Port Industrial District and a Portion of the

East Bayfront - Part II Study

(Don River)

The Toronto Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (November26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

This report explains why a Part II Plan for the Port Industrial District and a portion of the East Bayfront is required at this time to address a range of development proposals and to settle a variety of outstanding planning matters, in order to provide a clear planning direction for the future and to facilitate orderly development.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)The Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services in consultation with all appropriate City departments prepare a Part II Study for the Port Industrial District and a portion of the East Bayfront east of the Parliament Street Slip.

(2)City Council indicate its position to the Ontario Municipal Board that any existing or future referral appeals, including those of Home Depot in respect of 429 Lake Shore Boulevard East and 324 Cherry Street and United Castan in respect of the Cherry Street corridor, not proceed to hearing until such time as the City completes a comprehensive Part II Study of the Port Industrial District and a portion of the East Bayfront as described in this report.

(3)The Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to report back to Toronto Community Council for its January, 1999 meeting on a detailed schedule and work program for the proposed Part II Study and any resources that may be required to facilitate that Study.

A.Background:

In my report of November 6, 1998 entitled "Home Depot - Application No. 197019 for 429 Lake Shore Boulevard East and 324 Cherry Street to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit a retail warehouse in the East Bayfront Planning Area", I stated that I would be reporting to the December 9, 1998 meeting of the Toronto Community Council on the need for a Part II study for the Port Industrial District. My report of that date also refers to a discussion I had with the TEDCO Board of Directors regarding the need for such a study.

I believe that such a study is required to address the land use issues that have arisen in the context of the Home Depot application, as well as a variety of other matters that are ongoing within the Port Industrial District, some of which were discussed in the report of November 6, 1998. An Ontario Municipal Board pre-hearing conference on the Home Depot application is being held on December 21, 1998. A decision by Council to proceed with a Part II Official Plan Study for this area will inform the Board of the City's commitment to addressing a variety of planning issues in this area.

Section 16 of the former City of Toronto's Official Plan explains that Part I Plans outline general development policies for the city as whole. Part II amendments are intended to be consistent with the general policies of the Plan and to be approved by Council in order to provide more detailed guidance for the future planning and development of specific areas of the city. Part II Plans may vary any of the density or other provisions of the Plan in response to local circumstances and based upon appropriate local study.

Section 16.4 states that Council will consider large scale development proposals which may have a major impact on the structure or character of the city, or which may alter the form of streets and/or blocks of the city, only in light of a study of the area undertaken for the purposes of recommending Part II policies for adoption. Since the proposals under discussion could have a major impact on the structure and character of this part of the waterfront, I am proposing that this Part II Study be undertaken at this time.

At the same time, City Council has initiated a new Official Plan for the entire city. A number of issues including those related to areas of employment and industry and big box retail will have to be considered within this context.

The Part II Study will allow the City to examine the variety of existing proposals and ideas for change and to develop a plan for the future that will help to facilitate orderly development and provide planning certainty.

B.Planning Background:

The Part I Official Plan of the former City of Toronto consists of general policies regarding the nature of the waterfront itself and specific policies for the Port Industrial District.

The general Part I policies state that the primary goal for the waterfront is to provide increased and sustainable public enjoyment and use of the area by ensuring that:

-future developments and actions by both the public and private sectors will help to achieve the objectives of extending the richness, diversity and activity of city life into the waterfront;

-reducing its physical and perceptual isolation from the rest of the city;

-increasing and improving public access along the water's edge and between its parts;

-increasing the amount of public parkland and the availability, choice and awareness of recreational opportunities and public activities throughout the year;

-enhancing the waterfront as a place;

-contributing to the improved health and rehabilitation of the waterfront environment; and

-protecting and improving the Martin Goodman Trail as a continuous waterfront route.

Section 14.10 outlines Council's goal to protect and emphasize the contribution of the waterfront to the well-being of the city as the location of industrial jobs, public utilities and rail and road transportation facilities and commercial shipping activities. Council is to encourage the continuation and expansion of industrial activities in the parts of the waterfront which are appropriate for industrial use.

The site specific policies for the Port Industrial District are contained in Section 14.35 through 14.40. Essentially these policies discuss the primary role of the Port Industrial District as an area of industry and its changing need to accommodate general and light industry and some retail use. It also refers to opportunities for open space, parks, environmental and recreational opportunities.

