The Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guidelines Update and Public Realm Plan
January, 2008
prepared by Brook McIlroy Planning and Urban Design / Pace Architects
Content
i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – KEY RECOMMENDATIONS iii
ONE INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Purpose of the Study 1.2. The Study Team 1.3. The Consultation Process
TWO STUDY BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS 4 2.1. Introduction 2.2. The City of Toronto Official Plan 2.3. The Zoning By-Law 2.4. Tall Buildings Guidelines 2.5. Motel Strip Secondary Plan 2.6. Existing Motel Strip Urban Design Guidelines
THREE THE STUDY AREA - ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 7 3.1. Analysis Introduction 3.2. Built Form 3.2.1. Building Massing 3.2.2. Ground Floor Design 3.2.3. Building Separation 3.3. Circulation 3.3.1. Pedestrian Connections 3.3.2. Roads and Streetscapes 3.3.3. Parking, Access and Servicing 3.4. Parks and Open Spaces 3.5. Heritage and Public Art 3.6. Zoning and Density
FOUR SHAPING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT - RECOMMENDATIONS 14 4.1. The Study Area 4.2. Guiding Principles 4.3. Community Elements - General Guidelines 16 4.3.1. Streets and Street Hierarchy 4.3.1.1. Marine Parade Drive 4.3.1.2. Lake Shore Boulevard West 4.3.1.3. Intermediate North-South Streets 4.3.1.4. Minor North-South Streets 4.3.1.5. Intermediate East West Street 4.3.1.6. Minor East-West Lane
Content
4.3.2. Public Realm Structure 24 4.3.2.1. Pedestrian Circulation 4.3.2.2. Court Yards and Mid-Block Connections 4.3.2.3. Open Spaces 4.3.2.4. The Village Court 4.3.3. Land Uses 30 4.4. Building Massing and Siting 31 4.4.1. Height & Massing 4.4.2. Building Base Design 4.4.3. Tower Articulation 4.4.4. Shadow Studies 4.4.5. Sustainable Design 4.5. Landscape Elements and Pedestrian Amenities 38 4.5.1. Pedestrian Walkways 4.5.2. Streetscapes 4.6. Preferred Master Plan 40 4.6.1. Block Specific Guidelines 44 4.6.1.1. The Lake Shore Blvd. Block 4.6.1.2. The Mid-Block 4.6.1.3. The Marine Parade Block 4.6.1.4. Private Open Space Block
FIVE IMPLEMENTATION 52 5.1. Next Steps 5.1.1. Policy Updates and Amendments 5.1.2. Development of Land Owner Precinct Plan 5.1.3. City of Toronto Design Review Panel Review 5.1.4. Existing Motel Strip Urban Design Guidelines 5.2. Recommended Official Plan, Secondary and Zoning Amendments 5.3. Updates and Reviews 5.4. Glossary of Key Terms 5.4. Document References
APPENDICES a. Charrette Summary (as previously submitted) b. Minutes from Design Review Panel Discussion
ln s nedd nue ad we codnto ad o assist future development approvals. to and coordination owner land ensure intended is Plan Precinct Owner’s Land The guidelines. the and Plan Master the on based Plan Precinct a develop City) the with consultation (in owners land that study this of recommendation central a is it but owners. A recommended Master Plan is provided in this document of cooperation and design coordination between adjacent property degree high a require will but configurations ownership property same. the remain densities Appropriate high quality development is possible with allowable the existing all occur that to assumes was it and if consolidation future preclude not does This pattern. ownership was property existing update the guideline address to this undertaken occur, to yet has consolidation As developed. be to lands these for required be would consolidation property that anticipated was it guidelines design original the In waterfront destination. new a with area surrounding the provide to potential the has that community density high mixed-use new a in result could lands 650,000 these of development the densities allowable current the At sq.m. or hectares 6.5 of area development potential overall an with long metres 420 is area entire The metres. 15 as narrow as some and metres 80 as deep a are properties Some owners. different 8 with properties 12 approximately are There boundary. plan secondary existing the of outside are that properties several Lake Shore Boulevard West and Marine Parade Drive and includes Ramp, Off Expressway Gardiner the between Area Plan Secondary Strip Motel the of portion western the in located is area study The consultants andlocalresidents. their owner’s, land staff, City involving process collaborative a of product the are which recommendations key the outlines and study that of result the is document This (2002). Area Shores Bay Humber the for guidelines design urban existing the update and In late summer 2007 the City of Toronto initiated a study to review KEY RECOMMENDATIONS Executive Summary of the existing conditions and discussions with stakeholders and stakeholders with discussions and conditions existing the of Shores Area several Bay guiding principles have emerged through an Humber analysis the for update guideline the developing In City Staff.Thefollowingisalistofthoseprinciples,
11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Build ontheHumberBayShoresAreaheritage. retail viability;and, promote to possible wherever parking on-street Provide along criticalpointsofMarineParadeDrive; uses restaurants and retail for opportunities Optimize Provide for reasonable access to sunlight and sky views; a design sustainable and priority; efficiency energy Make Support adiversityofbuildingformsandactivities; Drive; Parade Marine and West Boulevard Shore Lake between connections mid-block and sidewalks private streets, Create a connected community framework through public entrances alongpublicstreetsandprivatecourtyards; front multiple with uses residential at-grade Encourage and privateareas; public between zones transition articulated well Create buildings facingpublicstreetsandsidewalks; low-rise with buildings slender more and taller Balance Plan vibrantpedestrian-orientedstreetscapes;
