109oz in Context

7/31/2019 109oz in Context

1/74

109OZ in Context

Ossington Community Association

July 2012

This is a work in progress. OCA does not purport to expertise in the

law or planning, and all claims made in this document are to thebest of our knowledge. OCA is grateful for notification of anyfactual errors or interpretive implausibilities.


2/74

Whats the nutshell story? Every existing building on Ossington is Lowrise.

Lowrise means 4 stories or less; Midrise means 5 to 10 stories.

There should be only Lowrise on Ossington. Lowrise is part of why Ossington is an evening and nightlife destination. Midrise would suck

the life out of the Ossington Strip, just as it has sucked the life out of College and Palmerston.

And Lowrise is key to Ossington buildings having a good interface with the Neighbourhood.Midrise would destabilize the Neighbourhood: its intrusive presence goes beyond height, forengineering reasons that are inseparable consequences of height.

A developer has applied to build 109OZ, an 82 foot tall Midrise building withretail space for a chain store on one-third of the block just south of Golden Turtle.

This proposal is even more intrusive than typical Midrise: it fills out a huge volume withprominences and balconies, markets a party lifestyle to 100 residents with 80 balconies eastand west up as much as 70 feet, routes 70 cars across kids walking to school, and overlooks asmany as twenty house lots, half of which back directly on to it.

The laws do not support Midrise on Ossington. The Official Plan specifically directs Midrise to the Avenues: Queen East, College, King West,

Dundas, and Bloor West are Avenues: Ossington is not an Avenue.

The applicants argument that Midrise is OK on Lowrise Ossington because Ossington is like

an Avenue undermines the very foundation of the Official Plan. The Official Plans call for growth can be met through Lowrise development on Ossington.

The Official Plan promises protection to Neighbourhoods. In our view, these safeguards legallyrequire keeping midrise off of the Ossington Strip.

And so the OCA calls on Councillor Layton to vote now, always, and only forLowrise on the Ossington Strip to protect the basic framework of the Official Plan,to protect against destabilization the local business, residential, and school

communities, and to work with the community and developers to guarantee amore enjoyable Ossington Strip for the Neighbourhood and all of Toronto.


3/74

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BASIC FACTS AND IMPACT

THE APPLICANT AND ITS HISTORY IN THIS

AREA

THE PROCEDURAL STATUS OF THE 109OZ

PROPOSAL

THE OFFICIAL PLAN: GROW, BUT PROTECT STRATEGY: HOW TO KEEP OSSINGTON

LOWRISE AND WIN


4/74

BASIC FACTS AND IMPACT


5/74

What is 109OZ?

A proposed condominium structure

Site: 103, 10911 Ossington Avenue

Ossington Strip, east side, about 50m south ofthe light at Argyle

Between Hollywood Foods and Bhmer

The lot is 46m wide and 41m deep


6/74

How big is the proposed building?

82 feet high, 150 feet wide, 108 feet deep (counting thebalconies)

Retail on the ground floor, five levels of condos, and amechanical penthouse on top = HVAC unit

Not counting the HVAC unit, the building is 70 feet high Not exactly a cube:

The sixth story is slightly set back on the street side, though itsbalconies reach forward to the proposed property line

The top half of the sixth story is set back by about ten feet on

the laneway side The laneway faade recedes at the edges

Still, not that far off.


7/74

What does that mean?

Consider the three-story building to the north,housing Hollywood Foods, Frantic City Books, andthe Golden Turtle

That building is about 33 feet high, 50 feet wide,and 68 feet deep (half of the lot)

So ignoring the HVAC unit the proposal ismore than twice as tall, three times as wide, and

almost 1.6 times as deep. So the proposal has over nine times as much

volume as the biggest building on its block.


8/74

But it doesnt look huge in those pictures!

Well, it is huge. Here is OCAs artist conception

based on plans, zoning maps, and photos of the

block if the proposal is built as proposed:


9/74

Ossington side view

Bhmer height:one story

Golden Turtle height:

three stories

Lowrise limit

Proposed true height


10/74

View from G-S School side

Lowrise limit

Two story high

blank brick wallDoor

Typical-sizedhouse

Proposed true height


11/74

View walking north on Ossington

Lowrise limit

Bhmer

66 feet to go!

No setbacks


12/74

View from Argyle looking south

Golden Turtle

Balconies =

negative setback

A setback!

by 10 feet, at 66 feet upLowrise limit


13/74

Top view

Laneway

137 feet

Ossingtons

idewalk

Lo

adingdock

Balcony life up 3X the height of a house

G

ivins-Sh

awSchool


14/74

wait, did I read that right?

