bikes

109OZ Info Sheet

Upcoming Community Council meeting info
Basic facts about 109OZ
Impacts on communities: school, bike, business, resident, Toronto

1. Upcoming Community Council meeting info

Date and time: Tuesday, June 18, 11:45am

Where: City Hall, 100 Queen St. West, Committee Room 1

Item number: 2013.TE25.18

Link to item notice: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.TE25.18

Link to Direction Report mentioned in notice: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-58823.pdf

For Discussion of the implications of the Direction Report: http://individual.utoronto.ca/jmwilson/DR_Concerns.doc

The recommendation is for the City to negotiate a bit, but says 6 STOREYS IS FINE. Planning is treating Ossington as if it were an “Avenue” like Dundas or Eglinton, relying partly on the “planning fiction” that 17.5m Ossington will someday be widened to 20m (the minimum “Avenue” width) which would require tearing down every building on Ossington.

Luckily, one of the primary functions of Community Council is to amend motions for submission to City Council, and it appears that Councillor Layton is going to introduce an amendment in order to support the community’s position.

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

1. Please call or email Mike Layton ASAP and express to him the importance of supporting the community and getting the number of storeys down on 109OZ. Phone: 416-392-4009 Email: mailto:councillor_layton@toronto.ca

2. Please attend the Community Council Meeting June 18. A bit turnout can make all the difference (http://www.torontosun.com/2013/05/14/councillors-shoot-down-humbertown-development). You can either speak, give a PowerPoint Presentation, or use the Overhead Projector. If you plan to give a Powerpoint Presentation, bring your own computer and make some backup paper printouts of your slides just in case—if there are technical difficulties, the Overhead Projector can project your printout.

3) If you cannot attend, email your comments to Community Council at teycc@toronto.ca, citing “2013.TE25.18 on June 18, 2013 for distribution to Community Council members” (or see link below).

Even better: DO BOTH: send in your written comments or your presentation in advance and THEN go to the meeting and deliver them in person. This page gives more information about written and delivered comments:

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/tmmis/have-your-say.htm

If attending in person, then it is best to register before 4:30 the day before, but you can also sign up at the meeting. One can submit comments or register to speak by clicking the ‘submit comments’ or ‘register’ links at the top of this page:

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.TE25.18

2. Basic info about 109OZ

103-109-111 Ossington, near Argyle, centre of Ossington strip
21.5m (25m with “mechanical penthouse”): 6 “official” storeys, but really height of 8-storey building. Existing zoning is 4-storeys, 14m.
9 storefronts wide, occupies large footprint of large lot
No ground level green space
86 units, no family size
70 underground parking units off of Argyle Place
3.9 density, existing zoning is 2.5
One single 12,000sqft ‘AAA’ retail space (i.e., chain store)
For overhead views giving sense of size, see http://www.scribd.com/doc/109555668/views
For ARRIS Strategy Studio Ossington Avenue High Street Development Review, see http://arris.ca/OCA/

3. Impacts on communities

SCHOOL

70 cars and heavy truck loading in this building
Argyle Place laneway mouth only 5.5m wide
Argyle Street only 6m wide from parking lane to curb
Makes for a very tight turn during morning rush across a sidewalk where children walk to school
Pattern of one-way streets means traffic pressure on school loading area and children’s routes to school (such as Bruce and Argyle)
If the endgame is the whole block goes midrise, that means ballpark 200 more cars using that laneway
Unit makeup is not inviting to families – doesn’t increase school vitality
Loss of sky views from west-facing playgrounds and classrooms
Increased dog urine and feces in the playground
Construction dust

BIKE

Argyle Street is part of city’s Bikeway system: Argyle-Robinson Bikeway runs from Brock to Bathurst, plugging West End Bikeway “black hole”
Argyle Street only 6m wide from parking lane to curb for one lane of traffic and one contraflow bike lane; Argyle Place laneway mouth only 5.5m wide
70 cars and heavy truck loading in this building
If the endgame is the whole block goes midrise, that means ballpark 200 more cars using that laneway
The /Ossington Avenue High Street Development Review/ calculates that growth on Ossington realistically makes for at most 1/1000 of the city’s total population target (which is more than met already anyway; and the city already has a condo glut anyway)
The Official Plan calls for promoting “active transport” like cycling
Disrupting this crucial link the Bikeway network is a far-reaching effect; the tiny gain in density can be easily recovered in a less strategic location

