PUBLIC MEETING: THE FUTURE OF QUEEN STREET
Please come out to this important public meeting:
TUESDAY OCTOBER 23rd, 7:30 PM
KEW BEACH SCHOOL, 101 KIPPENDAVIE AVE
The Issue: Should Toronto & East York Community Council (TEYCC) approve, defeat or defer a new set of Urban Design Guidelines based on the recent Queen Street East Visioning Study?
We have invited Councillor McMahon to attend. No other major public meeting is currently scheduled prior to the November 6th TEYCC meeting at which Council will vote on this matter. Please join us and have your voice heard.
The City Planning Department have made their views clear during the Queen Street East Visioning Study; their final draft of the Urban Design Guidelines would permit 6+ storey buildings to be built on Queen Street East with essentially no limitation on density.
We would like Council to direct City Planning to use the existing Beach Urban Design Guidelines. Did you know that previous Councils had passed motions and implemented policies and guidelines that specifically limit buildings on Queen Street East to "3 storeys or the appearance of 3 storeys"? We are alarmed and extremely concerned that City staff are not enforcing policies passed by Council in the past -- even though the current council has never formally repealed these past policies and motions.
There are many other concerns about the proposed guidelines:
1. The Official Plan specifically requires a full "Avenues Study" to be done before intensification (i.e. increasing density) occurs, yet such a study has never been done. Such studies look at the impacts of development and intensification on all types of physical infrastructure -- traffic, transit, sanitary and storm sewers, parking, etc., as well social infrastructure such as school capacity, daycare and seniors' facilities.
2. There is no explicit mandate in the Official Plan that requires any intensification on Queen Street East. Several requests to City Planning to cite the applicable passage(s) have gone unanswered.
3. We believe there are other ways to restrict development on Queen, and that Council has not given these sufficient consideration. One way would be to reinstate the previous Secondary Plan - which City Planning removed in 2002 without public consultation. Council can put the zoning rules directly into the Official Plan, as was done in 1987, and revert to the previous guidelines as well, with minimal changes -- what former Acting Chief Planner Gregg Lintern called a "refresh".
4. The proposed guidelines should not be considered an improvement because the "balance" is too far towards intensification in our community, which is already over-stressed in terms of traffic, transit, sanitary and storm sewers, parking and school capacity.
5. At the three public meetings held during the Visioning Study, attendance was poor, likely because most of the meetings were held during the summer, and the meetings were not well publicized.
6. There is an Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) appeal scheduled to be heard in a few months time, for the recently approved re-zoning of 1960-1962 Queen Street East, the current location of "Lick's". We believe that this re-zoning was approved without the proper consideration of the current Urban Design Guidelines; passing new guidelines prior to that hearing could improperly impact the appeal.
If you cannot attend, please email Councillor McMahon at councillor_mcmahon@toronto.ca (and please BCC SaveQueenStreet@gmail.com), or call her office at 416-392-1376, with your comments and let her know the proposed guidelines are unacceptable and should not be passed until the OMB Appeal for Lick's (1960 Queen) has been heard; ask her to defer the vote until at least the next TEYCC Meeting after November.
TUESDAY OCTOBER 23rd, 7:30 PM
KEW BEACH SCHOOL, 101 KIPPENDAVIE AVE
The Issue: Should Toronto & East York Community Council (TEYCC) approve, defeat or defer a new set of Urban Design Guidelines based on the recent Queen Street East Visioning Study?
We have invited Councillor McMahon to attend. No other major public meeting is currently scheduled prior to the November 6th TEYCC meeting at which Council will vote on this matter. Please join us and have your voice heard.
The City Planning Department have made their views clear during the Queen Street East Visioning Study; their final draft of the Urban Design Guidelines would permit 6+ storey buildings to be built on Queen Street East with essentially no limitation on density.
We would like Council to direct City Planning to use the existing Beach Urban Design Guidelines. Did you know that previous Councils had passed motions and implemented policies and guidelines that specifically limit buildings on Queen Street East to "3 storeys or the appearance of 3 storeys"? We are alarmed and extremely concerned that City staff are not enforcing policies passed by Council in the past -- even though the current council has never formally repealed these past policies and motions.