Lands conveyed to the City for a nominal sum forroad widening purposes???

LINE OF PROPERTY WITH 1M CONVEYANCE FOR

ROAD WIDENING?????


15/74

Ya mean theyre gonna widen

Ossington???

Ohoho, not exactly

Part of the intricate legal position on which

this proposal rests on is the applicants offer

to the City to pull the building one meter back

from the sidewalk for road widening

purposes

We explain more below


16/74

What are the units like?

86 units, the median unit 720 square feet

Most units are about 119 wide and have

only one window

70 units are only 1BR

In the 2BR units, one of the bedrooms is

more like a partitioned-off space that receives

light through a glass scrim over 30 feet from

the window


17/74

How much do the units cost?

The median apartment costs $412K

Going by the figures we have available, they

are $574 per square foot.

At that rate, the typical 1800 sf house in the

neighbourhood would go for over $1,030,000

and for that you get a yard and no $500

monthly condo fee.


18/74

Do the units increase affordable

housing? So the applicant has often claimed.

But: It should be asked whether in four years, the buyer who needs more than 720 sf will be able

to recover that investment: especially if the selling point for these condos, the Ossington Stripvibe, has been significantly degraded in their creation.

The condos are expensive: At 3.5% on a 3-year mortgage with 25 year amortization, the cost of mortgage + condo fee on the

median $412K apt is $2556/month. Get rid of the condo fee, and you can afford a $512K house

Better to rent and save, perhaps.

In discussion with the applicant in Councillor Laytons office, the prospect of a supermarketcame up: the applicant envisaged a branch of the high-end Pusateris chain

By our calculation, the applicant stands to realize $150250 psf profit: knock $100 off that andthe monthly cost drops to $2247, the cost of a $450K house

Two young couples could divide a house and a yard and get more space: $2247 a month each: an $800K 1800sf house + $100K to divide it: 900 sf each

$2556 a month each: a $900K 2000sf house + $120K to divide it: 1000 sf each

Finally, OCA is pro-residential intensification, but that does not require Midrise


19/74

How profitable is the proposal?

This is our attempt to use the citys proforma to estimate the

financials of the proposal

Justification:

Development insiders repeatedly tell us $200 per sf construction

costs

The city proforma recommends a 30% of construction soft costs

pricing Development insiders have reported land costs of as low as $3M

and as high as $7M, we split the difference

Unit prices and parking are sourced here

The applicant stated rents of $2040 prevailing on the strip, but

we assume AAA space goes for $50; 11560 sf retail; cap rate of 8%

Our best estimate is of a profitability within the $150250 psf

range

Disclaimer: this is all highly inexact, and does not accommodate

how much the applicant is borrowing to finance the proposal, or

how long it will take for the construction to occur, as well as many

other unknowns. Corrections appreciated.
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/midrise_proforma_midvshigh.pdfhttp://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/midrise_proforma_midvshigh.pdfhttp://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/midrise_proforma_midvshigh.pdfhttp://www.andrewtomassetti.com/images/20774/109OZ/109oz-vip-prices.pdfhttp://www.andrewtomassetti.com/images/20774/109OZ/109oz-vip-prices.pdfhttp://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/midrise_proforma_midvshigh.pdfhttp://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/midrise_proforma_midvshigh.pdfhttp://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/midrise_proforma_midvshigh.pdf


20/74

Here is one of 16 720 sf units

Sold as 1BR+Den the den a desk of solitarycontemplation in otherwise unsaleable space

between front door and bathroom, more than 50 feet

from the sole narrow window


21/74

Here is a 2BR for a young family

This unit is 1112 sf for $740K, or $665/sf. At that rate, an 1800 sf house would cost

$1.2M. The range of resale house prices in our area in 2012 has been $7251225K. For

that price you also get a yard, and you dont have to pay monthly condo fees, and you

would get a house that has stood the test of 80100 years rather than a hastily

constructed new building.


22/74

Are there other noise and visual

impacts? Balconies on every level

About 40 on the street side and about 40 on the laneway side

Since the building is marketed as a place to party, and judging bysimilar structures at Wellington and in Liberty Village, residentsare understandably concerned about party noise

The HVAC unit is supposed to be screened, but we find itimplausible that it will not project significant noise from alevel high enough to travel quite far

The laneway side features a two-story tall blank back wallwith a loading dock and garage entrance

The laneway side also features a 12 cube electricaltransformer, which would presumably be a source ofsignificant noise


23/74

How many residences are near the

site? Eight houses on Givins are across the laneway from the site, with

their rear yards and rear windows facing the 40 balconies

One house on Argyle Street abuts the laneway side-on, and it andtwo other houses have backyards equally in the viewshed as thoseon Givins

There is a house on Argyle Place, the laneway: less than 60 feetfrom the site, its front door opens directly onto the laneway

Another ten or more lots on Givins are within 150 feet (half anarrow block) of the site, as are seven or eight on the other side ofArgyle Street, as are one or two on Argyle across Ossington, as areone or two on Humbert

Several rental apartments are in the three-story buildingimmediately to the north


24/74

What about shadow?