Section 14.36 deals with increasing the attractiveness of the Port Industrial District to the public and industry by, amongst other things, landscaping and street improvements, securing parks and harbour viewing areas, reducing the area designated for Heavy Industrial uses, expanding a range of retail uses fronting onto Cherry and Leslie Streets, encouraging improved public transit, and ensuring that industries achieve a high standard of performance in terms of appearance, landscaping and environmental protection. Section 14.38 recognizes the ability of limited retail uses to enhance the district for public use.

The industrial designations found in the district include Restricted Industrial Areas, General Industrial Areas, Heavy Industrial Areas, and General Use Areas. No residential uses are currently permitted in this district.

C.Applications and Initiatives in the Area:

A variety of development applications and initiatives related to this area have arisen over the past few years that point to the need for providing greater clarity for potential investors and the public. These include the following:

1.Home Depot application

On June 27, 1997, Home Depot made an application for an amendment to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for a big box retail store totalling 9,940 square metres (107,000 square feet) for a site at the intersection of Lake Shore Boulevard East and Cherry Streets. At its meeting of November 25, 1998, Council adopted my recommendation to refuse that request. Council's position will be reported to the Ontario Municipal Board pre-conference hearing of December 21, 1998.

2.Cherry Street application

On July 30, 1998, a joint application was submitted by United Castan Corporation and TEDCO for an Official Plan Amendment for a portion of the Port Industrial District that includes the western portion of the Port as well as the Home Depot site. That application requests redesignation from General Industrial and General Use to Medium Density Mixed Commercial-Residential for the area to the west of Cherry Street and, for the lands to the east, redesignation from Heavy Industrial to General Industrial and from General Industrial to General Use. Since that time TEDCO has withdrawn as a co-applicant. The remaining applicant, United Castan, has appealed to the Board for the City's failure to hold a public meeting on this application. This matter will also be before the Ontario Municipal Board at its pre-hearing conference of December 21, 1998.

3.Potential location of an Olympic Athletes' Village in the Port Industrial District

The area of the Cherry Street application was identified as a potential location for an Athletes' Village for the 2008 Olympics in the City's application to the Canadian Olympic Association in 1998.

It is anticipated that the final bid proposal will be submitted to Council in late 1999 at which point locations for venues and villages need to be confirmed. Further analysis will be carried out on all proposed venues and villages during 1999.

4.Costco Application at the Port Centre

On August 17, 1998, I received a letter from the solicitors for Costco Canada Inc., requesting an Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning for the lands bounded by Lakeshore Boulevard East, Saulter Street, Commissioners Street and the Don Roadway in order to develop a warehouse membership club in the area of the Port Industrial District known as the Port Centre. This application will require the City to respond to the issue of whether a big box centre should be located in the Port Industrial District.

5.TEDCO Initiatives

TEDCO has prepared a streets and blocks plan of this area, representing their vision, based on their mandate. However, this plan does not have any official land use standing and TEDCO continues to work toward achieving it incrementally. Within that context, TEDCO has initiated a number of studies of transportation issues in the district to advance its plan.

6.Canada Marine Act

The Canada Marine Act has introduced further uncertainty about the lands used for Port activities and adjacent lands and the potentially changing mandates of the various waterfront agencies.

7.Other Matters

There are a number of other proposals and changes that have recently occurred in and around the Port Industrial District. It seems that the cruise ship industry catering to tours of the Great Lakes is becoming increasingly successful and requires space for loading and servicing of ships. The Port may be a logical place for some of this activity to occur.

D.Planning Issues:

1.Appropriate Land Uses in the Study Area

1.1Establishing Appropriate Industrial and Employment Uses and an Implementation Strategy

An important consideration for the Part II Study is to preserve and enhance the ability of this area to provide viable employment and appropriate industrial uses. For this reason I propose that industrial designations should be reviewed, within the context of both their successes and problems to date and within an overall context of the amalgamated City of Toronto. Employment uses would need to be considered within an overall context of other compatible uses. A review of industrial uses would include an analysis of the ability of the transportation network to support them as well as strategies for implementation.

