NEW COMMENT June 8, 2010

The City has recently provide notice to local residents in the Richmond St East and Berkeley St area of a Community Consultation Meeting to be held on June 15, 2010 at 7:00pm in the basement at the Little Trinity Church at 425 King St East. Unfortunately the "Notice" sent to area residents did not state who was making the re-zoning application and who the end user is, it has been confirmed by BPFA, that the front applicant is Concert Developments with the end user being Toronto Community Housing Corporation.

What strikes BPFA as being very misleading is the lack of clarity with respect to the "Notice" sent out by the City of Toronto. Why was the applicants name not posted on the "Notice" and why was the end user Toronto Community Housing Corporation also not posted????????

In short the notice states the application is for a 13 storey structure with 3 townhouses facing Berkeley St. and that's it, the Notice does not provide the public with a clear set of facts with respect to what the the existing zoning allows for and the allowed usage. BPFA recognizes that community housing is an allowed usage under the existing RA Zoning but we all know 13 storey's is not an allowed height, in fact the highest "as of right" height is 3.5 storey's or 12 meters.

Back in March , 2009 the City released a "Staff Report"written by Willie Macrae, City Planner regarding Concerts first re-zoning application at 132 Berkeley St. In that report Mr. Macrae recommends a compromise scenario of a 14 storey structure. Mr. Macrae writes, "City staff presented an appropriate development scena rio for the site to the applicant at a meeting on March 2, 2009. Staff have massed a proposal for a 14-storey (approximately 40 metre high), smaller floorplate (approximately 680 square meters) tower, with a wrapped mechanical. It provides a 12 metre setback for the tower from the front property line on Berkeley Street, a stepback above the 12th storey and more adequate separation distances for the tower from adjacent property lines. This scenario establishes a height more in-keeping with previous approvals for buildings in the King-Parliament area."

The City and Mr. Macrae have never defended nor clarified how they have arrived at their justification of a 14 storey development scenario and now they are suggesting 13 storey's. However the City has established a clear bias with respect to supporting a developer(s) vs. a neighbourhood of the small property owners, a clear bias towards high density urban development vs. lower built form less density development. But more importantly the City has established a clear determination to support developers in "PUSHING OUT" small property owners, pushing them off their land, out of the neighbourhood, out of their homes in short destroying everything the very neighbourhood and community we have all spent many years building.t

BPFA.CA's own research has revealed that Berkeley St prior to the introduction of the RA Zoning By-Law in 1996 was zoned for a height cap of 17 meters. The RA Zoning By-Law considered very radical at the time (1996) with a change in philosophy to zoning erased density control (GFA) requirements and decided on focusing on built form envelopes with height and set back requirement. As a result Berkeley St was identified in the Official Plan (Secondary Plan Chapter 6, Section 15) as a “Special Street” “with its small scale, fine grained character”. In paragraph 3.1.3 the Official Plan states that “The quality, role and character of these “Special Streets” will be maintained and enhanced.” In acknowledgement of this new status Berkeley St was reduced in height from 17 to 12 meters and was suppose to be protected from re-zoning applications like the one brought forward by “Concert”.

In short, the City of Toronto made a conscious decision and contract with the property owners/stakeholders along the Berkeley St corridor to respect its unique character and nature, protecting it from tall structure development. At least that is what we the community were led to believe. BPFA.CA use's the word “led” because the City of Toronto has in the Preliminary Report demonstrated a complete disregard for the existing zoning by-laws (not to mention numerous reports/studies published by the City) by suggesting an alternative proposal for a 14 storey (40 metre) residential building as stated on page 10 of the Preliminary Report, 132 Berkeley St. Ref. # 08 190996 STE 28, using the phrase “appropriate scenario”.

Unless BPFA.CA is mistaken, what gives the City the right to promote zoning compromises that are in clear violation of existing zoning height limits without a clear mandate by the community and the stake holders that would be directly impacted by such a compromise?

Should the City be allowed to place themselves in the role of brokering a planning compromise between Concert Real Estate Corporation and the community and property owners without a mandate by the community or all the property owners? BPFA.CA says, "absolutely not", the City's compromise scenario is not "appropriate" and is both high handed and unacceptable.

In short, the existing application by Concert or the compromise alternative scenario put forward by the City arrive at the same result, the redefining of height limits along Berkeley St via the re-zoning of one property, thus opening the door for a flood of applications for the remaining four parking lots on Berkeley St.

It is the opinion of BPFA.CA this type of re-zoning through the back door has to stop.

WWW.BPFA.CA greatly appreciates everyone’s efforts.