Fix a certain time t: noon on April 21 or September 21.

At t, an 82 foot building in Toronto would cast a shadow about 80 feet long

Toronto tilts a bit counterclockwise of true north, so at time t: Shadow would reach the north sidewalk along Argyle Street for the width of five houses

The house on Argyle street abutting the laneway would be cast completely in shadow

Shadow would cover the garages of three houses along Givins

At all other times on the day of time t, the shadow would be longer At 9AM on that day, shadow would cover the intersection of Argyle and Ossington, spreading

perhaps as far south as Venezia and as far north as Quasi Modo

By 3PM on that day, shadow would cover the lots of 11 houses along Givins and Argyle

For the six winter months, the shadow would be longer at all times of day For months, there would be no mid-morning sun for four houses west of Quasi Modo

For months, seven house lots along Argyle would be completely cast in shadow at noon

For months, the intersection of Argyle and Ossington, and the Givins-Shaw playground, wouldreceive no late-afternoon sun

6070% of the residents along Givins derive significant economic value fromproduce grown in their back gardens. For most of the year, these back gardenswould receive no afternoon sun.

Consider these remarks as speculative and provisional, subject to closerinvestigation soon


25/74

What about cars?

The proposal is for a 70 car garage, 60 for residents, 4for business, 6 for visitors

The garage would be accessed from Argyle Place, a 17foot wide laneway.

Argyle Place empties to Argyle Street and Bruce Street Argyle Street is part of the citys bike path network

Argyle and Bruce Streets are very significant paths forchildren walking to Givins-Shaw School

Argyle runs one-way toward and past the schoolsplayground, and there is a right turn available ontoGivins Street, on which the school fronts


26/74

What does this mean for the Givins-

Shaw School?

We discuss traffic safety issues above, in the

slide on cars:

70 cars would cross the paths on Argyle and Bruce

Streets where children walk to school

Every car exiting onto Argyle Street would pass

either the schools dropoff area or its playground

The proposal is also only 200 feet from theschool and its playground, and so both would

easily be in the viewshed of the proposal


27/74

A map of car/pedestrian flows


28/74

A picture of car/pedestrian flows


29/74

What about the retail space?

The retail space would be 12,000 sf By comparison, the largest legal restaurant on Ossington is 1833 sf, less than

one-sixth the size of the retail

There is no proposal to put hard dividers to make many smaller shops

That means that there is every possibility that the retail space would beoccupied by a single operation

The retail space is likely to be affordable only by a chain store It is likely to rent for $50 or more per square foot annually

That works out to over $90,000 a year rent for that 1833 sf restaurant

The full space would rent for $600,000 a year

The applicant has expressed its hope that there would be as many as

five businesses operating, but that will not be up to the applicant Their business model involves selling the retail space to a national property

management firm for perhaps $7,000,000 or more

From that point forward, the tenants would be entirely the concern of theproperty management firm


30/74

Which stores would rent the retail

space?

That is anybodys guess

Shoppers has a spot just at the foot of Ossington,

so they are not the likely tenant

But it could be H&M, Zara, the Gap, or some

similar business hoping to locate in an area the

development community has declared chic

It could also be a large grocery store, whichwould involve many daily semi-truck deliveries to

the laneway


31/74


32/74

Who has made the proposal?

Reserve Properties, a development firm run by SheldonFenton, a long-time developer in the GTA, and his sonShane

Reserve has recently won approval for two projects in

The Beach and another project further south onOssington across from the ministorage

Their development team includes architect RolandColthoff of RAW architects and planning consultantCraig Hunter, a prominent advocate for GTA developers

According to news reports, Fenton initially taskedColthoff with designing a 100 unit building


33/74

Has the applicant been willing to

negotiate? The applicant is well-aware of the communitys view

that Midrise development and big chain stores do notbelong on Ossington.

And yet:

They have declared in print, and in Ward 19 CouncillorLaytons office, that they are unwilling to adjust the heightof the building unless compelled to do so

They declared in the Councillors office that they areunwilling to guarantee that no national tenants would be

considered They have expressed a hope that several stores would

occupy the retail space, but have been unwilling to takeany action to further this hope


34/74

Is the applicant worried about the many

destabilizing effects of the proposal?