There are many other concerns about the proposed guidelines:
1. The Official Plan specifically requires a full "Avenues Study" to be done before intensification (i.e. increasing density) occurs, yet such a study has never been done. Such studies look at the impacts of development and intensification on all types of physical infrastructure -- traffic, transit, sanitary and storm sewers, parking, etc., as well social infrastructure such as school capacity, daycare and seniors' facilities.
2. There is no explicit mandate in the Official Plan that requires any intensification on Queen Street East. Several requests to City Planning to cite the applicable passage(s) have gone unanswered.
3. We believe there are other ways to restrict development on Queen, and that Council has not given these sufficient consideration. One way would be to reinstate the previous Secondary Plan - which City Planning removed in 2002 without public consultation. Council can put the zoning rules directly into the Official Plan, as was done in 1987, and revert to the previous guidelines as well, with minimal changes -- what former Acting Chief Planner Gregg Lintern called a "refresh".
4. The proposed guidelines should not be considered an improvement because the "balance" is too far towards intensification in our community, which is already over-stressed in terms of traffic, transit, sanitary and storm sewers, parking and school capacity.
5. At the three public meetings held during the Visioning Study, attendance was poor, likely because most of the meetings were held during the summer, and the meetings were not well publicized.
6. There is an Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) appeal scheduled to be heard in a few months time, for the recently approved re-zoning of 1960-1962 Queen Street East, the current location of "Lick's". We believe that this re-zoning was approved without the proper consideration of the current Urban Design Guidelines; passing new guidelines prior to that hearing could improperly impact the appeal.
If you cannot attend, please email Councillor McMahon at councillor_mcmahon@toronto.ca (and please BCC SaveQueenStreet@gmail.com), or call her office at 416-392-1376, with your comments and let her know the proposed guidelines are unacceptable and should not be passed until the OMB Appeal for Lick's (1960 Queen) has been heard; ask her to defer the vote until at least the next TEYCC Meeting after November.
Visioning Study - Public Meeting Announced!
Please go to www.SaveQueenStreet.com to find out about a public meeting regarding the Visioning study.
The meeting will be held on October 23rd!
New Residents Group Forming
There is a need for a residents group that is able to properly carry on the fight for protecting our community - a group which covers all of The Beach, and ONLY The Beach.
Please go to www.beachresidents.ca for more commentary and information on issues related to Queen Street and planning issues in The Beach, and to find out how you can get involved in this new group.
Please go to www.beachresidents.ca for more commentary and information on issues related to Queen Street and planning issues in The Beach, and to find out how you can get involved in this new group.
Visioning Study To Do List: Call Every TEYCC Councillor!
The visioning Study comes to TEYCC on Nevember 6th - but the OMB Appeal on Lick's starts the 12th of November.
We need to contact every TEYCC Councillor about the Visioning Study - will you help us
Click HERE for a list of every TEYCC Councillor - all 12 of them.
We need people to pick up the phone and call all 12!
The message: Anything but a "Yes Vote!" on the Visioning Study. We want a deferral or a vote "No" against this Visioning Study unless substantial changes are made.
We need to contact every TEYCC Councillor about the Visioning Study - will you help us
Click HERE for a list of every TEYCC Councillor - all 12 of them.
We need people to pick up the phone and call all 12!
The message: Anything but a "Yes Vote!" on the Visioning Study. We want a deferral or a vote "No" against this Visioning Study unless substantial changes are made.
Visioning Study Public Meeting - Wed. Sept 19, 6pm
Visioning Study 3rd (Final) Public Meeting,
Wed. Sept. 19, 6-9 pm.
895 EASTERN AVE. (EMS BLDG)
The current guidelines say this about the “built form” of buildings on Queen St.
“Buildings will be 3 storeys in height and/or be perceived as 3 storeys.”
WE NEED TO KEEP THIS WORDING IN THE NEW GUIDELINES!
More height and density will also mean more traffic, worse TTC service, more parking problems and more basement flooding.
The image to the left comes from the planning department - it shows how the built form and angular planes can be respected by using something other than the standard Avenues & Midrise Guidelines.
The comment the planners made was that itis "unrealisitc" - but that is only true if you accept that increasing density is more important than anything else.