The Humber Bay Shores vi The Humber Bay Shores Context Plan area. Existing densities prescribed by the City of Torontoof By- City Zoning the by prescribed densities Existing area. study the within lands developable remaining the for vision public realm and form built a develop to is document this of scope The design joint and cooperation coordination amongstpropertyowners. of degree high a of absence the in solution form urban positive a in result not will guidelines design best possible development model for the area. However, these urban the provide to is update guideline this policy of objective existing The framework. the within achieved be cannot spaces public and development urban quality high create to ability More the framework. importantly, policy existing the land meet to guidelines struggle design will urban owners existing the of context the Within Drive. Parade Marine flanking parkland waterfront the to in incorporated high densities have been given density with transfers for lands that have been properties cases many In Drive. Parade Marine to West Boulevard Shore Lake from spanning deep and narrow generally are which dimensions high property constrained unique very but rights development relatively have have typically area lands The study challenges. Shores development Bay Humber within Properties community withinthestudyarea. compact new a serves that realm public quality high new a create the Waterfront Trail. With new development comes a responsibility to and parkland surrounding the Ontario, Lake to connections physical and visual with waterfront the to connections enhancing by legacy this on build to opportunity the has study the within development City the Skyline to and abundance of passive recreational parks and views trails. New open its with Residents Toronto of the imagination in presence established an has area Shores Bay Humber The their owner’s, land staff consultants andlocalresidents. City involving process of collaborative product the a are which recommendations key the outlines and study that of result the is document This (2002). Area Humber Shores theBay for guidelines design urban existing the update and review to study a initiated Toronto of City the 2007 summer late In 1.1. 01 Introduction Purpose oftheStudy
THE HUMBER BAY SHORE URBAN DESIGN GUID Map of Charrette Study Area the sameownerandnumberindicates theby-lawlotnumbers Diagram ofcurrentlandownership, matchingcoloursindicate Extent ofstudyare Extent ofanalysis
INVITATION TO A DESIGN CHARRETTE
a ELINE UPDATE AND PUBLIC REALM PLAN
The Humber Bay Shores ONE The Humber Bay Shores ONE o te ubr a Soe ae ad h rmiig ad t be to lands remaining the developed. The objective of the charrette and was to gather feedback and area Shores Bay Humber the for vision their about stakeholders key with consult to team their and City the for opportunity important an provided charrette The Area. Study the within development future for priorities the establish to and area recent Plan Secondary examine Shores Bay to Humber held the in was development Charrette a 2007, 8, November On 1.3. recommended inthisdocument. Plan Master the on based be should and area the of developed whole the be for should Plan Precinct Owner Land a Update, this of guidelines outlined in this document. Based on the recommendations form built and realm public the with supplemented be may changes policy These standards. zoning other and setbacks heights, uses, of mix preferred the identify would policies updated The document. this in outlined vision the implement and development future guide further to amendments Plan Secondary and by-law area- zoning specific prepare may consultation staff Planning in City community, and local the study, with the of completion Architects Upon Design/Pace (BMI/Pace). Urban + Planning McIlroy consultant theBrook by of undertaken team was 1) page on (show Shores Area Bay Study Humber the for Update Guidelines Design Urban The 1.2. Boulevard West andsouthisMarine ParadeDrive. Shore Lake be to considered is north study, this of purpose the For and realizetherecommendationscontainedwithinthisdocument. steps that will be required to coordinate the existing policy framework implementation key identifies - Implementation Lastly,Five: Section guidelines. design urban existing the to updates recommended the describes and update guidelines this to central area study the of description a provides - Development Future Shaping Four: Section area. plan secondary existing the Plan of analysis an Secondary undertakes - Area The Section: Third The vision. recommended the implement to required be might that amendments potential some describes and area the in development shapes that context policy existing the outlines - Analysis and Background Two:process. Policy Section consultation its and study the of overview an provides - Introduction One: Section sections. 5 into divided is document This basis forallbuiltformstudiesandproposedcommunitystructures. Law and the existing Secondary Plan density transfers are used as the The ConsultationProcess The StudyTeam landscaping alongthewaterfront. The areabenefitsfromextensiveandwellestablished Parade Driveto theskyline. Amazing viewsfromMarine Blvd. W. toMarine ParadeDr. have alreadybeenestablished. Informal connectionsthroughthestudyareafromLakeShore remain. Some originalmotelsstill and generallysupportedthecharrette directionsasoutlinedabove. realm public quality high a achieving of importance the highlighted Panel the summary, In document. this to attached are discussion 22, 2007 for review and comment in Appendix B. The minutes of that were November on directions Panel Review Design Toronto theresulting of City the and to presented Charrette the of findings The findings canbefoundinAppendixAtothisdocument. who participated in the day’s events. A full summary of the Charrette attendance in participants fifty approximately were There BMI/Pace. by lead team consulting the and staff city representatives, land owner owners, land residents, area by attended was charrette The traffic issueswithinthearea. existing the ameliorate as well as impacts traffic minimize to West Boulevard Shore Lake along access private and cuts curb Minimize #5- Traffic and Transportation Marine ParadeDrive along activity increased with appropriate, where at-grade retail and floors ground designed well with streetscapes quality high Create # 4-StreetDesign area Drive the Parade Marine throughout and West Boulevard Shore Lake connections between especially pedestrian overall Increase # 3-PedestrianRealm including newpublicspaceswithindevelopments Build on the strength of the existing open spaces with new connections # 2-PublicOpenSpaces lake the to views facilitate to and spaces open public new realm, public quality high a and buildings taller,slender,well-designed for Allow #1- BuildingDesign following keydesignprinciplesweredetermined. Design Guidelines and the Public Realm Plan. For the charrette, the was designed to assist in the review and update of the existing Urban guiding principles for the remaining undeveloped lands. The charrette scope determine to as well as framework, policy existing the of failures and successes the and date to development the on ideas 01 Introduction