For example, about the safety of children on the way toschool?

If so, theyre not letting on: Sheldon Fenton describes his six-storey building as appropriate

for a main street in a rapidly growing city. Everywhere wevedone developments you have a protectionism from the localpeople,says Fenton, who calls the reaction pure NIMBYism. Asked if he heard anything that would modify his project, hesaid: What weve proposed is reasonable and I believe itshould be approved.

This is a surprising turnabout from the applicants earlierstatement that We understand you, we want to embracethe community, we want to be a part of it, and we don'twant to try and be a thorn in the side
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1223216--battle-over-ossington-ave-condo-among-several-in-cityhttp://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1223216--battle-over-ossington-ave-condo-among-several-in-cityhttp://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1223216--battle-over-ossington-ave-condo-among-several-in-cityhttp://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/05/interview-shane-fenton-reserve-109oz-launch-partyhttp://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/05/interview-shane-fenton-reserve-109oz-launch-partyhttp://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/05/interview-shane-fenton-reserve-109oz-launch-partyhttp://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/05/interview-shane-fenton-reserve-109oz-launch-partyhttp://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1223216--battle-over-ossington-ave-condo-among-several-in-cityhttp://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1223216--battle-over-ossington-ave-condo-among-several-in-cityhttp://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1223216--battle-over-ossington-ave-condo-among-several-in-city


35/74

Doesnt the applicant have something

else on Ossington? Yes. They are the developer of the Motif condo at 41 Ossington,

northwest corner of the Rebecca intersection. It is a mixed project,involving a condo part fronting on Ossington together withseveral townhouses behind on Rebecca.

The condo part is, sad to say, a Midrise structure. Its circumstances

differ from this one in several ways: Much smaller: less than one-quarter as large as the 109OZ proposal,

with one-third the street frontage and under one-quarter the retailspace

On a corner, abutting only the townhouse part of that developmentrather than backing onto eight residential lots

The safety issues with the laneway do not exist The Planning Department does not consider Motif to be precedental


36/74

What happened at 41 Ossington?

As we understand it, something like this: Joe Pantalone was running for mayor when the application was filed

Mike Layton entered office with the clock already ticking on the file

Initially, the proposal was for a five-story 18.5m residential structurewith an HVAC unit atop the townhouses

The Rebecca Street neighbours spent months in good faith negotation

The city, confronted with an application filed at a strategic moment,was slow in processing the decision

The OMB allows the city 120 days after a completed application

Approximately one year after the date the application was filed, theapplicant immediately appealed to the OMB, and the city, lacking

sufficient resources for an OMB trial, settled The result was a six-story structure stretching east along Rebecca

nearly as far at six stories as the original proposal stretched at fourstories, and with a substantially increased overall floor area, with aslightly diminished parking stacker structure at its eastern extreme


37/74

41 Ossington: initial proposal

41 Ossington: final settlement


38/74

41 Ossington:

Initial figures

41 Ossington:

Final figures

TYPO!

After months of negotiating:

One extra story taller

9% higher GFA


39/74

How did 41 Ossington go to 21.5m?

A mystery: The right-of-way (ROW) of a street is the distance between opposite side

buildings

A&MRBS says maximum allowable height is the ROW

ROW on Ossington = 17.5m

eh???

OP 2.2 Structuring Growth Policy 3a: The Citys transportation network will be maintained and developed to

support the growth management objectives of this Plan by: protecting anddeveloping the network of rights-of-way shown on Map 3 by: i) acquiring over time the additional property needed to achieve the

designated width. The conveyance of land for widening may be required for

nominal consideration from abutting property owners as a condition ofsubdivision, severance, minor variance, condominium or site plan approvals;

ii) extending and altering the widths of pavement, sidewalk and otherfacilities as necessary within the designated rights-of-way

In other words, by encouraging all Major Streets to have all buildings torndown and replaced with ones with the Map 3 ROW

Map 3 says the ROW for Ossington is 20m


40/74

Continued The legal basis for 21.5m is found here:

In other words, a certain map says that Ossingtonneeds to be 20m to carry enough traffic, and thatthe ROW once all buildings are torn down will be20m, and so that is why it is OK to build 1.5mabove that hypothetical ROW


41/74


42/74

the procedural status of the109OZ proposal


43/74

Where in the legal process is the

109OZ proposal? The application for the proposal has been completed, on or shortly before 5 July

2012. The city has 120 days to vote the proposal, or some descendentcompromise, up or down.

The proposal requires two changes in the zoning bylaw controlling the lands on theOssington Strip: The bylaw limits height to 14m, the proposal requests 21.5m

That is a technical height: the HVAC unit brings the height to 25m but is not counted in the

technical height The bylaw limits density to 2.5, the proposal requests 3.9

Density means: (area of all floor space inside the building)/(area of the lot)

Density 2.5 would mean three stories on the front half of the lot and two stories on the back half, orfour stories on the front quarter of the lot and two stories on the back 3/4, or four stories covering alittle over half of the lot, or

Density 3.9 would mean four stories over almost the whole lot, or five stories over 78% of the lot, orsix stories over almost 2/3 of the lot

The proposal distributes density in something like an average of the latter options.

