|
That, on the recommendation of the Managing
Director, Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with
respect to the application of Rygar Corporation Inc., relating to the
properties located at 100 Fullarton Street and 475 Talbot Street:
a) the
proposed by-law, as appended to the revised staff report dated February 18,
2014, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on February
25, 2014, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official
Plan), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Downtown Area
(DA2) Zone, which permits a wide range of office, commercial, retail,
residential and institutional uses and a Holding Downtown Area (h-3•DA2•D350)
Zone, which permits a wide range of office, commercial, retail and
institutional uses, a range of residential uses up to a maximum density of
350 units per hectare, with a holding provision requiring the completion of a
wind impact assessment to ensure development over 15.0 metres will not have
an adverse impact on pedestrian level wind conditions in the Downtown prior
to the removal of the holding provision TO a Downtown Area Bonus
(DA1•D350•B(_)) Zone, to permit a wide range of office, commercial, retail and
institutional uses and a range of residential uses including apartment
buildings at the same height and density as the existing zone, with a bonus
zone which will facilitate a development design which includes a 33-storey
(108.15 metre tall) mixed-use apartment building, with a podium base
accommodating commercial/retail space on the ground floor and a mix of
structured parking, residential, and/or office space above the ground floor,
which shall be implemented through a development agreement in return for the
provision of the following services, facilities and matters:
i)
a
point-tower building
design which, with
minor variations at the City’s discretion, (such variations may include the
extension of the podium northward), matches the Site Plan, Elevations, Sections
and Renderings as
appended to the revised staff report dated February 18, 2014 as
Schedule “1”, and
includes an architecturally differentiated base, middle and top with:
A)
the
base consisting of the portion of the façades between the ground floor and
the top of the 6th floor with a maximum height of six (6) storeys, positioned
at the front and exterior lot lines at the corner of Talbot Street and
Fullarton Street, incorporating architectural detail which creates a
prominence on the Talbot/Fullarton Street corner, including retail uses at
street level abutting the Fullarton and Talbot Street frontages, with a
minimum ceiling height of 3.6 metres and transparent glazing of at least 2.5
metres in height, for 60% or more of the frontages, with entrances to each
retail unit provided, where possible, directly to the street, flush with the
sidewalk grade, including permanent canopies or architectural elements
projecting above pedestrian entrances at street level and a mix of structured
parking, residential, and/or office space above the ground floor with any
above-grade structured parking being screened with a variation in materials
and colours;
B)
the
middle portion consisting of the portion of the façades between the top of
the base and the top of the 32nd floor clad primarily in glass window-wall
panels and employing balcony design which creates articulation and variation
in the facades, includes variation in the massing of the tower through
building step-backs with a combination of vegetated green roof and outdoor
amenity space incorporated into the building step-backs and terraces; and,
C)
the
top consisting of the portion of the façades above the top of the 32nd floor,
employing building step-backs on the 33rd floor to provide for outdoor
terraces, employing further step-backs above the 33rd floor to articulate the
top of the building, using attractive materials and architectural design to
screen all mechanical elements located above the 33rd floor, using
high-quality building materials and incorporating decorative lighting
elements to create an aesthetically pleasing cap;
ii)
two
(2) levels of below grade parking (minimum 65 spaces);
iii)
locating
waste and recycling facilities within the proposed building screened from
views of adjacent properties;
iv)
providing
barrier-free access to all floors (to the extent feasible to facilitate
access and use); and,
v)
the
provision of public art;
b) the
Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to implement the
design features recommended in part a), above, through the Site Plan approval
process, as well as consider, where possible:
i) additional
screening of the receiving/moving/garbage truck bays from the Talbot Street
sidewalk;
ii) landscaped
screening west of the six (6) northern most surface parking spaces;
iii) a
modified design for the fenestration in the vertical strip which extends
along the tower portion of the building on the north and west elevations to
provide for a more aesthetically pleasing contribution to the skyline; and,
iv) the
use of glazed accent windows in place of or in addition to the aluminium
panel slot detailing on parking garage facades to provide an opportunity for
breaking up the façade (especially at the corner) and animating the façade at
night;
c) pursuant
to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act, as determined by the Municipal
Council, no further notice BE GIVEN in respect of the proposed by-law as the
amendments are minor in nature;
it being noted that the Planning and
Environment Committee reviewed and received a communication from the
residents of 500 Talbot Street with respect to this matter;
it being pointed out that at the public
participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals
made oral submissions in connection therewith:
·
A.R.