of theday. Charrette Teams presentedtheirfindingsto thegroupatend to thestudyareaandexistingdevelopment. Charrette Teams workedthroughaseriesofquestionsrelated
The Humber Bay Shores ONE The Humber Bay Shores TWO by: growth physical direct to is Plan Official City’s the of purpose The andmanage todirect physical, social,andeconomicdevelopmentfortheCity. ways new finding and reinvestment, and traditional land use approach, focusing on opportunities for renewal The Official Plan is both visionary and strategic as it departs from the in theProvince’s “PlacetoGrow Document”. of City introduced framework conceptual The the Toronto’s mirrors Plan Official homes. new million 1.25 about building require will growth new Accommodating 2031. and 1996 between jobs million 1.6 and people million 2.6 by grow will Region the is that it predicted that quickly so growing is Toronto America. North in regions urban fastest-growing the of one is (GTA) Area Toronto Greater The 2.2. this document. in outlined vision the implement to required be might that changes key of summary brief a is the outlined Also forAreas. Shores Bay vision Humber existing City’s the describe that documents key policy the of overview general a provide sub-sections following The they arezonedOpenSpace. area, and have no existing as-of-right development opportunities as Plan Secondary the of outside are green dark in indicated areas The Plan. Secondary area’sexisting the within fall that properties area policy areas and land use designations. The map indicates the study the study area (map shown on page 6) there are a variety of existing within that note to important also is It Implementation. – 5 Section in found be can recommendations These Guidelines. Design Urban Strip Motel the and Plan Secondary Strip Motel The By-Law, Zoning these of policies including the City of Toronto’s number Official Plan a and Site Specific to subject are Area Study Shores Bay Humber the within Lands structure. policy overarching the to require amendments that recommendations some Urban are Shores there Bay Guidelines Humber Design the to of update this City Throughout an of the area. vision long-term form, the express built that policies and employs Toronto land-use development, shape To 2.1. 02 Study Background & Policy Analysis • Employment Districts); in growth job and Avenues, and Centres (Downtown, occur growth that see to wishes City the where areas Identifying The CityofToronto OfficialPlan Introduction 2.3. height, density and location of buildings on properties within the within properties on buildings of size, location use, and density the height, regulate that provisions contains by-law zoning A n diin te al ulig udlns ae recommendations towards: make Guidelines Building Tall the addition, In top. and middle base, building’s a of articulation the and, floor plane; ground the of make design the buildings; guidelines tall between The separation Toronto. of City distance minimum sizes; the plate floor maximum on recommendations in buildings tall of design the for outline general a provide guidelines These 2006. in The City of Toronto’s Tall Building Guidelines were recently completed 2.4. reflect thispreferredbuildingformforthearea. to updated be to need potentially will By-law Zoning Specific Site Guidelines is to achieve taller and more slender buildings the existing Design Urban Bay Humber the of directions primary the of one Since by theproperty’s landarea. building the of area floor the dividing by calculated is FSI building. the of bulk the determines (FSI), Index Space Floor the as such ratio density or area floor in expressed often number a is which Density, and setbacks. height building bulk, or density their including buildings of size the build and how big the building can be on a property. Zoning regulates City. The basic purpose of a zoning bylaw is to regulate what you can • • • • • • • • certainty aboutthecharacterandformofdevelopment. of level a with community broader the provide to continuing while flexibility design of degree a with manner timely a in proceed to development by-law allows that guidelines) design and zoning (i.e. framework regulatory new a Creating Focusing civicresourcestoignitethatchange;and, Sustainable Design. Pedestrian Realm;and, Tall BuildingMassing; Site Organization; Site Context; Tall buildingforms; The ZoningBy-Law Tall BuildingsGuidelines
plan include: Bay Shores (formerly Motel Strip) Area. Key elements discussed in the The Secondary Plan establishes a planning framework for the Humber within thezoningby-law. included not Space Open zoned currently are and are area plan secondary the within Road, Lawn Park at Drive Parade Marine along area, study the of sites western the of some that noted It be 6. should page on shown is area Plan Secondary the for boundary The required beyond the general framework provided by the are Official Plan. matters similar or infrastructure, design urban use, environment, land ofthe transportation, for directions forareas detailed more where policies city and schedules specific provide plans Secondary area. the of redevelopment or development the guide to The Motel Strip Secondary Plan was established in 1991 and is used 2.5. zone frompublictoprivatespaceswithindevelopments. transition a and spaces open and streets the address to conditions floor ground recommended specifically more of variety a lake, the to views for allow to separation distance tower increased guidelines include Someadditional area. study this to specific issues on Design Guidelines Urban Update is intended to provide additional design Shores guidance Bay Humber The prevail. should guidelines specific site these document this and Guidelines Building Tall the between interpretations of conflicts any In area. Shores Bay Humber the to apply and nature in general are Guidelines TallBuilding The • • • • • Secondary Plan implementationrecommendations. realm treatments;and, public and areas access public access, pedestrian roads, of hierarchy the including Transportationrecommendations and consolidations public landsallocation; land acquisitions, land standards, environmental parking, for recommendations Development and heights buildings building massing; allocation, and transfer density existing as such densities development of determination A land uses,viewcorridorsandconnections; streets, spaces, open areas, amenities public for policies An overall development structure and, site and area specific Motel StripSecondaryPlan highlight thevisibilityofdevelopment inthearea. Views tothesurroundingareasfromHumberBayParks of land-usesinthestudyarea. The existingBy-LawandSecondaryPlanidentifyacombination