Note that the density figure understates the structures impact in two ways: The first story is as tall as Bhmer, by itself half the height of the 3-story Golden Turtle building

The top three stories are 11.5 feet high

Balconies are not included in density but are no different from interior space in how the buildingpresents to the outside


44/74

What is needed for the Zoning Bylaw

change?

Two yes votes:

One from Community Council, the Councillors

from wards in old Toronto-East York

One from City Council


45/74

What determines how these votes go?

As a matter of something like custom (by nomeans of policy or law), in cases like this one, CityCouncil votes the same way as CommunityCouncil

And as a matter of something like custom (by nomeans of policy or law), in cases like this one,Community Council votes along with the WardCouncillor

So in the present case, Ward 19 Councillor MikeLaytons choice of how to vote will be verystrongly influential over the citys position

h d h k


46/74

What determines how Mike Layton

will vote?

This is not for us to say

Councillor Layton relies heavily on the report

issued by the Planning Department

Councillor Layton will also rely on the outcome ofthe visioning study he will be running with the

community over the coming months

But ultimately, Councillor Layton is a legislator,who is free to vote in either direction in accord

with his best policy judgement

h ll h l


47/74

What will the Planning Department

say?

The Planning Department is obligated by theOfficial Plan to consider a large number offactors.

We are not Planners, so we will gesture at the

principles that determine what Planners wouldsay, and then make some speculative remarks.

Planners are sworn to interpret the law andprinciples of sound planning. Still, like any

experts, Planners are not uniform in theirinterpretation, and frequently disagree on themerits of a proposal.


48/74

What has the Planning Dept said?


49/74

Can you try to explain that?

The Planner in charge floats the proposal around the office, soliciting comments from hiscolleagues. They collectively came up with these worries:

1. Its too tall and the setbacks are insufficiently deep.

2. It hulks over everything else, is too close to the house lots in back, and is not even in line with theconstraints specified by Midrise Performance Standards, a document specifying what Midriseshould be like.

3. We do not know what the crucial word treatment means here: this may be an aesthetic criticismof the ground floor faade. We are not familiar with the relevant standards here.

4. The apartments are tiny, and developers are supposed to compensate this with amenity space.The applicant is marketing the Ossington Strip as the amenity, and includes on site only aperfunctory second floor terrace above Bhmer.

5. We believe the city parking standard is one spot per unit. The applicant (in a way of which weapprove) is including less. As a matter of going down the checklist, the Planning Dept needs to forman opinion whether this is appropriate.

6. The green roof the applicant offers to provide is inaccessible, and occupies under 1/3 of theactual roof space

7. Access to the underground parking and laneway loading requires a technical widening of theLaneway to the standard width of 6m from the current level, more like 5m.


50/74

THE OFFICIAL PLAN:GROW, BUT PROTECT

Wh t d th Offi i l Pl b t


51/74

What does the Official Plan say about

this situation?

The Official Plan does not deal with the specifics ofwhat precisely can be built on this or that specific lot.Instead, it is a broad system of guidelines.

For specific parameters, the Official Plan is supposed to

be supplemented with a second-tier layer ofregulations, known as Secondary Plans or Area Studies.

In many cases, these specific regulations exist. Not,however, in the present case. An Area Study was done

for Ossington in 2009, but instead of including withinits scope what would make for appropriate built form,it confines itself to the regulation of restaurant size.

Wh t i l th b d


52/74

What, in general, are the broad

guidelines of the OP? The backbone of the OP is a compromise:

Preserve the stability of residential Neighbourhoods (such asthe lands back of the lots along the Ossington Strip)

Direct regional population growth into the city rather than outbeyond the suburban fringes

This is implemented by two strategies:1. The OP directs growth into certain non-Neighbourhood areas

2. And the OP strongly regulates the interface between areas forgrowth and abutting Neighbourhoods

The broad guidelines capture these strategies as well as various other desiderata.


53/74

Where will the city grow?

