RECOMMENDATION:
That
a Public Meeting be held to consider the applications submitted by Kylemore
Homes for Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of
Subdivision to permit 47 Condominium Townhouses, 17 Freehold Townhouses, 6
Single Detached dwellings and a Commercial Block on the north side of 16th
Avenue, west of Kennedy Road.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report
is to update Committee on the status of these applications and recommend that a
Public Meeting be scheduled to obtain public comments on the proposed
applications.
BACKGROUND:
Property and Area Context
The 4.5
hectare (11.1 ac) property is located on the north side of 16th Avenue,
west of Kennedy Road (Figure 2). The property contains a two storey single
detached dwelling located on the south western portion of the property, to be
retained. The remainder of the property
is undeveloped and is currently vacant.
The site
generally slopes gently down from the northeast to the southwest towards the Bruce Creek in the west. The south west portion of the site is located
within and impacted by the Regional Flood Line as established by the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority.
The Bruce Creek and lands owned by the
York Downs Golf Course adjoin the property to the west and north, the Unionville Montessori School and a Bell Canada utility
building adjoin the property to the east, and single detached dwellings are
located to the south, across 16th Avenue.
Official Plan designation
The
subject lands are designated Agriculture (A1) and Hazard Lands with an overlay of Future
Urban Area in the Official Plan. The
Future Urban Area overlay, established by OPA 5 as adopted in 1993, means the
lands are intended for future urban development.
The
Official Plan provides that urban development of lands in the Future Urban Area
shall only be permitted following technical studies relating to sewer and water
servicing, sub-watershed management, transportation and development charges
schedules. In addition, prior to any
development on lands designated Future Urban Area, a Secondary Plan is to be
prepared, approved and incorporated into the Town’s Official Plan.
Existing zoning
The
lands are zoned Rural Residential Four (RR4) and Open Space One (O1) by By-law
304-87.
Proposal for condominium townhouses, freehold
townhouses and single detached dwellings and a commercial block
The
applicant is requesting an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and
approval of a Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit 67 condominium townhouses, 17
freehold townhouses and 6 single detached dwellings (including the existing
dwelling), a 0.58 ha (1.4 ac.) commercial block, a 0.05 ha (0.13 ac) parkette,
and 0.47 ha (1.2 ac.) of buffer/valley lands (Figure 4 and 5). The applicant indicates that the proposed
development is to be marketed as an adult lifestyle community and targeted
towards empty nesters. The existing
dwelling is not of heritage significance, however, the applicant proposes to
retain the existing dwelling, to be incorporated as a lot the draft plan of
subdivision.
March 2003, Development Services Report
refers applications back to staff
In March
2003, staff forwarded a preliminary report to Development Services recommending
that the applications be referred back to staff for further discussion with the
applicant, and other property owners in the area, on the need for a
comprehensive review of the future pattern of development in the Future Urban
Area north of 16th Avenue and west of Kennedy Road. A community information meeting was held on January 28, 2004.
Proposal revised in
attempt to resolve staff’s concerns as outlined in the March 2003 Development
Services report
The applicant met with staff
on a number of occasions for consultation on the Town’s concerns. The applicant’s most recent concept
represents an improvement on the original submission, but further refinements
are still required. The revised
proposal (Figure 4) incorporates a 0.19
ha (0.46 ac) parkette at the northwest corner of Street ‘A’ and 16th
Avenue and a 0.66 ha (1.6 ac) parkette and possible tot lot (Figure 5) on the
west side of Street ‘A’ north of 16th Avenue. The proposal deletes 3 blocks of townhouses
and replaces them with 8 single detached dwellings fronting onto Street
‘A’. The Discussion section of this
report provides a brief summary of concerns/issues raised by staff in the preliminary
report, discussed in relation to the revised proposal.
DISCUSSION:
Secondary Plan required
for development of Future Urban Area
The Town’s Official Plan requires the preparation of a Secondary Plan
prior to proceeding with any development of the subject lands. Although designated with a Future Urban Area
overlay in the Official Plan, the property is part of an area on the west side
of Kennedy Road, south the Angus Glen
community, not currently covered by a Secondary Plan.