The Humber Bay Shores TWO The Humber Bay Shores TWO recommendations regarding: are there Guidelines Design Urban Strip Motel original the Within street. the address should buildings how and configuration building provide guidelines document The direction on the design of guidelines. new buildings including This site planning, tall those Guidelines. replaces Design and updates Urban Strip the Motel to conform existing must Area Study the within development new All 2.6. area’s visionoutlinedinthisdocument. the reflect better to updated be to need may 11-4) and 11-3 11-2, this document, although the overall area structure plans (map 11-1, policy recommendations are consistent with the recommendations of these of Many structure. road and space, open and use land future for structure preferred a contains Plan Secondary Strip Motel The 02 Study Background & Policy Analysis • • • • • The studyarea is madeupoflandsbothwithin (purple)andoutside(green) oftheexistingsecondaryplan area. Lane; A pedestrian only ‘Village Court’ area at the base of Brookers A ‘parkwall’ofbuildingsalongthecentralgreenspace; development the of length (Right-of-Way B); the along corridor central A Appropriate buildingheightsalongahierarchyofstreets; View corridorsalongresidential street; Existing MotelStripUrbanDesignGuidelines Although the majority of the principles outlined in these guidelines these in outlined and principles the of majority the Although guidelines the of shaped. better be can development which implementation by tools new recommend the test to opportunity unique a is There Guidelines. built Design Urban 50% existing the per almost as out are area Plan Secondary the within lands The to private. public from zones transition of design the on guidance additional and development mixed-use of location of variety a and diversity, development encourage to design building for model flexible more a buildings, tall for sizes plate floor maximum introduces update This the remaining properties to be developed, new guidelines are needed. of nature fragmented the to Due design. building tall and structure are still relevant there is a need to readdress the overall development • • • • A regionalviewcorridorfromtheGardinerExpressway. and, Tools for shaping building forms such as Sky Exposure Plane; Build-to boundariesfornewdevelopment; Minimum andmaximumbuildingheights;
along thewaterfront. which formsacontinuouswallalongLakeShoreBoulevardand The massingofexistingdevelopmentisdenselyclustered, 03 Analysis of Existing Conditions 3.2. cooperation betweenadjacentlandowners. and coordination of level higher much a for need the underscores and Plan Master Recommended the Update, Guidelines Design of the existing analysis developments informs recommendations in the Urban The Guidelines. Design Urban the in expanded are that directions new of summary a provides the and on map, shown adjacent Area, Plan Secondary Shores Bay Humber the of Bay Humber the Shores Area. in The following sections analyze the existing undertaken conditions was developments existing of attributes negative and positive both of analysis an development new for framework design urban appropriate an considering In 3.1. 3.2.1. rnprny f h dvlpet n a el lcd vibrant placed urban streetcondition. well a and development the of transparency visual a encourage to together work that typologies building diversify to goal the with types massing these of both of best Learned: Lessons continuous buildingwallalong thepropertylines. a in result and views sky limit can that condition wall street powerful a creates type building This wide. and short is that forms have large floor plates which result in a building massing building The lake. the to view the addresses that form terraced the first 4-5 storeys along the adjacent major roads and have a along Right-of-Way ‘C’. developments Both development types step two back after these between zone transition central a is Drive and taller building along Lake Shore Boulevard West, there Parade Marine along buildings lower With guidelines. previous in the recently developed areas and are the intended result of the in massing but vary in height. Both of these buildings are found The second and third types of development massing are similar be should considered appropriateinsomelocations. and wall street the in relief needed much provide condition. This design typology, when appropriately located, can street urban an to contribute not does but park waterfront the the at of extension visual a is space open This created building. each of base is space open expansive an buildings, taller of design the Through west. the to developments recent more the then taller significantly are and print foot minimal a have typology, park” the in “building a in constructed were towers two These Pier. Palace the of side inthe east the on found occurs building type first The Area. Plan Secondary massing the within development of types predominant three are There Built Form Analysis Introduction Building Massing h gieie pae noprts the incorporates update guideline The