OP 2.2 Structuring Growth in the City: Integrating Land Use andTransportation, Policy 2: Growth will be directed to the Centres:

Yonge and Eg; North York Centre; Scarboro Centre; Dundas/Kipling

Avenues: Important corridors along major streets designated for intensification and

reurbanization(Bloor West, Dundas West, Eglinton, Ronces, )

Midrise along the lands fronting onto the Avenues

Employment Areas: Industrialized or formerly industrialized lands:

Only two anywhere near subway/streetcar are Niagara area below King and east sidelands below Eastern Avenue

Downtown:

Bathurst east to Yonge up to the tracks by Dupont; Yonge east to the Don River belowRosedale Valley; Bathurst west to Lansdowne below the Gardiner

as shown on Map 2 (next slide)

in order to protect neighbourhoods from the effects of nearbydevelopment (Policy 2i)

Official Plan Map 2: Urban Structure


54/74

Official Plan Map 2: Urban Structure

D thi ll i t if i th


55/74

Does this allow intensifying growth on

the Ossington Strip?

No: The Ossington Strip is not in any of the four land-use

classifications to which growth will be directed

Subclauses (a)(h) of Policy 2 are motivations for

increasing density in relatively urbanized regions Why not build towers everywhere?

Policy 2(i): to protect neighbourhoods from theeffects of nearby development

Policy 2(i) is one of the most important subclauses inthe entire OP. Without it, the most basic framework ofthe OP provides no rationale to prevent limitlessintensification everywhere.


56/74

Is Ossington an Avenue?

Ossington is not an Avenue: Map 2 makes this

clear.

The applicant has been asserting that Ossington

is like an Avenue and should be opened toMidrise development. They have even hired the

author of the Avenues and Midrise Buildings

Study (A&MRBS) to consult on this project.

That is their assertion, however. It has no legal

basis.


57/74

Is Ossington like an Avenue?

No. Avenues are significant corridors along major streets

The Ossington Strip is not a significant corridor: it is only .6km long.Almost all other Avenues are far, far longer.

Exception 1: west side of Bathurst Bloor to Dupont, .9km but the east side isCore so that is pro forma

Exception 2: Bayview in Moore Park, .7km but that is 27m wide and heavilycar-dependent, with pod-malls

The Ossington Strip is not a corridor: the 2009 Area Study recognizesit as a Destination, not a space to go through but a place to come to

The MR performance standards for Avenues require a Right-Of-Way = minimum distance between property lines on oppositesides of the street of 20m The ROW on Ossington is 17.5m

The A&MRBS is adamant that buildings must not (HVAC unit aside) betaller than the ROW. This is known as the building envelope.

Does Ossington meent OPs


58/74

Does Ossington meent OPs

qualitative picture of an Avenue? Corridor:

The informal text box on 2-1 states that the policy framework found here prepares the city torealize *forecast *forecast population+ growth depending on the success of this plan increating dynamic transit oriented mixed use centres and corridors

The informal text box on 2-2 states the purpose of the growth management portions of OP asto shape the urban fabric of the GTA into a system of mixed use centres and corridors

Ossington is not a mixed-use corridor, so the Ossington Strip is not a segment of a mixed-usecorridor

Main shopping street: The informal text box on 2-3 explains the Avenues as the Citys main shopping streets

Familiarly, Ossington is not one of the City s main shopping streets: People from around the city travel to Ossington in order to playPaul Johnston, realtor for the 109OZ

project

The cool thing about this project [41 Ossington] is it demonstrates that Ossington is not just a streetthat people come to eat and drink. Its a place where people actually want to live, because you are soclose to so many fantastic amenities that the city has to offer Shane Fenton

And isnt an Avenue really ultimately
http://condobusiness.ca/ReservePropertiesHighlightsOssingtonCulturewi.aspxhttp://condobusiness.ca/ReservePropertiesHighlightsOssingtonCulturewi.aspxhttp://condobusiness.ca/ReservePropertiesHighlightsOssingtonCulturewi.aspxhttp://condobusiness.ca/ReservePropertiesHighlightsOssingtonCulturewi.aspxhttp://www.thestar.com/living/realestate/article/973082--a-new-shape-for-an-old-streethttp://www.thestar.com/living/realestate/article/973082--a-new-shape-for-an-old-streethttp://www.thestar.com/living/realestate/article/973082--a-new-shape-for-an-old-streethttp://condobusiness.ca/ReservePropertiesHighlightsOssingtonCulturewi.aspxhttp://condobusiness.ca/ReservePropertiesHighlightsOssingtonCulturewi.aspx


59/74

And isnt an Avenue, really, ultimately

what the OP says is an Avenue?