The website for the Visioning Study can be found at http://www.toronto.ca/planning/queen-study.htm -
The drawings came from this document HERE
Please support Queen Street and the efforts of The Beach Residents Association of Toronto
www.beachresidents.ca or email us at beachresidents@gmail.com
Please note that generally, I have not been updating this site but have been updating www.beachresidents.ca instead for the Beach Residents Association of Toronto - please go there for more current information on the OMB Appeal and about the Visioning Study.
You can also go to the Links page and contact other groups in the community to get their views on the Visioning Study.
Visioning Study - 1st Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting Held on July 16th
There are about 41 people who are local professionals, representatives of the community, property owners or otherwise deemed worthy who sit on th eStakeholder Advisory Committee for the Visioning Study.
The meeting is obviously more biased towards development than one where the public at large can participate. However the meetings are useful and we look forward to the next one.
The image to the left is taken from a series of possible alternatives for Queen shown in an handout - this one is the planning department's representation of the Midrise Guidelines - this is not what the local residents want and this has clearly been expressed at various meeting going back over a year!
1960-1962 Queen East - OMB Appeals have been filed
The official notices were sent out by City Council - the key thing to note was that an OMB Appeal had to be in by July 10th and so no new appeals can be accepted.
There were 2 separate documents sent out by the city - I have scanned both of them into one PDF available HERE
In response The Beach Residents Assocation of Toronto filed an appeal, and the owners of the neighbouring property also filed an appeal.
Report on the "OMB? Or Not OMB? Meeting" of June 19th
The kickoff meeting for "Beach Residents Association" at St. Louis Bar on June 19th on Queen was successful - attendance was good and included many new people, as well as many familiar faces.
The main topic was the OMB, but also included the Visioning Study, the Harmonised Bylaw and the need for ongoing, Beach wide residents groups similar to Don Mills Residents Inc. and the Annex Residents Association.
MPP Michael Prue spoke briefly and is in support of this effort. Terry Mills, a noted planner involved in the Yonge Eglinton area, also provided some additional comments and expertise.
The outcome of the meeting was that it makes sense to spend the $125 to launch the appeal. This will require incorporation. (The "Friends of Queen Street" name could still be used for this effort - a new name seemed easier for the time being)
It will not be an easy fight. But even so, many of the people signed up to be part of the group, and we started selling memberships at $20 each in order to raise money for the appeal and for incorporation.
There are several teams that are being organised, namely:
1. A team to serve as the board members of the non-profit corporation
2. A fundraising team
3. A team to talk with planners and lawyers about the merits of the case, and to decide who to hire
4. A general team of volunteers for other planning matters (Visioning study etc.) and ongoing activities to build support for the group (website, etc.).
As for me (Brian Graff), I am working with the team to deal with planners and lawyers in building the appeal itself, while also sitting on the board. We would still like to find others willing to be the spokesperson or do the organizing and fundraising, leaving me to work on the Appeal itself.
In the long term, we need people willing to volunteer for the effort, and of course, money. Please contact me at friendsofqueenstreet@hotmail.com if you are willing to help with leading the effort, particularly for fundraising, or if you are willing to pledge money so the OMB appeal can go ahead.
The main topic was the OMB, but also included the Visioning Study, the Harmonised Bylaw and the need for ongoing, Beach wide residents groups similar to Don Mills Residents Inc. and the Annex Residents Association.
MPP Michael Prue spoke briefly and is in support of this effort. Terry Mills, a noted planner involved in the Yonge Eglinton area, also provided some additional comments and expertise.
The outcome of the meeting was that it makes sense to spend the $125 to launch the appeal. This will require incorporation. (The "Friends of Queen Street" name could still be used for this effort - a new name seemed easier for the time being)
It will not be an easy fight. But even so, many of the people signed up to be part of the group, and we started selling memberships at $20 each in order to raise money for the appeal and for incorporation.
There are several teams that are being organised, namely:
1. A team to serve as the board members of the non-profit corporation
2. A fundraising team
3. A team to talk with planners and lawyers about the merits of the case, and to decide who to hire
4. A general team of volunteers for other planning matters (Visioning study etc.) and ongoing activities to build support for the group (website, etc.).