The requirement for a Secondary Plan is to ensure that any development
within a ‘Future Urban Area’ is dealt with in a comprehensive manner based on
overall district studies and technical analysis having regard to options for
the future development of all surrounding lands.
The Unionville Montessori School, adjacent to
the east of the Kylemore property is also within the Future Urban Area overlay
and also subject to the same requirements of the Official Plan.
The owners of the Montessori School, along with
the owners of the York Downs Golf Course to the north and the previous owners
of the Kylemore property (Deacons) to the west, previously developed a
concept/illustrative plan outlining a possible future development
scenario. The concept plan was
considered by Council as the basis for approving the new Montessori school, but
has no official status. It was developed
for illustrative purposes only, to demonstrate that approval of the Montessori School development
would not prejudice or limit options for a future Secondary Plan exercise.
Kylemore Homes has not provided staff a Secondary Plan or technical
studies as required by the Official Plan, but they have provided staff with
various concept plans. However, the
concept plans do not fully address the concerns outlined in the March 2003
report with respect to backlotting onto the valley lands, provision of a
parkette of adequate size, deletion of through lots and provision of the
extension of the east-west road on the Montessori site. A revised proposal submitted by the applicant
does further address the parkette issue.
East/West road required as
a condition of approval of the Unionville Montessori School
As a condition of approval, the Unionville Montessori School was required
to convey a strip of land, along their north property limit, to the Town for
future public road purposes. The width
of the strip of land is equal to one half of a future road allowance (8.5
m/27.8 ft). The future road link to Kennedy Road would ensure
adequate access for the school and the surrounding lands. Access options for all of the surrounding
lands are enhanced by the proposed connection to Kennedy Road. However, the current proposal by Kylemore
does not include an extension of this proposed road. Exclusion of this road extension would limit
access options for the remainder of the lands in the area, in particular the
properties now fronting onto Kennedy Road.
Kylemore Home’s concepts provide an east/west road further north of the
subject property. The applicant’s
contend that the provision of the road further north, allows for it to be
aligned with the conceptual road pattern to the east, across Kennedy Road in the Breczy
Community and therefore, would make the east/west road along the north limit of
the Unionville Montessori School
redundant. However, the lands required
for the east/west road proposed by the applicant are not owned by the Town or
the applicant. If the applicant’s road
proposal is accepted, lands to complete this road could only be acquired at a
future date.
Kennedy
Road
property owners are concerned about future development of their lands
Property owners along the west side Kennedy Road (9332 to 9392
Kennedy Road) expressed an interest,
at the January 28, 2004 information
meeting, in a possible land assembly that would combine their lands with the
subject lands. They commented that the
Kylemore proposal could inhibit their ability to redevelop their properties,
should internal access arrangements not be addressed.
Proposed plan does not
have a water allocation or sanitary sewer capacity
The proposed plan of subdivision does not have a water allocation or
sanitary sewer capacity. Any future
draft approval can not be recommended until there is an assignment of water
allocation and sewer capacity for this proposed plan.
Residents to south
expressed concerns at Community Information meeting
On January 28, 2004, a Community
Information meeting was held in the Council Chambers. Area residents to the south expressed concern
regarding future traffic generated from the proposal. Residents also noted that they are presently
encountering difficulty turning out of their subdivision onto 16th
Avenue (from Aitken Circle) due to
traffic volumes on 16th Avenue.
The residents requested that the applicant’s traffic study should
encompass a larger study area (i.e. also include potential/future traffic
generated from the development of the northeast corner of 16th
Avenue and Kennedy Road). The Region of York has jurisdiction over the 16th
Avenue access.
The submitted traffic study will be reviewed by the Region in conjunction
with the Town’s Engineering Department.
Proposed connection to 16th Avenue does not align with road to the south
The applicant’s revised proposal provides a connection to 16th
Avenue (Street ‘A’) which is offset from the
existing street to the south across 16th
Avenue (Aitken Circle) and is
located approximately 260 metres west of the intersection of Kennedy Road and 16th
Avenue.