Yes.

Ossington isnt like an Avenue in the most importantsense: the Official Plan says it is notan Avenue.

In insisting on the sort of intensification intended forAvenues, the applicant is not merely requesting azoning by-law change they are effectively trying toundermine the very framework of the OP itself

This makes for an extremely dangerous precedent.

Whether a certain patch is like an Employment Areain some way or other is irrelevant to whetherestablishing a smelter there is legal.

Is the applicant genuinely abiding by


60/74

Is the applicant genuinely abiding by

Avenue standards?

[***2-16 policy 3]

H d th OP t t N i hb h d


61/74

How does the OP protect Neighbourhoods

from adverse impacts of growth? 2.2.3 Avenues: Reurbanizing Arterial Corridors

Policies 1 and 2 strongly encourage holistic Avenue Studies ofstrategicMixed-Use segments of Avenues to specify appropriate transitions toNeighbourhoods and height and density limits.

Optional according to Policy 3 but only if it can be proved that redevelopingthe entire Avenue segment using the proposal as precedent will have noadverse impacts on adjacent Neighbourhoods

Policy 4 insists that Avenue designation does not overrule Neighbourhooddesignation in terms of protecting Neighbourhood lands

2.3.1 Healthy Neighbourhoods Policy 2 guarantees development on Mixed-Use lands adjacent or near

Neighbourhoods must (a) be compatible w/ Nbh (b) gradually transitionscale and density (c) maintain light and privacy (d) not significantly worsentraffic and parking

Policy 3 states intensification of land adjacent to neighbourhoods will becarefully controlled so that neighbourhoods are protected from negativeimpact. Where significant intensification of land adjacent to a NeighbourhoodorApartment Neighbourhoodis proposed, Council will determine, at theearliest point in the process, whether or not a Secondary Plan, area specificzoning by-law or area specific policy will be created in consultation with thelocal community following anAvenue Study, or area based study

How does the OP regulate Mixed Use


62/74

How does the OP regulate Mixed-Use

to protect Neighbourhoods?

4.5 Mixed-Use Areas Policy 2: In Mixed Use Areas development will:

(c) locate and mass new buildings to provide atransition between areas of different development

intensity and scale, as necessary to achieve theobjectives of this Plan, through means such asproviding appropriate setbacks and/or a stepping downof heights, particularly towards lower scaleNeighbourhoods;

(d) locate and mass new buildings so as to adequatelylimit shadow impacts on adjacent Neighbourhoods,particularly during the spring and fall equinoxes

Whats the big deal with Midrise


63/74

What s the big deal with Midrise

against Lowrise? Lowrise is 14 stories, Midrise is 510 Its not just one story!

A four story building can be framed with wood

A five story building must be framed with steel; must have an elevator;must have an external HVAC unit; must have a loading dock.

All of this infrastructure has an impact on the Neighbourhood. All of this infrastructure adds a lotto the construction costs. A 5-

story building will therefore not make very much money for theapplicant. A 6-story building has very similar costs to a 5-storybuilding, but with an additional story to sell. Developers will useevery trick in the book to get that sixth story: which is what

happened down on 41 Ossington. To oversimplify, there is no such thing as a 5-story building. The

choices are: 4 and low-impact infrastructure

6+ and high-impact infrastructure

I it ibl t b ild MR O i t th t


64/74

Is it even possible to build MR on Ossington that

protects the Neighbourhood?

The way to protect Neighbourhoods from Midrise is madeoperational in the A&MRBS. It involves a wide range ofconstraints.

We can avoid the details, however, because in allillustrations in the A&MRBS, it is assumed that abutting

residential lots have an axis parallel to the Avenue. For the entirety of the Ossington Strip, on at least one side,

the residential lots have an axis perpendicular to theAvenue. In particular, this is the case on the lot under discussion.

That makes a big difference to the adverse destabilizingaffects on the Neighbourhood of the MR buildings

Whats the big deal with parallel or


65/74

What s the big deal with parallel or

perpendicular?

Ossington)is)Lowrise)) Growth will be directed to the Cent res , Avenues , Emplo yment Dis trict sand the Downt own in order to: protect neighbourhoods from the

effects of nearby development.

Side%

On End%On

! impact: End %On! impact

Midrise means Side-On, End-On means Lowrise

SIDE-ON Queen)East) END-ON Ossington)Strip)


66/74

What about those Area Studies?

Council did not order them when the Motifproposal was advanced.

It did not order them when the 109OZ proposalwas advanced.

It has not ordered them. Councillor Layton has stated he will approach

Council to request that they be ordered inSeptember.