TEDCO's plans for the Port Industrial District would be reviewed within the context of all the other ongoing proposals. A Part II Study provides the opportunity for appropriate changes to be considered and incorporated into the Official Plan to allow the City to speak with one voice about achieving economic investment on the waterfront.

1.2Retail Warehouse uses

My report of November 6, 1998 noted that the eventual acceptance of a complete application from Costco will require the City to reopen studies of the appropriateness of the Port Centre, a "power centre" of big box retail uses, within the Port Industrial District.

Council adopted my recommendation that in conjunction with the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, I undertake a study of the land use, economic development and policy implications of permitting additional big box retail development within the South District, including the Port Industrial District, and that the recommendations on this matter be brought back to Toronto Community Council in 1999.

The study produced by the Centre of Commercial Activity at Ryerson on the cumulative impact of big box retailing on the former City of Toronto's retail strips and downtown, identified industrially zoned land close to major highways as the prime target for big box centres and specifically identified the Port and King Street West as being subject to this type of development pressure.

I see this retail study as one of the first, discrete parts to be produced in the initial stages of the Part II study. Clarification on this matter will provide assurances to both retail strips as well as big box merchants on the City's policies. I will be reporting on this study further in the new year. A potential Port Retail Centre, including the Costco proposal, would be evaluated in this context.

1.3Home Depot Site

At this time I have not determined what would constitute appropriate development on this site and on the lands immediately to the west and believe that a study of this portion of the East Bayfront is required. The East Bayfront working committee did not support a concentration of big box retail in the East Bayfront and other potential uses for these large sites between the Parliament Street slip and the Port, and in particular for the gateway Home Depot site, need to be identified.

1.4Residential Uses

Since the city's waterfront began to revitalize in the 1970's, there has been speculation about the potential of locating residential uses in the northwest part of the Port Industrial District, a matter which was raised formally in "Regeneration", a report of the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront in 1991. It would seem, therefore, that regardless of the Cherry Street application and the status of the Olympic bid, the City needs to make a determination about whether residential uses are appropriate here, and if they are, what would be required to achieve them. This decision will also form the basis of a City Planning position on the appropriateness of this site for an Olympic Athletes' Village. I believe that a determination of this sort would appropriately occur within the context of the Part II Study I am proposing.

An evaluation of whether to permit residential redevelopment would mean that the City would need to do extensive built form, transportation, municipal services, and neighbourhood, school, and community service studies. I understand that United Castan have been preparing their own studies in this regard.

2.Transportation Issues

TEDCO has prepared extensive work on transportation improvements to the Port, an issue that seems critical to the ability of the area to be successful for employment purposes, and I understand that other transportation studies have been undertaken within the context of the Cherry Street proposal. In addition there are a variety of transportation studies that have been completed for this area, which are based on different development scenarios. As I mentioned in my report of November 6, 1998, the potential removal of the Gardiner Expressway to the east and west of the entrance to the Port will provide opportunities to reexamine the entire system of streets and blocks within this area.

The proposed Part II Study will offer the opportunity to deal with the problems at the Cherry Street entrance and other servicing problems, to consider the potential extension of Queens Quay East and to make the entire area safer for both trucks and recreational users and cyclists. Further, any redevelopment of this area would suggest the need to extend public transit here, a matter which should be examined in this context.

3.Greening the Port, the Lower Don Strategy and Other Environmental Matters

While the City has made a commitment in principle to the concepts of "Greening the Port", and Bringing Back the Don and both TEDCO and the City have been attempting to address this through individual projects and applications, the implementation strategy to ensure that these policies can occur in a consistent and successful way in this area needs further development. An implementation strategy to achieve these policies is required.

4.Built Form and Urban Design

An overall urban design plan that can be implemented throughout the Port Industrial District is another outstanding piece of work that should be prepared within the context of a Part II Study, in order to improve the attractiveness and cohesiveness of this entire area. To date, this work has occurred on an incremental basis only.

E.Terms of Reference of the Part II Study:

1.Boundaries of the Study Area

A comprehensive Part II Study of the Port Industrial District must include the site owned by Home Depot and the adjacent sites to the west as far as the Parliament Street Slip. I have shown the proposed boundary of the study area on Map 1, attached to this report. While a portion of the site is technically in the East Bayfront planning area, it lies at the entrance to the Port and, in conjunction with the properties immediately to the west, is a prominent waterfront location with views of the water from the roads on both the north and the east. It has been called an important gateway to the Port, where it will both set the tone for this area and also may be required to provide improved transportation linkages.

