Comments on the community meeting An open letter from Antony & Lyanne Upward

Councillor Bussin, Mr. Mestyan:

Firstly we wanted to thank you for organizing / participating / chairing the community meeting held last week concerning the planning application for 763-765 Woodbine Ave / 1945-1955 Gerrard St East.

As requested, as input to the finalizing of the city planners report on this application which Mr. Mestyan presented at the meeting, and as input to the community committee that Councillor Bussin will be organizing, we wanted to put on record our comments related to this application.

Could we also ask you to pass on to the applicant that we want to encourage the development of the community around the immediate Woodbine / Gerrard intersection and appreciate the lead (and risk) that he is taking putting forward this proposal.

As several community members commented at the meeting, the immediate area is at a tipping point economically, and having the right first development will clearly set a strong precedent for the rest of the neighbourhood – including the other 3 corners of the intersection, 1 of which currently has a medium sized vacant, low density premise on it.

But "the right development" is key. It is disappointing that the applicant didn't approach the community for input prior to putting their initial application together. I think they likely would have got a lot of creative and positive input from the community judging by the energy shown at the meeting! Further by taking a collaborative / open approach, the applicant would have got the community on-side, and likely saved themselves a lot of time and effort with the committee of adjustment and would have reduced the number of revisions to their architectural plans (which we know from experience can be expensive and time consuming).

However, now that the "normal" process of consultation based on the applicants initial proposal is underway, we have two major and a number of other comments which we would like make:

Major Comments

Building Height.

We recognize the "as of right" current zoning for a four story building. We also understand the need, as expressed in the current City of Toronto Official Plan for densification along major, mass-transit served routes (such as Gerrard East). But we also feel the right balance must be struck between human scale buildings, density, and the developers profit.

So, for the record, we believe 7 stories is too high, period, even with set-backs and other devices (due to the overall narrow dimension of the lot in the North-South direction and the significant impact on property values due to the overlooks on the South side).

Having looked at near by buildings we believe 5 stories, is the maximum which should be permitted, with the 5th floor being set-back.

Building Purpose.

We understand the "high end condo" nature of the proposed project as presented by the applicant.

However, given the proven success, from a community and resident perspective, of "mixed income" developments, and given that this is clearly the nature of the immediate neighbourhood (Devon Rd for example has several Toronto Housing Authority properties, low income rental, all the way to one or two properties which are $800,000+ in current value), we would like to ask the applicant to consider more of a mix of units and hence of residents. Certainly such a move would demonstrate sensitivity to the community and show the applicants leadership in current housing public policy.

We would strongly support our neighbours who expressed at the meeting that we would not welcome a single low income building and would strongly encourage the city to take what ever planning measures are possible to prevent such an outcome in the short, medium and long term.

As a side benefit we strongly believe a mixed income building would likely have the additional benefits of:

Other Comments

Side walk size.

The current side walk on the South side of Gerrard East of Woodbine is a "double-wide" sidewalk with a number of trees and the retail display from the Daisy Mart blocking some of this extra-width. Given the considerable foot traffic, including children walking to Bowmore School, even the current sidewalk is barely adequate. Further some of the sidewalk is in a poor state of repair and is not cleared properly in winter, adding to the pedestrian woes.

A cursory examination of the plans at the meeting made us concerned that perhaps, in addition to the removal of at least one reasonably sized tree, the side walk would be narrowed to a "single-wide" width (approx 1.5m). If we read the plans correctly, this would be unacceptable for a street the size of Gerrard with retail stores and current, let alone, increased pedestrian traffic from the development itself.

We encourage the City to maintain, at a minimum the current "double-wide" side walk width.

Giving back to the community.

Antony suggested (and have followed-up in a separate email) concerning the idea of several parking spots being reserved for Autoshare vehicles. This would be an amenity for the unit owners as well as for the community in general.

We encourage the City to facilitate discussions between Autoshare and the applicant as a matter of priority.

We are also certain our neighbours have more ideas on this topic and would strongly encourage the applicant to pro-actively seek similar ideas that add value to the commercial and community aspects of this project.

Garage Access.

As many noted at the meeting there are major concerns about look of the proposed building on Gerrard, because of the extremely large space taken up by the garage access (removing additional street level retail opportunity). The current design creates a big "dead zone" at street level (much as the much maligned building at 751 Woodbine Ave does).

We strongly encourage the City and the applicant to take all creative measures to minimize this dead zone and maximize (as today) the number of street level retail opportunities. We suggest that the importance of minimizing the dead-zone may require some relaxation of the requirements that have caused the applicant to assume the need for large garbage trucks to have access inside the building, but look to the City to provide leadership on this matter.