Planning is highly understaffed, so even if theyare ordered, it will be a long time before they arecompleted.

If Area Studies are impossible what


67/74

If Area Studies are impossible, what

can be done?

Councillor Layton is working with the communityon a Visioning Study. The aim is to come up witha surrogate for the absent Area Study.

This has the potential to be of significant value.The city can use it in backing up its case. If it iswritten with due attention to law and goodplanning principles, it can stand up just as well as

a study by the Planning Department. The Ossington Community Association is looking

into retaining a Planner to assist in this process.

Are there other OP regulations bearing


68/74

Are there other OP regulations bearing

on the situation?

The OP is complex, and there are very many

especially since it insists on being interpreted

holistically.

We will point to two factors: Coherence of the public realm

Health of the retail sector

How does the OP protect the


69/74

How does the OP protect the

Character of the public realm?

3.1.2 Built Form

Policy 3(c): New development will be massed and

its exterior faade will be designed to fit

harmoniously into its existing and/or plannedcontext, and will limit its impact on neighbouring

streets, parks, open spaces and properties by

creating appropriate transitions in scale to

neighbouring existing and/or planned buildings

How does the OP protect Commercial


70/74

How does the OP protect Commercial

Zones? 3.5.3 The Future of Retailing

Policy 2: Traditional retail shopping streets will be improved as centres of community activity by:

a) encouraging quality development of a type, density and form that is compatible with the character of the

area and with adjacent uses;

b) improving public amenities such as transit and parking facilities, street furniture and landscaping; and

c) encouraging and supporting effective business associations in these areas.

Policy 3: Retail development along theAvenues is encouraged and will suit the local context of

built form and support the establishment of a high quality pedestrian environment.

Policy 4: in order to provide local opportunities for small businesses and maintain the safety,

comfort and amenity of shopping areas, zoning regulations for ground floor commercial retail uses

in new buildings in new neighbourhoods or in Mixed Use Areas along pedestrian shopping strips

where most storefronts are located at the streetline, may provide for a maximum store or

commercial unit size based on the following considerations:

a) the prevailing sizes of existing stores and commercial units in the area; b) other indicators ofopportunities for small business, such as vacancies in existing stores and commercial units; c) the provision

of a range of store and commercial unit sizes to meet the range of local needs including day-to-day

convenience shopping and other household goods and services; d) the potential impact of large vacant

stores and commercial units at the ground floor level on the safety and comfort of the strip for pedestrians,

e) the need for eyes on the street; f) the rhythm and flow of storefronts on the strip; and g) the potential

for the building design, particularly the street faade, to address the safety, comfort and amenity of the

shopping area.


71/74

STRATEGY: HOW TO KEEPOSSINGTON LOWRISE AND WIN

How will this all play out?


72/74

How will this all play out?

Scenario A: Councillor Layton pledges to vote only for Lowrise

Community and City Council vote against the proposal by, say February The applicant appeals to OMB

The city is then bound to defend its decision at OMB

OCA cooperates with the city in defending the legal and planning case

Everything depends on the Board Members judgement at that point, but inour view we have a very strong legal and planning case to keep Ossington

Lowrise Communities have been winning against applicants at the OMB with

increasing frequency as the Harris Board has faded out and is replaced by aMcGuinty board

Scenario B: The compromise game gets rolling Councillor tries to broker a bargain down to 5 stories

The applicant, as announced, wont budge

Either the applicant runs clock out and goes to OMB or city votes no on 6 andapplicant goes to OMB

Now city is either going to cave in to 6+ or bound to defend a weak position atOMB, having just given the nod to a second MR, at that point arguing overshades of grey rather than principles; then maybe were looking at 7 or 8


73/74

What does OCA want from the city?

OCA thinks there is an extremely strongprincipled case to be made here: Ossington isLowrise.

OCA calls on Councillor Layton to vote now,always, and only for Lowrise on the OssingtonStrip.

OCA believes that this commitment is the

keystone of creating the strongest possibleposition for the city going forward to promotethe flourishing of the Neighbourhood and itsCommercial Zones.


74/74

What does OCA pledge in return?

OCA pledges in return: To extend its full support to Councillor Layton as he

defends the Lowrise character of the Ossington Stripand works for all the constituents of Ward 19,

To engage fully and enthusiastically with theCouncillors Visioning Study and to bring together thefull Ossington Community to guarantee a moreenjoyable Ossington Strip for the Neighbourhood and

all of Toronto, And more generally to work in partnership with the

Councillor to promote the flourishing of theNeighbourhood and its Commercial Zones.

Documents

109oz in Context