The Humber Bay Shores Three The Humber Bay Shores Three buildings gettallertheyshould belocatedfurtherapart. as e.g. buildings between separation distance the and buildings the of height the between relationship relative a be should there buildings between separation greater achieve To buildings. of portions taller the for massing densities permeable more a allowable creating while existing separation the achieve agreater to buildings with between and plates floor narrower smaller, Learned: Lessons waterfront. creates an impermeable visual boundary between the City and the This site. the of boundary West Boulevard Shore Lake the along together. The visual impact of this built form is a solid urban wall close located plates floor large with buildings by characterized is Shores Bay Humber of areas developed the of form the general In 3.2.3. at-grade. creating transition zones for both commercial and residential uses Learned: Lessons provides that manner a greater comfortandprivacy. in terraces outdoor utilize to for owners possible it make also will zone transition This pedestrians. for inviting and public feel spaces open and sidewalks the that ensure and spaces public to units private from shift the facilitate would zone transition A area. Plan Secondary the in floors ground for lacking is uses residential for zone transition semi-private A and limited convenienceparking. roads adjacent the of nature the by limited somewhat are they but themselves establish to restaurants. starting are and businesses These retail service for intent and the Drive with been established has Parade wall street continuous Marine a West, Boulevard of Shore Lake areas some Along floor conditions. ground several are there development existing the Within adjacent publicspaces. many of quality of the from detract base which area the the throughout buildings at conditions are existing There the guidelines. in design prescribed previously was than articulation of realm (sidewalks and open spaces) requires public a much the higher degree with buildings all of floors lower the of interface The 3.2.2. Building Separation Ground FloorDesign The guideline update provides direction on direction provides update guideline The lo fr ulig ta ae alr with taller are that buildings for Allow Large floorplates minimizeviewsthroughthe site. Transitions betweenpublicandprivateusesareunmitigated. viability ofcommercialuses. The inabilitytoparkalongLakeShoreBlvd.W. limitsthe Sidewalks arenot continuousalongroadways. Streets throughthesitesareanotcontinuous. The existingpedestrianpathwaysareoftengated. 03 AnalysisofExistingConditions 3.3. 3.3.1. West to Marine Parade Drive. It is essential that pedestrians have pedestrians that essential is It WestDrive. Parade Marine to Boulevard Shore Lake from private access at pedestrian preventing dead-end gates and sidewalks have north- not do smaller streets Many south non-existent. sometimes travel. and of unreliable path their are buildings between maintain direction north-south to the in Connections street the cross are to pedestrians and forced non-continuous times, at are, sidewalks areas developed existing Within visitors. and residents intensely area by used are shoreline the along connections Pedestrian in Section4.3.2. Plan Realm Public the See trails. and lanes bike sidewalks dedicated and expanded connections, block through of form the in cycling and walking for opportunities additional provide should Learned: Lessons and vibrantpublicrealm. safe a create to and stops transit to connections direct cycling, and walking encourage to development the through connections Circulation Pedestrian Connections pn pcs ihn h dvlpet area development the within spaces Open
The Humber Bay Shores Three 10 The Humber Bay Shores Three open andaccessibletoallmodes oftravel. becomes area the that ensure will circulation of fabric grain circulation should be provided throughout the study area. A fine cycling and pedestrian vehicular, of system interconnected An are notrecommendedanywhereinthestudyarea. lots parking Surface garages. parking structured to addition in Boulevard West is recommended to provide convenience parking Shore Lake along parking on-street zoning, commercial this of support In uses. commercial for zoned is West Boulevard Shore Lessons Learned: along thestreet. street. A grass boulevard and trees have recently been installed the animate would that uses other and retail accommodated successfully buildings not have West Boulevard Shore Lake Shores, onto fronting Bay Humber of area developed the Within established, willformapositiveelementalongthisroadway. once and, planted recently are trees the of established Most length. entire and planted well its for sides both along planting tree and west) a the (to median has Drive Parade Marine poor orientationconditionsfordrivers. to contributes also area Plan Secondary the of portion western attract to difficult moreclients from other locations. The one way street condition becomes on the it as area the in retail for difficulties economic to contribute potentially could This realm. public quality high a discourage and the buildings to around areas feel private overall an to contribute conditions These to accessifyouareunfamiliarwiththearea. difficult it makes nature non-continuous its reality in however right-of-way, private continuous a be to intended was access north-south streets in the Secondary Plan. In its conception this development vehicular access to buildings is provided along the and can make the area minimal difficult to are manoeuvre. Within conditions the existing street North-south conditions. of-way right- wide have West,which Boulevard of Shore both Lake and Drive Parade Marine by framed is area development recent The 3.3.2. Roads andStreetscapes In the study area the entire frontage of Lake conducive tothe parklikesetting. The wideasphalt surfaceofMarineParadeDrive isnot Parade Drivewillcontributetoasuccessfulpublicrealm. High qualitystreetscapingandlandscapingalongMarine 03 AnalysisofExistingConditions not continuous. block withindevelopments. Accessthroughthe entireareais Site accessfor parking, servicingandgarbage islocatedmid- Strategically located on-street parking can support retail areas, Currently requirements. through out the andservice development there is minimal at-grade parking. access same the fulfill can which feature organizing the as act that laneway and/or should be used but through a continuous east-west public road technique same the development, future In areas. garage and loading parking, visitor as such elements organizes building andfunctional West Boulevard Shore Lake and Drive Parade Marine on cuts curb minimize Boulevard to helps Shore lane central The Lake West. to parallel runs that ‘C’ right-of-way Currently