Patton, Patton Cormier and Associates, on behalf of the applicant –
expressing appreciation to the Civic Administration for their efforts;
expressing support for the recommendation; indicating that the façade of the
Talbot Street streetscape, they are not trying to replicate something that
was not there; noting that it was a parking lot and before that it was an
auto glass repair shop; indicating that the height of 110 metres relates to
the smaller floor plates, the density and the increase in the number of
units; noting that they are inter-related; advising that the message really
is that this is a well thought out design for this building; advising that
the Ontario Building Code has been amended with new structural requirements
for glass; and advising that there are no variances required for the DA1
Zone; noting that they have sought a change from the DA2 Zone for both height
and density.
·
Sal
Vitiello, Richmond Architects – indicating that his firm has been practicing
doing high rise residential, primarily, for the last 25 years; noting that
the firm has been going since 1931; advising that they have employed lessons
that they learned from doing buildings on smaller sites in the City of
Toronto and other cities in Ontario; indicating that they have learned that
the building does have to be broken down into three elements, as Mr. Davis
mentioned in his presentation; indicating that they have also found that some
of the building sizes that were shown, in the earlier slides, show larger
buildings most likely with larger units that are not what they call a point
tower design; indicating that point tower designs are generally found in
Vancouver, Toronto and other cities and are listed at around 750 metres in
size; indicating that the reason for this is that they would rather go up in
height and limit the amount of sky that they actually block and the amount of
shadow that is produced; advising that the idea is to move that shadow
through the adjacent properties by no more than a few hours so that the
shadow moves completely over the properties and allows the most amount of
sunlight as possible; outlining that, as mentioned by Mr. Davis, the site is
bounded by Talbot Street on the right of the slide and Fullarton Street is on
the south side of the slide in his presentation; advising that, on the north
end of the site, they have tried to put all of the service lanes into the
building to keep all of the garbage, shipping and receiving, for the
commercial and the office spaces, as well as the residential spaces, to the
rear of the building where it is out of the way and quiet in the
neighbourhood; indicating that the basement levels are for parking and
bicycle storage with some other storage spaces that they will have for
lockers; indicating that there are two levels of basement in this particular
project and they have geotechnical reports that show that it does support the
two levels of underground; advising that, on the ground floor, the yellow
section in the middle, shows the residential lobby; advising that there are
three distinctive commercial retail spaces and, at the rear of the building,
you will see the ramps and loading bays (in blue); indicating that there is a
truck turnaround that is cut into the rear of the building that is high
enough for the trucks to pick up and leave the site without bothering the
balance of the neighbourhood; advising that the second floor is serviced by a
ramp up from the next loading area and is parking; reiterating that floors
two to six are parking, the seventh floor is office space that has access to
a terraced area, the eighth floor is amenity space (in blue) for the building
and accesses the roof and the seventh floor terraced landscaped deck;
advising that there are approximately ten units per floor; indicating that
the units vary in sizes from over 1,000 square feet; noting that they can
join units together to combine one bedroom and two bedroom units into three
bedroom units, if required; indicating that the residential is aimed at a
higher end condominium use; noting that it is not meant to be for rental;
advising that the upper floors step back so that it gives them the top of the
building; indicating that this section shows the residential in the gold
colour, the blue is the parking levels (from 2 to 6), and the brownish-purple
layer is the office space with the residential above it in the blue; pointing
out that there are two blue levels down below and then there is a grey area
that is the commercial space, retail space on the ground floor (which is two
storeys in height); advising that they were at the urban design review panel
a short while ago and some of the comments, in particular, were to break the
elevations down a little bit further; noting that they have done so and, as a
result, there is a slight change in the renderings that were shown earlier;
noting that his presentation incorporates some of the changes that the urban
design peer review panel gave them; advising that they think that this
improves the building, gives it a very distinctive look; advising that the
materials at the base of the building are metal panels and the darker,
thicker pieces are pre-cast panels; noting that it is mostly a glass building
with some pre-cast; and, advising that the parking garage is treated with
some architectural decorative elements so that it does not look like a
parking garage. (see attached presentation).
·
S.
Farhi, Farhi Holdings Corporation – expressing support for the proposed
development; and indicating that more development like this is more than
welcome.
