The lots containing the semi-detached dwellings are zoned Street Townhouse Residential.

 Comments:

 (A) Official Plan Objective

 Finch Avenue was deleted from the Scarborough Official Plan by the former Scarborough Council on June 24, 1997 as Amendment 990. While the Amendment has been appealed, staff do not consider Finch Avenue an issue affecting the subject lands and support a redesignation of the lands to Low Density Residential. The proposed density would conform to the Low Density Residential designation in the Malvern Community Secondary Plan.

 (B)Zoning By-law Objective

 The proposed lot frontages and areas are consistent with the residential dwelling lots in the area and would provide for dwellings compatible with the existing residential development to the south. Staff do not oppose the deletion of the subject lands from the Agricultural Holding Zoning By-law and incorporating the lands into the Malvern Community Zoning By-law with the appropriate Single-Family Residential and Street Townhouse Residential Zones, and development standards similar to existing lots in the area. A Major Open Spaces Zone would also need to be established adjacent the Rouge Valley, in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Partial lots that would be created would be excluded from the rezoning until the lands to the west have been considered by Council. Other site specific standards such as a minimum building setback from the railway right-of-way would also be incorporated into the rezoning.

 (C)Draft Plan of Subdivision Objective

 The proposed lotting in Figure 2 may not represent the optimum for assuring the maintenance of the required berm within the rear yards, property maintenance between the required fencing along the railway right-of-way and the noise attenuation fence on top of the berm within the rear yards or for a trail connection to the Rouge Park. In order to ascertain the community's input, the applicant's revised scheme and an alternative scheme providing for a single-loaded road abutting the railway right-of-way will be presented at the Community Information Meeting on June 29, 1998. The single-loaded road could form part of the recreation trail, provide for an enhanced streetscape by incorporating landscaping on the berm adjacent the railway and provide for an increased building setback from the railway which may reduce the noise impact from the railway.

 Notwithstanding the above, a residential subdivision can be supported on the subject lands. In supporting the development, standard City conditions may be applied such as the owner making satisfactory arrangements with the City for: all services and easements; payment of Development Charges; street tree planting; five percent cash in lieu of parkland; dedication of all streets, public walkways, 0.3 metre (one foot) reserves and corner roundings to the City at no charge and free and clear of all encumbrances; lifting of 0.3 metre (one foot) reserves; constructing temporary turning circles; contribution for the costs of geodetic and aerial surveys, engineering costs and inspection fees performed by the City; and maintenance of installed hydrants. Site specific requirements would include a provision of an adequate recreation trail connection to the Rouge Park.

 Specific agency requirements may include: the owner making satisfactory arrangements for the supply of underground electric and water distribution, street lighting systems, telephone services and required easements; installing fencing along the railway right-of-way and open space corridors, submitting a stormwater management report and applying appropriate stormwater techniques to the satisfaction of the agencies; conveying open space corridors to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; and implementing appropriate noise attenuation measures.

 Conclusion:

 Residential development of single family and street townhouses can be supported on the subject lands. Sufficient flexibility exists in the objectives described to incorporate changes to the subdivision plan.

 Contact Name:

 Sylvia Mullaste, Planner

Phone: (416) 396-4265

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: mullaste@city.scarborough.on.ca