Town standards typically require streets to be aligned in order to
provide safe turning movements and proper sight lines. However, the Region of York has jurisdiction
over 16th Ave, and would not permit a signalized intersection less
than the 260 metres from the Kennedy Road and 16th
Avenue intersection. The applicant’s traffic engineer indicates
that the introduction of a traffic signal at Street A (approximately 260 metres
west of Kennedy Road) should help vehicle turning movements into and out of
Aiken Circle. The new signal will
provide additional gaps for longer periods of time to minimize the delay for
vehicles using Aitken Circle.
Street ‘A’ on the plan, 260 m from Kennedy Road, is in close
proximity to the valley edge. Town staff
recommended a single loaded road, aligning Street ‘A’ with the valley corridor,
to avoid backlotting onto the valley.
The applicant’s concept plans continue to indicate Street ‘A’ offset
from the valley allowing backlotting.
The applicant’s concept could be revised to align Street ‘A’ with the
valley corridor by relocating street ‘A’ and the access to 16th
Avenue further west (Figure 7), or by shifting the alignment of street ‘A’
within the plan, north of 16th Ave..
Appropriateness of commercial development to be assessed
Staff have indicated that the appropriateness of the commercial
development, and a possible range of commercial uses, has yet to be
assessed. The proposal requires a
detailed review to assess the relationship of the proposed commercial and
residential uses in an area context.
Area residents also expressed concern with certain potential uses in the
commercial block. For example, the
residents would not be in favour of drive through restaurants. To date, staff have not received a conceptual
site plan for the commercial site or a list of proposed uses.
Subdivision design
concerns
Concerns expressed by the Town’s Planning & Design staff include:
-
plan needs to be reviewed on a comprehensive basis
with other properties in the area
-
the size and usability of the parkette
-
relationship of the road and lotting to the valley
lands
-
the relationship and setback of the condo
townhouses on the east property line to the Montessori school and the
residential properties to the north fronting onto Kennedy Road.
-
proposal does not provide for an extension of the
access road from Kennedy Road through the
Montessori school site; there is a need to confirm appropriate location of east
west road in consultation with area landowners.
While Town staff acknowledge that
the applicant has worked with the Town and provided various concepts (Figures 8
– 11) and revisions to their plan, the applicant and Committee are advised that
staff are of the opinion that the proposal does not address all the concerns
identified in the March 2003 report.
Attached as Figure 7 is a concept drafted by Town staff showing
alternative design principles.
Sanitary sewer easement extends through rear yards
An existing sanitary sewer easement
extends through the rear yards of the easterly condominium blocks. Any future servicing of the sewer would
require a disruption to these blocks.
This must be considered in relation to the pattern of development.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
There are no financial matters to
be considered in this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:
The applications have been circulated to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Their comments and conditions will be
incorporated into the Official Plan amendment, Zoning By-law and draft
conditions.
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:
The application has been circulated
to Town Departments for review and comments.
All conditions and requirements received will be addressed and
incorporated in the recommendation report.
CONCLUSION:
The issues and concerns raised in the March
2003 report and further detailed in this report were intended to be resolved
and addressed prior to a Public Meeting being called. While the applicant has provided area
concepts and revised the proposal, many
of the issues are not fully resolved.
However, it would be appropriate for Committee to schedule a Public
Meeting to receive public input on the proposal at this time.
The staff concerns and possible alternative
design principles will be addressed in a recommendation report following the
public meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
Valerie Shuttleworth, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.
Director of Planning & Urban Design
|
|
Jim
Baird, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.
Commissioner of Development Services
|
DOCUMENT #: Q:\Development\Planning\APPL\ZONING\03
119739 Kylemore Homes\Sept21report.doc
ATTACHMENTS: Figure 1 –
Applicant/Agent and Location Map
Figure
2 – Area Context and Zoning
Figure
3 – Air Photo
Figure
4 – Proposed Draft Plan
Figure
5 – Parks Configuration
Figure
6 – Future Urban Area Boundaries
Figure
7 – Town’s Concept
Figure
8 – Applicant’s Concept No. 1
Figure
9 – Applicant’s Concept No. 2
Figure
10 – Applicant’s Concept No. 3
Figure
11 – Applicant’s Concept No. 4
APPLICANT/AGENT: Angus Glen
Development Ltd
Attn: Michael Montgomery
10060
Kennedy Road
Markham,
ON
L6C
1N9
Tel: (905) 887-0090
Fax: (905) 887-5197