The remainder of the East Bayfront is not included in this study. It has been the subject of a Part II Study and working group recommendations resulting in Council's adoption of changes to the Zoning By-law in 1997. The East Bayfront By-law is before the Ontario Municipal Board and has been consolidated with the Home Depot hearing.

While there have been more development applications made for the northern part of the Port, I am also proposing to include the area south of the Ship Channel in the Part II Study. In 1997 Urban Planning and Development Services began to prepare a development concept plan for the area. This project has not proceeded due to the pressures for staff involvement in proposals on the northern part of the Port. This study was initiated as a way to deal with the extension of municipal servicing to the area, improving the street system including the need to resolve the alignment of Unwin Avenue, the resolution of a parks design for the North Shore park, now transferred from the Toronto Harbour Commissioners to the City, and other matters around recreational uses and public access to the water's edge. This Part II Study would also give the City the opportunity to consider appropriate land uses on the Ontario Hydro site, which is for sale, and to review all the industrial designations within the context of the entire Port Industrial District.

2.Timing for the Part II Study

Given the urgency of the current development pressures and need to provide some clarity of vision for this area, I am proposing a process which would have a final report available in November, 1999. I am proposing to report back to Toronto Community Council in January, 1999 on a detailed work program and schedule and with any requests for resources that may be required in order to facilitate the preparation of this Study.

F.Consultation:

Extensive public consultation is a prerequisite of this study and I will report on a detailed consultation program in January, 1999. I would propose that immediately upon adoption of this report by Council, letters go out to the many stakeholders and interest groups involved, including but not limited to the Toronto Economic Development Corporation (TEDCO), the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), the Waterfront Regeneration Trust, landowners and tenants including Ontario Hydro and local community groups including the local film industry, Friends of the Spit, Southeast Toronto Industrial Awareness Organization (SETIAO), South East Area Industrial Advisory Committee (SEAIAC), the Task Force to Bring Back the Don, the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, the Toronto Harbour Commission (THC), and the Toronto Bay Initiative.

The process for undertaking this Study involves a technical team of city staff, coordinated by planning staff, in the areas of urban design, transportation, environment, parks, policy and economic development, to analyse the extensive materials produced to date for this area and to immediately assess any gaps in data and then to undertake any work necessary to address these gaps. The team would then put together a series of options and approaches for consideration and reporting.

G.Conclusion:

I believe that it is important for the City to provide a strong direction and vision for the future of the Port Industrial District. At the present time the variety of conflicting development proposals and outstanding planning matters should be addressed comprehensively through the preparation of a Part II Study.

Contact Name:

Elyse Parker

Telephone: 392-0069

Fax: 392-1330

E-mail: eparker@city.toront.on.ca.

--------

The Toronto Community Council reports for the information of Council, also having had before it the following communications, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk:

-(December 8, 1998) from Mr. Peter Smith, Co-Chair, Portlands Action Committee and Public Liaison Committee;

-(December 8, 1998) from South-East Toronto Industrial Awareness Organization;

-(December 8, 1998) from Mr. Gary F. Reid, General Manager, The Toronto Harbour Commissioners;

-(December 8, 1998) from Mr. John Darling, Board Liaison Officer, Toronto Windsurfing Club;

-(December 8, 1998) from Mr. D.F. Given, President, Malone Given Parsons Ltd.;

-(December 9, 1998) from Elizabeth Borek, Lakeside Area Neighbourhoods Association, addressed to Councillor Rae and Members of Council; and

-(December 9, 1998) from Mr. Stanley M. Makuch, Cassels Brock & Blackwell, on behalf of Lafarge Corporation.

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

-Mr. Don Given, Toronto, Ontario;

-Ms. Elizabeth Borek, on behalf of Lakeside Area Neighbourhood Association;

-Mr. Tim Bermingham, Blake, Cassels & Graydon, Barristers & Solicitors; and

-Ms. Tanya Carinci, Cassels Brock & Blackwell.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

East Bayfront