parking and servicing is accessed from the east-west 3.3.3. ae akn ad evcs ces rm cnrly located centrally a continuous street. from access services and parking have Learned: Lessons entrances alongstreets. at-grade residential of use encouraging while and cars to their from moving people with street the to life pedestrian give Parking, AccessandServicing For new development, properties should properties development, new For 11 The Humber Bay Shores Three 12 The Humber Bay Shores Three and withinthepublicparkopenspaceareas. Court Village the within Barrier, Gardiner the by West Boulevard Shore Lake of side north the along include: could signage, strip motel old the of reuse drivers. the including Art, Public new and for Locations pedestrians to interest visual provide and history Learned: Lessons area fortheCity. farm house and/or highlight the history of the area as a recreation reference to the old motel strip, the original shoreline, the original focus greater on interpretation of the history a of the area and could include provide may installations art public public New the plan. realm in identified are locations Parade Additional Marine Median. the Drive along and park shoreline the include within locations landmark areas these decorative of Some some installed. been area has elements Plan Secondary the Within 3.5. park areasshouldbeencouraged. parameter.Year-round and space open public all within activities its along walkways public defined well or roads public by framed Learned: Lessons any potentialopenspacesalongMarineParadeDrive. for required is transition same This instead. yard front a create development that preferred is it areas park to adjacent properties are development existing interpreted primarily as within the backyards of existing development. spaces For open Currently amenity public zone. a as area park the of use intended the express clearly to uses private and public between zone transition a from benefit would edges park The public. general the to inviting not is The design of the Central Park (D) currently has a private feel that 3.4. Heritage andPublicArt Parks andOpenSpaces New public art would highlight the area’s the highlight would art public New ulc ak ad pn pcs hud be should spaces open and parks Public within theexisting development. There aremany examplesofdecorativelandmark elements private amenityspaces. Existing parkshaveundefinededgesandareoftenconfusedfor The existingby-law andsecondaryplanidentify acombinationofland-uses inthestudyarea. buildings withlargefloorplates. The existingzoning,densityandheightlimitsencourageshorter 03 AnalysisofExistingConditions Plan. the Urban Design Guidelines and the allowed densities in the Secondary in heights allowed the between conflict are a of area result Plan a partially Secondary the within massing and form built The Lake ShoreBoulevardWest andwithinthestudyarea. of length entire the along uses is commercial the parking support to On-street critical parking. on-street of convenience the from the in Currently benefit not does that at-grade uses of mix a is there area developed street. the of side north the on Factory from Kraft the residential buffer to West Boulevard Shore Lake along strip Existing zoning within study area dictates a +/- 38 metre commercial 3.6. along thenorthernsideofstudyareashouldbeexamined. this reason the long term viability of creating street front commercial Two sided commercial streets are preferred for economic viability. For right densities. as-of- these reflect should guidelines the form built possible best Topark. waterfront continuous the secure to undertaken the achieve were that transfers density to due densities development of range Learned: Lessons Zoning andDensity hogot h suy ra tee s great a is there area, study the Throughout Area “D” Central Park 13 The Humber Bay Shores Three 14 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR site. the of development the for direction preferred the highlights that document this in provided is Plan Master recommended A Plan. Precinct a owners submit and land Staff) City thatwith consultation (in recommended develop is it coordination guide and encourage Toregulate, required. is cooperation/coordination then achieved be not can consolidation If owners. property adjacent between coordination design and cooperation of degree high a with the existing property ownership configurationspossible but willis require development quality high that determined been has was update guideline It pattern. ownership property existing this the address to undertaken occur, to yet has consolidation As developed. be to lands these for required be would consolidation property that anticipated was it guidelines design original the In waterfront destination. new a with area surrounding the provide to potential the has that community density high mixed-use new a in result could lands 650,000 these of development the densities allowable current the At sq.m. or hectares 6.5 of area development potential overall an with long metres 420 is area entire The metres. 15 as narrow as some and metres 80 as deep as are properties Some owners. and different 8 with properties 12 approximately Drive, are There boundary. Parade Marine and contains properties that are Westoutside of the existing secondary plan Boulevard Shore Lake Lane), (Brookers Ramp Elizabeth Queen the between Area Plan Secondary the of portion western the in located is area study The 4.1. 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment The projectstudy areais420metreslongand is6.5hectares. The StudyArea facilities suchasdaycares,librariesandmedicalclinics Spaces inpodiumbuildingscouldbeusedforcommunity Create frontdoorsinsteadofbackalongpublicareas. . olwn pgs t ass i te eemnto o a eventual an preferred structure plan. of determination the in assist to pages, following the on outlined options plan structure the evaluate to used are They plan. realm public the and update guideline design urban the of development the shape and direct principles guiding These city staff.Thefollowingisalistofthoseprinciples. and stakeholders with discussions and conditions existing the of Shores Area several Bay guiding principles have emerged through an Humber analysis the for update guideline the developing In 4.2. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1.