As for me (Brian Graff), I am working with the team to deal with planners and lawyers in building the appeal itself, while also sitting on the board. We would still like to find others willing to be the spokesperson or do the organizing and fundraising, leaving me to work on the Appeal itself.
In the long term, we need people willing to volunteer for the effort, and of course, money. Please contact me at friendsofqueenstreet@hotmail.com if you are willing to help with leading the effort, particularly for fundraising, or if you are willing to pledge money so the OMB appeal can go ahead.
LCBO (1986 Queen St E) News - OMB gives go-ahead for construction.
I am just back from the OMB hearing - I was only granted "participant" status", and the adjudicator made an immediate decision at the hearing to allow the appeal, and therefore the proposed LCBO will be built. A new rendering of the facade is available HERE
The current design (still requiring Site Plan Approval from the City) had a few changes at the back that the 2 neighbouring homeowners had negotiated.
I lead the efforts on the fight at the Committee of Adjustment, and am an individual member of GBNA. Yet, the GBNA failed to keep me informed or ask my opinion about how to deal with this issue. I was sent a letter at 1:30 in the morning, hours before the hearing - The GBNA's letter is available HERE
The letter concludes "the GBNA has no further objections to the revised proposal for 1986 Queen St E." - funny but what about traffic and parking issues that we are going to get from having the mega-LCBO and Shoppers Drug Mart at a place far from any paid parking!
If nothing else, this was a learning experience - lessons learned include the need for an incorporated residents group that will take fights the OMB (unlike GBNA), the need for "experts" to be taken seriously at the OMB, and lastly some other things that I won't say here at the risk of sounding bitter.
Now available! TEYCC - The Audio Recordings!
I have posted the audio files from the TEYCC meeting on Tuesday - find them on www.beachresidents.ca - these are taken from the DVD.
The entire day's proceedings convert in 93 audio files (of 3mb to 6mb each) and run about 3 to 5 minutes - though many of these deal with other matters unrelated to Queen Street (Edgewood, for example, was heard the same day)
About 20 of these files go from my deputation (& Neil Sinclair's) through to Council's questions of staff, and then about 9-10 of the Councillors giving their speeches and rationale for their decision, and then the final recorded vote.
It would be extremely helpful to get these converted into written transcripts - please contact me at beachresidents@hotmail.com if you can help, and I can provide some pointers to make it easier! There are many FACTUAL errors in staff's comments, and in the Councillors' own comments.
This is far from over - there are still 3 important hurdles before this inappropriate building can start construction - and each one of these is yet another opportunity for the community to ask for changes, or possibly still have this proposal rejected outright.
The entire day's proceedings convert in 93 audio files (of 3mb to 6mb each) and run about 3 to 5 minutes - though many of these deal with other matters unrelated to Queen Street (Edgewood, for example, was heard the same day)
About 20 of these files go from my deputation (& Neil Sinclair's) through to Council's questions of staff, and then about 9-10 of the Councillors giving their speeches and rationale for their decision, and then the final recorded vote.
It would be extremely helpful to get these converted into written transcripts - please contact me at beachresidents@hotmail.com if you can help, and I can provide some pointers to make it easier! There are many FACTUAL errors in staff's comments, and in the Councillors' own comments.
This is far from over - there are still 3 important hurdles before this inappropriate building can start construction - and each one of these is yet another opportunity for the community to ask for changes, or possibly still have this proposal rejected outright.
1960-1962 Queen Street E: The Timeline
I have created a age that provides a more detail than what is shown below - click HERE.
Key Dates
Pre-application Community Consultations: None
Application Submitted: April 6 2011
Preliminary Report Finished and Dated: May 2 2011
Council vote on Preliminary Report: May 25 2011
Planning Department’s Community Consultation Meeting: June 13 2011
Councillor’s Public Meeting with Frank Lewinberg: Sept 8, 2011
Segment Study Submitted: Nov 18, 2011
Application Declared Complete: Nov 18, 2011
Councillor’s Public Meeting with Paul Bedford: Nov 28, 2011
Visioning Study Approved: January 10, 2012
Councillor MacMahon’s “interactive” Segment Study walk: February 25, 2012
FoQS First Public Meeting: March 15, 2011
FoQS Second Public Meeting: April 12, 2011
Final Report Finished and Dated: April 26, 2012
Councillor McMahon’s “Open House”: April 30, 2012
Final Report Released: May 3, 2012
Final Report at TEYCC: May 15, 2011
Final City Council Vote: June 6-7 2012
Deadline for OMB Appeal: July 10, 2012
(Note: The only meeting in the area with Chief Planner Gary Wright was on March 17, 2001 - and Lick's was not part of it as there was no information about it known.