·
Dave
Nuttall, 500 Talbot Street – indicating that the residents of 500 Talbot
Street have submitted a communication to the Planner; requesting
clarification on three or four issues; indicating that the first issue is
that the applicant is requesting to rezone this property from a DA2 Zone to a
DA1 Zone and the applicant requires variances; advising that there is nothing
that you need a variance for in DA2 Zone that you cannot get in a DA1 Zone,
with the exception of landscaping; noting that landscaping for a DA2 Zone is
5% of the area of the lot and landscaping for a DA1 Zone is zero; advising
that he has looked at the site plan and it looks like they have open space at
the back; advising that he does not really see why they need to go from a DA2
Zone to a DA1 Zone for a 5% variance in landscaping; suggesting that the
applicant be given the variances that they are asking for, the height that
they are asking for, the density that they are asking for and the setbacks
that they are asking for but keep the zoning as DA2; indicating that the
residents at 500 Talbot Street are worried about is that they do not want
what is happening on Dundas Street to happen in their neighbourhood; advising
that the residents at 500 Talbot Street are the only people in the area that
own units; noting that the majority of the units in the area are rentals;
indicating that he thought that the applicants wanted to have landscaping out
front, with coverage; expressing surprise that they are parachuting a DA1
Zone right across the street from them in the middle of all of this DA2
zoning; expressing concern that if that happens, the DA1 zoning is going to
spread and the whole area is going to turn into DA1 Zone; indicating that,
outside of the landscaped coverage of 5%, for open space, they can accomplish
the same amendments to the DA2 Zone that they are trying to get into the DA1
Zone; advising that their second concern relates to the density; advising
that the list of buildings that staff quoted in their report, like the
Renaissance Centre and the Harriston, their math is a little out; believing the
Renaissance Centre does not have 600 units; advising that there are only 199
in the second building that they built, which means that they are trying to
say that there are 400 units in the first building; using that as a guide,
and coming back on the premise that these folks are building smaller units,
they can live with an increase in the density such as a 50% increase over 700
units per hectare; enquiring as to whether or not they are getting this just
because they asked; enquiring as to how staff came up with that number;
enquiring as to whether or not there a logical mathematical formula and if
they are following other examples, then the density should not increase 1,000
per unit; advising that his last question relates to clarification on the
height of the building; indicating that, in the Downtown, the only project
that has asked for a 110 metre height, to the best of his knowledge, is One
London Place; advising that he believes that Sifton Properties Limited and
London Life could have gone wall to wall with their building, but they did
not do that because they squished it in and they have a nice open concept
area; believing that they asked for another 20 metres, which would be a fair
way to look at it instead of just coming in and saying well it’s 90 metres,
can I have 110 metres; advising that the residents of 500 Talbot Street are
looking for some type of a reasoning why the 110 metres is allowed because if
you look at the plan shown on the screen, the building is wall to wall, from
Fullarton Street to Talbot Street; indicating that they are pretty much 100%
without any setbacks; noting that Gene Drewlo got 95 metres, an increase in 5
metres of height, on his project on Dundas Street and Waterloo Street;
indicating that probably his argument would be to come in and this is what is
happening to a lot of buildings here; advising that, in Downtown London you
can only go down one or two storeys; noting that if you go any further down
than that and you are hitting water, you are not building; realizing that it
is forcing these guys to put the parking above the first floor; indicating
that, for that reason, you can see them asking for an increase in height;
advising that you can ask them why the 19 metres; indicating that his last
question relates to the Official Plan; noting that he believed that it would
require an Official Plan Amendment, but he was advised by Staff that it would
not require an Amendment to go from DA2 Zone to DA1 Zone; noting that his
other comments have been answered by the submissions; indicating that another
concern is with the glass falling off these buildings and expressing concern
that the same thing is going to happen on this once you get up to a certain
height; noting that the bulk of that glass is coming from the balconies because
of the wind movements up there and it creates voids and vacuums and it sucks
out this glass; noting that the glass does not fall off on its own, it is the
wind doing it; recommending that the wind study will take this into account;
noting that this is an all glass façade building; advising that the building
design has been changed quite a bit, there are new materials running down the
sides of the building; enquiring as to the purpose of the residential units;
indicating that he believes that the units are to be condos for sale;
advising that the residents of 500 Talbot Street are curious as to whether
the units are going to be student housing, regular rental or home ownership;
advising that they have approximately 40 signatures on a petition; advising that
they are in favour of something going in at that location; advising that some
of the residents have complained that it is going to block their view; and,
realizing that there are two or three more vacant lots there and when they
build those, that will block the view further.
·
Oliver
Hobson, 45 Evergreen Avenue – enquiring as to whether or not there is going
to be any effort made to maintain a consistency of view on the Talbot
streetscape; indicating that, many years ago, where the Harriston is now, was
484 Ridout Street and the bonusing was used during that process to put a
façade around in in respect of Eldon House and further up the street there;
advising that there are two corner blocks that are gone on Talbot Street;
noting that this is one of them; reiterating that the other one was mentioned
earlier on; advising that if it can be re-established, maybe we can maintain
a consistency of view there; indicating that this appears to be in London’s
legal district, on the way to the court house; and, hoping that there is a
way that that can be worked in. (2014-D14A)
|