along criticalpointsofMarineParadeDrive; priority; Lake ShoreBoulevardWest and Marine ParadeDrive; between links mid-block and sidewalks private streets, entrances alongpublicstreetsandprivatecourtyards; and privateareas; buildings facingpublicstreetsandsidewalks; piie potnte fr eal n rsarns uses restaurants and retail for opportunities Optimize Provide for reasonable access to sunlight and sky views; a design sustainable and efficiency energy Make Support adiversityofbuildingformsandactivities; Create a connected community framework through public front multiple with uses residential at-grade Encourage public between zones transition articulated well Create low-rise with buildings slender more and taller Balance Planvibrantpedestrian-orientedstreetscapes; Guiding Principles Build ontheHumberBayShoresAreaheritage. retail viability;and, promote to possible wherever parking on-street Provide spaces between buildings. Internal courtyards createsafeandcomfortable landscaped lake. Narrow towerswithsmallerfloorplatesmaximizeviewstothe sidewalk life. Well-defined urbanstreetswithcommercialopportunitiesand 15 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 16 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR of the streetscape greatly influences the character of the entire of character the influences greatly streetscape the design the of north, the on development new and park side waterfront south the the on With area. this in development all for street organizing public central the undoubtedly is Drive Parade Marine 4.3.1. for theRecommendedMasterPlan. structure community base the up make that recommendations key the summarizes sub-sections following The elements. realm public and roads of hierarchy the was specifically most considered, be to needed that elements key several were there structure preferred the evaluating When recommendations. charrette the and guidelines these fulfill would that structures community potential there multiple are that recognized been has it process project the Throughout 4.3. 4.3.1.1. by theadjacent landusesandgroundfloor designs. The StreetStructure, whichisthebasisfor PreferredMasterPlan,has avarietyofstreetsandstreet hierarchiesthatareinformed 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment Streets andStreetHierarchy Community Elements Marine ParadeDrive While commercial uses are generally desirable as a way of reinforcing design ofavibrantpublicrealmalongMarineParadeDrive. the to specific guidelines the are below Outlined diagram. adjacent the in shown as use land associated the on based wall street the of setback and location the vary to recommended is It area. study the of edge eastern the on court village existing the to adjacent is uses restaurant and retail of location preferred The residents. and users park for uses destination provide to uses ‘common-area’ and café restaurant, retail, residential, of mix a combine should Drive Parade Marine onto fronting buildings area, study the Within community. at-grade uses. therefore is It critical that edge. careful street consideration be the made of in the character design the of residential of defining the in this in viable is location. At-grade residential uses will continue to plan a major that role retail of amount the to limit a be will there that anticipated is it Drive, Parade Marine of character public the Preferred Section forCommercialBuildingsalong MarineParadeDrive. Preferred SectionforResidentialBuildingsalongMarineParadeDrive. 17 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 18 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR transit right-of-wayrequirements. required existing the to addition in secured be to need will metres 2.8 of width right-of-way additional an parking, Weston-street Corridor. allow To ShoreBoulevard Lake the of design the to specific form recommendations for Lake Shore Boulevard West guidelines are Lake Shore Boulevard West to support potential retail uses. The built It is also strongly recommended that on-street parking be provided on sided retailwall. two a create to West Boulevard Shore Lake on uses retail auxiliary locate Kraft see to ideal be would it future the In uses. residential this street, the and factory Kraft the between acrossbuffer a provide to intended is zoning industrial light to adjacencies the Given only. uses commercial for zoned is area deep metre 38 +/- a West, Boulevard Shore Lake along area study the Within City. the to area this connecting in role long-term important an play will street this dedicated street car right-of-way and improved pedestrian amenities important transportation function for the area. With future plans for a an provides that road arterial major a Westis Boulevard Shore Lake 4.3.1.2. 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment Preferred Section forCommercialBuildingsalong LakeShoreBlvd.W. withon-streetparking andarearservicelane. Lake ShoreBoulevardWest south streets are specific to this north-south major road connection. north- for recommendations form built The recommended. also are patios, like areas, overflow Outdoor Drive. Parade Marine and street street. Retail is recommended at the corner of this major north-south the of the side one on provided and be should parking park On-street waterfront. the to gateway a as role public its play should and amenities streetscape of level high a incorporate should street this for streetscape the of design The West. Boulevard Shore Lake onto turns right/left and parking on-street with connection north-south major a be to considered is street This intersection. signalized new a for potential the has that street one is there area study the Within h rcmedd ih-fwy ieso fr tet B i 18.5 is ‘B’ metres (D.I.P.S. Street IntermediateLocalStreet-OptionA). for dimension right-of-way recommended The 4.3.1.3. Intermediate North-SouthStreets Intermediate North-South Street‘B’hasaright-of-way widthof18.5metres andanasphaltwidthof8.5 metres. 19 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 20 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 16.5 metres(D.I.P.S. MinorLocalStreet-OptionA). is ‘A’ and ‘D’ Street for dimension right-of-way recommended The connection. road north-south minor supportive community of design the to specific are streets north-south for recommendations form at pavers built The unit encouraged. of is lanes use parking permeable The and street. crosswalks the of side one on allowed be should parking On-street provided. are spaces open public street, unless the facing entrances building residential continuous with with that of a consistent minor street within be a typical residential should neighbourhood Shore streets these Lake of design onto The West. turns Boulevard left prevent will Right-of-Way Car Street long-term the In dedicated the as movements turning limited have will streets these maintained. are corridors view adequate are and streets north-south minor 2 least scaled pedestrian are area the within blocks that ensure to required at that anticipated is It 4.3.1.4. 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment Minor North-SouthStreets the valueof communityforallresidents. Landscaped entrances appealtohomebuyers andcanenhance more comfortablepedestrianorientedstreetsandpublicspace. Podium buildingshumanizethescaleofhighrises,resultingin Minor North-South Streets‘D’and‘A’ haveright-of-waywidths of16.5metresandanasphalt widthof8.0metres. 