Key Dates
Pre-application Community Consultations: None
Application Submitted: April 6 2011
Preliminary Report Finished and Dated: May 2 2011
Council vote on Preliminary Report: May 25 2011
Planning Department’s Community Consultation Meeting: June 13 2011
Councillor’s Public Meeting with Frank Lewinberg: Sept 8, 2011
Segment Study Submitted: Nov 18, 2011
Application Declared Complete: Nov 18, 2011
Councillor’s Public Meeting with Paul Bedford: Nov 28, 2011
Visioning Study Approved: January 10, 2012
Councillor MacMahon’s “interactive” Segment Study walk: February 25, 2012
FoQS First Public Meeting: March 15, 2011
FoQS Second Public Meeting: April 12, 2011
Final Report Finished and Dated: April 26, 2012
Councillor McMahon’s “Open House”: April 30, 2012
Final Report Released: May 3, 2012
Final Report at TEYCC: May 15, 2011
Final City Council Vote: June 6-7 2012
Deadline for OMB Appeal: July 10, 2012
(Note: The only meeting in the area with Chief Planner Gary Wright was on March 17, 2001 - and Lick's was not part of it as there was no information about it known.
Guidelines? Even the MCR zoning isn't being strictly enforced...
In the Final Report on Lick’s (1960 Queen), it appears that the planners have NOT used the Midrise Guidelines in ANY way at all, and of course they are ignoring nearly everything in the Beaches guidelines on the belief that the Official Plan REQUIRES that buildings on Queen be 6 storeys (the height = ROW width “one size fits all solution).
They are only applying the existing angular planes from the MCR zoning, and then on top of that allowing all sorts of violations of the angular plane – bending over backwards to please the developer instead of strict adherence to the rules. See HERE
The existing zoning is 12m as shown on the maps – however, the MCR zoning has 2 different front angular planes, depending on the height shown on “the Maps”
If the maps show less than 18m in height, then the front wall can only be 13m.
If the property is zoned above 18m, then the wall can be 16m – the planners have used this. However, to me it is ambiguous that the intent was that if a property was rezoned, that the idea is to automatically act as if the maps had been changed all along.
The alternative idea is to just extend the angular planes where they were for the original height.
The point is that Queen Street will still have a “willy nilly” look, in so far as that at least 3 rules for the height of a façade will be possible if this rezoning is approved:
- 12m (or less) – Any as-of-right development can be 12m or less, as there is no minimum under the current rules, only under the avenues guidelines and the Harmonised Zoning Bylaw, which had 10.5m minimum, if I recall correctly
- 13m – if an application is UNDER 18m, either through committee of adjustment or through a rezoning, then the MCR zoning calls for a 13m façade – this is what the urban designers were likely doing on the LCBO, and this would have been the rule for 2012 Queen had they wished to make the façade taller instead of having so many setbacks.
- 16m – This is what the MCR zoning allows, and what the avenues guidelines permit, but no exceptions are supposed to be allowed (except for a safety railing on the roof).
- over 16m (16m with exceptions) – this is what the planners are allowing here – the bylaw for 1960 Queen includes the table in the attached pdf.
And by moving the brick down to 3 storeys (and the bylaw they have written for this requires that tbrick not be used above the 3rd floor on the main facades), it means that the 4th storey will be ALL glass, which is a violation of the Beaches guidelines on “traditional materials”.
On the 4th floor, these are no longer “windows” but a essentially a “curtain wall” system, like a modern office building.
Note also that a bank can be the only retail tenant – this too should be removed… maybe the Fentons have one lined up.
Read the 1960-1962 Queen Street Final Report
The dreaded day arrived last week - I don't want to spoil the un-happy ending, but the report recommends this project be approved.
