August 6, 2014
North York Community Council
North York Civic Centre Main floor, 5100 Yonge St. Toronto, ON M2N 5V7
Att: Francine Adamo, Committee Clerk
Re: NY 34.80 220 McRae Drive and 327-329 Sutherland Drive: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application – Final Report
Dear Councillor Augimeri and Members of Community Council
The Leaside Property Owners’ Association provides this correspondence in strong opposition to the staff report recommendation to approve the zoning by-law amendment application for this property in its current form. The current revised ZBA application consists of an 8 unit condominium townhouse development on McRae Drive, with rear access from a private lane, and one single detached house on Sutherland Drive.
This application generated extensive opposition by residents at the community meeting: held in January 2014. The LPOA in its comments dated Feb 4th 2014 (attached) recommended that the City demand that the proposed development be substantially re- designed and down-sized, and be brought into conformity with the character of the area, and with City planning guidelines.
The current application has made minimal changes, such as the change from two semi- detached to one single detached house on Sutherland and overall density has been reduced slightly from 1.6 to 1.48 FSI. but the key concerns of the height, massing and transition have not been addressed.
- The townhouse complex is far too tall and would set another precedent for the next infill development.
- In form and massing it’s really an apartment building; not townhouses.
- The townhouse complex continues to present as 4 storeys, due to its 13m. roof height and above grade first floor, not as 3 storeys (which would be 11m.) as described by the staff report.
- It should not exceed the height of the TH development at Randolph and McRae – 3 storeys max, ground floor at grade.
- Roof top patios create privacy issues for the neighbours particularly on the north
- The single detached house on Sutherland Drive would be massive compared to the existing houses on Sutherland, yet occupies a grossly substandard lot, and ignores all transition rules to existing housing:
- Proposed FSI 86%; permitted FSI 45%
- Proposed lot coverage 47%; permitted lot coverage 35%
- Non compliance with existing Leaside zoning by-law for front and rear yard setbacks, and height.
The LPOA requests that
- the North York Community Council recommend to City Council that the ZBA including proposed lot plan be refused.
The LPOA appreciates your consideration of our comments. Yours truly,
For Geoff Kettel and Carol Burtin-Fripp
Attachment: LPOA comments Feb 4 2014
c.c. Allen Appleby, Director, Community Planning, North York District