Official Plan Amendment Application SP98015

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98027

Shell Canada, 2650 Brimley Road

Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated December 2, 1998, from the Director, Community Planning, East District, recommends:

(1)that the recommendation contained in the following report be struck out; and

(2)that the application by Shell Canada be refused on the grounds that it is incompatible with the surrounding neighbourhood.

Recorded Vote on the foregoing motion by Councillor Mahood:

Yeas:Councillors Altobello, Balkissoon, Berardinetti, Cho, Duguid, Faubert, Mahood, Moeser, Shaw -9

Nays:Councillors Ashton, Kelly -2

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on December9, 1998, in accordance with Section 17 and 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 Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (December 2, 1998) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report outlines the results of the Community Information Meeting held the evening of November 24, 1998 regarding the proposal by Shell Canada Limited to amend the Agincourt North Community Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law for their property located on the northwest corner of Finch Avenue East and Brimley Road, to permit retail sales, convenience food sales (including the sale of donuts) and on-site food preparation in addition to permitted Highway Commercial Uses. The existing >Quick-Lube= building is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a larger 162square metre (1,745 square foot) one-storey, 24-hour convenience store building with drive-thru facility. The Shell gas bar on the property will also be upgraded. Nine parking spaces are proposed to be provided on-site. No restaurant seating is proposed.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Scarborough Community Council defer consideration of the applications by Shell Canada Limited for their proposal at 2650 Brimley Road, to enable the applicant to undertake further consultations with local community representatives, Planning staff and the local Councillors regarding the issues raised at the community meeting. The Public Meeting for the applications will be rescheduled for the second Scarborough Community Council Meeting in 1999.

Background:

At its meeting on October 14, 1998, Scarborough Community Council considered my Preliminary Evaluation Report and directed that:

(a)Planning staff convene a Community Information Meeting in November, 1998;

(b)the applicant submit a Site Plan Control application and a Noise Study recommending measures which mitigate the noise generated by the drive-thru facility onto abutting residential properties;

(c)Shell Canada be requested to consider removing the drive-thru facility proposed in this application; and

(d)The Toronto Police Service be requested to provide a report to Scarborough Community Council on any statistics that may be available to support or justify community concerns respecting crime in the area.

Community Information Meeting:

A community information meeting was hosted by the Urban Planning and Development Services Department the evening of November 24, 1998. Over 60 residents were in attendance as well as Ward 17 Councillors Mahood and Shaw and Ward 18 Councillor Cho. The applicant presented the proposal and a number of concerns were raised by the residents including the following:

(a)noise impact on the surrounding residential area, especially with regards to the proposed drive-thru facility;

(b)on-site parking supply and traffic operations in the vicinity of the Shell property;

(c)community security issues and the proposed 24-hour operation; and

(d)no community desire for another convenience store in this area.

Shell representatives as well as the applicant=s noise consultant were on hand to answer questions. A show of hands at the close of the meeting, revealed that a vast majority of the residents object to the proposal.

Site Plan Control Application and Noise Study:

The applicant has submitted a Site Plan Control application and the Noise Study, both of which are currently under review by City staff. Although the Noise Study consultant attended the community meeting to present his conclusions and answer questions, the Noise Study was only made available to residents on December 1, 1998.

Request to Remove the Drive-thru Facility:

To date, Shell Canada has not responded to the request by Scarborough Community Council to consider removing the drive-thru facility proposed in this application.

Toronto Police Service:

To date, the Toronto Police Service has not formally responded to the request by Scarborough Community Council to provide a report on any statistics that may be available to support or justify community concerns respecting crime in the area. Fred Schofield, a Community Policing Officer, was in attendance at the community meeting and will be in attendance at the Scarborough Community Council Meeting on December 9th to provide information and answer questions.

Comments:

Given the community concerns outlined in this report, Planning staff are of the opinion that further consultations should be undertaken by the applicant with local community representatives, City staff and the local Councillors in an effort to reach a consensus on this proposal. I am therefore recommending the applications be deferred until the second Scarborough Community Council Meeting in 1999.

Contact Name:

Joe Nanos, Acting Senior Planner

Telephone: (416) 396-7037

Facsimile: (416) 396-4265

nanos@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council, submits for the information of Council, the following communication (December 8, 1998) from Sharyn Vincent, Principal, Vincent Planning and Development Consultants:

Vincent Planning and Development Consultants are the agents for Shell Canada Products on the subject applications and are writing to request Council to adopt the staff recommendation to defer the consideration of the applications to allow time for further community consultation. The limited time between the community meeting and the public hearing made it difficult to hold further meetings to work towards resolution. We are, however, confident that further discussions will be productive, and therefore look forward to working with planning staff to bring the various interested parties together in the near future.

________

The following persons appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Ms. Sharyn Vincent, Principal, Vincent Planning and Development Consultants, indicating her client=s willingness to undertake further community consultation in order to alleviate residents= concerns respecting noise, and advising that the results of the noise study undertaken indicate that Shell can operate at this site in compliance with Ministry of the Environment guidelines;

-Mr. Ken Campbell, on behalf of Shell Canada, responding to concerns expressed at the community information meeting respecting security controls; advising of various initiatives undertaken nationally by Shell Canada in this regard, and emphasizing Shell=s commitment to ensuring a safe and secure environment for its employees and its customers at this particular location;

-Mrs. Valerie Plunkett, President, Rosewood Taxpayers= Association, and area resident, requesting that Community Council deny this application on the grounds that it will take away business from the small retail plaza in the community, that the lighting from this site will intrude on the abutting residences, that it will create air pollution, and that security control measures may not be enforceable at this location;

-Mr. Ronald Green, Vice President, Rosewood Taxpayers= Association, requesting that Community Council deny this application on the grounds that it will not be of benefit to the community;

-Mrs. Frances van Dorsser, abutting resident, requesting that Community Council deny this application on the grounds that it will not be of benefit to the community;

-Mr. Bruce McLeod, area resident, requesting that Community Council deny this application on the grounds that, having undertaken to interview residents living behind this location, he discovered that many of them indicated they had not received notice of the Public Meeting, that some were unable to understand English, and further, that in his opinion, the application poses a significant threat to security and enjoyment of the area residents;

-Mr. Harold Beswick, Past President, Chartland Community Association, advising that the Community Association did not receive notice of the community information meeting in sufficient time to attend and voice an opinion, and therefore, speaking in support of the staff recommendation to defer this proposal for further community consultation;

-Constable Fred Schofield, responding to Community Council=s request, emanating from its meeting held on October 14, 1998, that the Chief of Police provide a report on any statistics that may be available to support or justify community concerns respecting crime in this area, and tabling with the Community Council data respecting this location which indicate that twenty-two incidents of gasoline theft had taken place at this location in 1998. (A copy of these data are on file in the Office of the City Clerk)