Click HERE - a detailed critique of the report will follow soon (like noticing how they call something like 2012 Queen a 6 storey building when they want to make it sound like the proposed building is not that different, but they would call 2012 Queen 4 storeys plus 2 mezzanines when they want it to sound small in an application!)
Click HERE - a detailed critique of the report will follow soon (like noticing how they call something like 2012 Queen a 6 storey building when they want to make it sound like the proposed building is not that different, but they would call 2012 Queen 4 storeys plus 2 mezzanines when they want it to sound small in an application!)
Save the views of the Fire Hall Clock Tower!
At the meeting on Monday, local planner Leontine Major told me that the views of the Fire Hall Clock Tower are protected. She sent me this file which shows the setbacks that are part of the existing zoning - see HERE. However, if someone applies for a rezoning, then of course they might ignore this or it might not be enforced.
In any case, it does protect views of the whole building to people walking nearby, but the views of the clock tower from a distance will be obliterated if anything taller than 12m is built, particularly on the south part of 1884 Queen Street -the gas station site.
Gregg Lintern, acting Chief Planner, was shown on Global TV saying that there are only "one or two" likely development sites in our area on Queen - despite the fact that the Avenue Segment Study identified 4 and I also identified 1919-1925 Queen Street (childhood home of Norman Jewison, above the corner store) as a 5th site. The consultant said it cannot be developed as it is "only" 32m deep - but I will leave this debate to another time other than to say that as a site gets shorter, it just means that a 6th floor becomes less viable - yet 747 Queen was built with only 12 units!
The important thing is to see the analysis I have done of the views of the Fire Hall and how insufficient the current setbacks are in protecting other than views from just east of Woodbine. See the analysis HERE.
The height of the Fire Hall is shown in this file HERE while the heights at 12m, 16m, and 20m of development on both north-west and north-east corned of Queen and Woodbine are HERE and HERE
Something to do: Call the Mayor's Radio Show Sunday Afternoon
Whether you are a supporter of the Mayor or disagree with him, he is known for taking phone calls from citizens, and taking action when citizens make requests that he feels are reasonable.
E-mail: mayor_ford@toronto.ca
Phone: 416-397-FORD (3673)
IMPORTANT: You can also call him on his radio show – its on 1010 on the AM dial, Sunday from 1pm to 3pm – he takes calls - typically in the last 10-15 minutes of the show! The number is 416-872-1010
Regardless of how you contact him, tell him what you think on this and related issues – just do not try to sound like a “nimby” or completely anti-development!
There have been numerous condos built here already, and more will be built even if all rezonings are refused…. BUT new development has to follow rules and be done right, and not exceed the capacity of the infrastructure and roads we have.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO SAY: WE WANT AN INTERIM CONTROL BYLAW!
E-mail: mayor_ford@toronto.ca
Phone: 416-397-FORD (3673)
IMPORTANT: You can also call him on his radio show – its on 1010 on the AM dial, Sunday from 1pm to 3pm – he takes calls - typically in the last 10-15 minutes of the show! The number is 416-872-1010
Regardless of how you contact him, tell him what you think on this and related issues – just do not try to sound like a “nimby” or completely anti-development!
There have been numerous condos built here already, and more will be built even if all rezonings are refused…. BUT new development has to follow rules and be done right, and not exceed the capacity of the infrastructure and roads we have.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO SAY: WE WANT AN INTERIM CONTROL BYLAW!
Volunteers Urgently Needed!
Friends of Queen is currently in limbo, but The Beach Residents Association of Toronto is continuing the work and needs your help!
Please go to www.beachresidents.ca or contact us if you are willing to help us either by becoming a "Street Captain" or by joining one of our teams!
You can also go to the Contact Us page and send us an email!
Please go to www.beachresidents.ca or contact us if you are willing to help us either by becoming a "Street Captain" or by joining one of our teams!
You can also go to the Contact Us page and send us an email!
IMPORTANT NOTE:
Friends of Queen Street (TM), Friends of Queen (TM) and FoQS (TM) are unregistered trademarks held by the owner of this website, www.friendsofqueenstreet.ca and www.friendsofqueenstreet.com.
Original materials on this site are Copyright 2011 and 2012.
This is the official site of Friends of Queen Street.
Original materials on this site are Copyright 2011 and 2012.
This is the official site of Friends of Queen Street.