BUSINESS

Ossington is a character area. It is 200 years old, one of Toronto’s oldest streets, and the historic center of the West End village. We should be proud of our local history rather than making everything cookie cutter.
People come here in part because of the great business community but also in part because it feels good as a place to hang out.
That is because of the century old streetscape and because it feels like a public square. In Europe, they have main streets with midrise buildings, but they also have public squares, where people go to hang out. Ossington has that same chilled out feeling. Given that it is a street rather than a square, why is that? My guess is: in both case, you have open sky views — it’s no different from going to the park.
You wouldn’t want to hang out on Queen at Ossington, with the Shopper’s and the Tim Horton’s. You wouldn’t want to hang out on Bay Street, or King and Shaw. Midrise is inevitably sterile and oppressive.
Yes, the building would mean more people. But at most 100 — divide that by the 26 restaurants & that means a drop in the bucket for you.
Does it seem like a good balance, to get 100 more people on the street, against disrupting the character, which draws people from around the city?

RESIDENT

This is your neighbourhood. The new building is not about neighbourhood building, the environment, or respect. It is just about profit.
Ossington is a character area. It is 200 years old, one of Toronto’s oldest streets, and the historic center of the West End village. We should be proud of our local history rather than making everything cookie cutter.
This would be a looming citadel right at the heart of our neighbourhood. So long historic Trinity-Bellwoods vibe, hello ego-tripping condo stack.
Think of the block of three buildings to the north, with Golden Turtle/Rua Vang. This building would be more than twice as high, three times as wide, and go back twice as far. That means it is the size of *twelve* 3-storefront-wide 3-storey buildings stuck together. That might be fine on Queen or Dundas, but on Ossington that is ridiculous.
The community has spoken: loud, clear, multiply, and as close to with one voice as it gets. The Official Plan says they are supposed to listen.

TORONTO

You care about the environment, and so do I. You dislike auto dependence, and so do I. You like Paris, and so do I.
But what is great about cities is that they are not all the same, and that each city has individual parts that are different from each other. Paris has the low-rise Marais. London has Camden Town. New York has Greenwich Village and Williamsburg. And Toronto has Ossington (and Little Italy, the Annex, Kensington, Chinatown, Queen West, Queen East, Cabbagetown).
Ossington is 200 years old, one of Toronto’s oldest streets. It is the historic center of a West End village. It used to be where Dundas Street started, but when Dundas got integrated into the city grid about 100 years ago, Ossington got cut off. As a result, Ossington is like a time capsule. Toronto is uneven on its history. Why not make this a case where we get it right?
The Official Plan doesn’t say “pack in as many people into as little space as possible”. It has a lot of different priorities. Density is one, but so is preserving character, memory, history, and context. In general the OP aims to find the places where density can go beneficially, to preserve other places. Ossington seems like a clear case worth preserving if possible.
As the /Ossington Avenue High Street Development Review/ calculates, maxing out population on Ossington would only add 1/1000 of Toronto’s total population target.
Toronto has already met its population target many times over.
The Official Plan calls for a diversity of types of housing, noting that there is already a glut of condos. Most new population is to come from immigration, meaning families, meaning condos don’t even help.
There are thirteen areas with Official Plan Amendments to protect lowrise character: Kensington, Chinatown, Baldwin Village, St Joseph Cottages, Yonge-Gerrard, Church-Wellesley, Bloor-Walmer, Annex/Old Yorkville, Yorkville, Yonge-Rosedale South, Yonge-Rosedale North, Avenue-Pears, and Casa Loma. Almost all are on the subway; all are more than 1km closer to the subway than Ossington. Most have as their primary merit that they are upscale. None are West of Kensington. Ossington, a West end destination district, deserves this kind of consideration.
Planning law in Ontario is weird, in ways that are demanding on the community and require all decisions to be approached by the City carefully and with great judiciousness. All of us are in this together. Ossington is not designated for growth by the Official Plan, there is no policy reason to require growth on Ossington, and there is plenty of policy reason to preserve Ossington. Nevertheless, City Planning seems to have jumped the track. Why think that won’t happen in your neighbourhood real soon?