Pedestrian and Streetcar Impact.

We have significant concerns for the impact on pedestrians (including the significant number of school children walking to and fro to Bowmore school) and streetcars of the significant traffic (both cars and trucks, garbage and so forth) turning in and out of the building at all hours.

Specifically related to the streetcar. As the councillor will recall Antony has had several interactions with the TTC concerning the timing of the 506 Carlton Car, and the difficulties the TTC has keeping this route to schedule. While there are many reasons for this challenging situation, one item that came out of this dialog, was the long time it takes streetcars to clear the Woodbine intersection, due to the timing of the lights, the left turn priority (heading West at all times and South during the evening rush), and the quantity of traffic.

Adding a significant quantity of left and right turning traffic both in and out of the building will only make this situation much worse, adding to the challenges for the TTC and the thousands of riders daily who rely on the 506 across the city. The impact of a poor design around the # of parking spaces and the access to the garage could have implications far beyond the immediate locality.

We also note that it is already challenging turning right from Devon onto Gerrard Westbound at many times of day due to traffic volume and that there is a left turn ban from Gerrard onto Devon during the morning rush (partly to keep traffic off Devon, but also to avoid issues of traffic backing up behind left turning vehicles prior to the Woodbine/Gerrard intersection).

While we recognise that traffic patterns will change what ever building is constructed, we believe this is a classic situation where current building code / zoning requirements for approx 40 parking spots (I hope I am remembering Mike Mestyan correctly) is encouraging the type of car ownership (and hence traffic) which stated City policy (not to mention Kyoto requirements) aims to reduce. We believe most of the concerns we have outlined can be significantly alleviated by reducing the number of parking spots to 10 including 2 for Autoshare.

If the building is more of a mixed income type (mentioned above) this will also likely reduce residents pressure for parking.

Relocation of Existing Businesses.

Would it be possible City of Toronto Economic Development Department to collaborate with the Applicant to re-house the 5 impacted businesses (Daisy Mart, Beech Mosaics, Wannabeadrummer, Dragoons Antiques, Stained Glass Repair)?

All 5 of these businesses have been in the community for some time and have become an integral part of the neighbourhood. The current plans have (at most) only two retail stores, and it is quite possible that the rents for the new units will exceed what the existing businesses can afford. There are a number of empty stores in and around the Woodbine / Gerrard intersection.

Could the City collaborate with the applicant to take steps to proactively assist the existing businesses relocate within the immediate neighbourhood and minimize the likelihood that any of the existing businesses cease trading?

This will help accelerate the tipping point towards a beneficial out come for the existing businesses, the new business in this development and for the community.

Look and Feel.

We wanted to express our support for several community members who suggested that the proposed building needed to pay more attention to the existing architectural designs and "feeling" of the neighbourhood. We were rather upset by the architects dismissal of the significant feeling of community which the current architectural mix of styles creates and which we enjoy (this again is linked to the mixed income nature of the community).

We have also seen a large number of very inappropriate, un-creative, box like structures in this and other neighbourhoods. We echo our neighbours sentiments regarding the hideous mistake of 751 Woodbine (the building immediately South of the proposed building) and, given the precedent setting nature of this project for the other corners of Woodbine & Gerrard, would want the standard for the look and feel of the proposed building be set appropriately high.

Again, we would suggest the applicant's architect seeks input from the community as the fastest way to get to a consensus design which would have the right balance and we would ask the City and the Councillor to facilitate this.

For example, from the way one of the community members at the meeting spoke about the existing architecture to the architect, I'm sure someone from the community would be pleased to provide the applicant and architect a walking tour and point out the various architectural themes.

Green Building.

We appreciated the green roofing for part of this project and thought it showed some awareness by the applicant for the pressing Environmental Sustainability issues of our time. Although not mentioned at the community meeting, we believe we are not alone in hoping that the applicant would consider constructing a LEED certified building on this site, perhaps including electrical co-generation (likely solar).

I suspect, as in other areas of Toronto, that if the applicant were to ask for interest from community members in investing in such a solar project there would be a significant number of people interested.

Again, could we ask that the City and the Councillor take as strong a stance on this as possible with the applicant to get the best possible outcome?

Could we ask that above points be included in the Planners final report and provided as input to the first Community Committee meeting?

We would appreciate a confirmation by email of your respective receipt of this letter.

Thank you again for helping the community with this important project,

Warm regards,

Antony & Lyanne Upward
24 Devon Road
Toronto, Ontario
M4E 2J8
antony.and.lyanne@theUpwards.net

Comments and responses

Please use this form to add your comments.

Add your comments here