21 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 22 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR with additionalwidthforloadingandservices. but A Option - Lane D.I.P.S.Rear to similar be to is design its and metres 7 is ‘E’ Lane for dimension right-of-way recommended The south. the to residential and north the to businesses future services that laneway public continuous a of design the to specific are lanes onto it or the units at-grade. The built form guidelines for east-west however it should not have the primary frontage of residential facing uses residential the serve to intended also is laneway This required. as uses commercial these for parking structured to access provide and West Boulevard Shore Lake along uses commercial the service to intended is laneway This West. Boulevard Shore Lake along zone east-west lane is recommended within the +/- 38 metre commercial public minor continuous a street east-west major a to addition In A). Option - (D.I.P.S.Street metres Local 18.5 Intermediate is ‘C’ Street for dimension right-of-way recommended The development. area future organize and connect will that street public a of design the The built form recommendations for east-west streets are specific to south. the to development new for entrances servicing and parking access, provide should street the and side one on parking be should There street. north-south major the to similar somewhat and nature in public be should road this of design The Plan. Secondary Existing the and guidelines design urban previous the from Right-of-Way‘C’ to similarly work to intended is road This west. the to Drive Parade connect to recommended Brookers Lane is to the street east and east-west to Lake major Shore Boulevard connected West A and Marine 4.3.1.6. 4.3.1.5. 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment Minor East-West Lane Intermediate East-West Street conform tothepedestrianfriendlyrequirementsofStreet‘D’. employed inexistingHumberBayShoresdevelopmentwill not Designs similartothelargeformatvehicularentrancesthat are yards andmid-blockconnections. grade residentialunits,vehicularbuildingsentrances,court The intermediateEast-West Streetshouldhaveamixofat- The Intermediate East-West Street‘C’ hasaright-of-waywidthof18.5 metresandanasphaltwidth of8.5metres. 23 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 24 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 4.3.2. 4.3.2.1. design oflandscapeelementsandpedestrianamenities. the on guidelines additional for 4.5 Section See uses. adjacent the with consistent be should sidewalks these design of treatment The and area. study the to internal streets the on and West Boulevard Shore Lake Drive, Parade Marine along sidewalks the include These zones. pedestrian multiple are there Plan Master primary consideration in all new development. Within the Preferred a as considered be should and guidelines design urban these of goal key a are routes circulation pedestrian accessible and Easy • • interconnected pedestriancirculation. The PublicRealm Structure,whichisthebasis forthePreferredMasterPlan, hasavarietyofpublicand privateopenspaceswithan 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment wider sidewalks should be employed to encourage retail and uses commercial or retail to adjacent are sidewalks When residential unitsat-grade. the from buffered be should sidewalks areas residential In Public RealmStructure Pedestrian Circulation • • ulc eetin o rvt pdsra cnetos this connections; pedestrian private to pedestrian public from transition connected and seamless a be should There three. all of combination a or plantings or fencing low transitions, height be can These uses. private from with separation manner proper public a in designed be always should and continuous be should routes pedestrian and sidewalks All and/or tables benches, plantings. as such amenities pedestrian restaurant spill out spaces and provide space for additional or planting. material paving in changes with denoted be can transition Mid-block connections betweenbuildingsshould bedesignedaspubliclyaccessible privatespacewith public/private transitions. between adjacentdevelopments. complementary/coordinated is and realm public the to beneficial is that manner a in undertaken be should design and treatment their areas, development private are courtyards shared Although buildings. between connections mid-block and courtyards shared Within the Preferred Master Plan there are several opportunities for 4.3.2.2. • • entrances offofthecourtyardarea. with areas landscaped be and hardscaped can of combination Courtyards a developments. between seamless is that design coordinated a have should courtyards Shared private transitionareas. access through the site and should provide adequate public mid-block and connections should be designed in a courtyards manner that facilitates including space open Private Courtyards andMid-BlockConnections one spacewithconsistentlandscapeandhardscapedesigns. Courtyard spacesbetweendevelopmentsshouldbedesignedas 25 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 26 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR public andprivateopenspaces. Outlined below are the guidelines specific to the design of all new parkland dedicationrequirements. development application for the site and would need to conform to a of part as reviewed be should area specific this in land park for Therequirements Plan. theOfficial in is space Plan, open Structure as Space identified Open the on highlighted as ‘A’, Area open spaceswithinthestudyarea. diagram The on the facing page identifies some Plan. potential locations for Precinct Owners Land the of development the during or application plan site of time the at coordinated be would This to see a portion of the parkland dedication allocated to these uses. like potentially would and facilities recreation active in deficient as area this identified have Recreation and Forestry Parks, City and cyclistconnectionstothewaterfront. pedestrian for priority a be should there spaces open the Within etc. courtyards, hardscaped spaces, green features, water with piazza paved as such spaces open private including, manners of variety a in incorporated be should These area. study the within spaces open private and public new create to exist Opportunities 4.3.2.3. • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment a publiccommunityamenityarea. pedestrian walkways to clearly demonstrate that the park is This park should have roads on at least 3 sides with defined usability.and maintenance with assist to parcel in larger one consolidated be should space open owned Publicly All profile sites,suchascornersitesor T-intersections. and high at effective formal especially be for will and gathering allow informal will spaces these of provision The at building bases and in the courtyards of new development. Provide small private parkettes and other private civic plazas mid-block privateandpublicopenspaces. existing and/or new open spaces. This will encourage use of to connections physical and visual enhance and/or Create Open spaces from residential developments. Landscaping can beusedtobufferhightraffic pedestrianpaths should bedesignedasfrontdoorswithformalentranceways. Entrances toresidentialunitsfacingopenspaceandparks located throughout thestudyarea. The OpenSpace Structure,whichisthebasis forthePreferredMasterPlan, hasavarietyofpublicand private parksandopenspaces A varietyoflandusescanfaceontopublic/privateopenspaceareas. Area ‘A’ 27 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 28 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR The followingconditionswillapplytotheCentralCorridor. design cohesive philosophy. a and canopies its buildings, the the of by structure determined be should façades building and avoided be should elements façade Appliquéd treatments. floor ground and amenities pedestrian same the have should Court Village the of portion western the on occur to development the consistency For been allowed forredeploymentofdensity. has Expressway Gardiner the to adjacent height building additional whole, a as Area Plan Secondary the within role urban site, the size of the assembled development parcel and its crucial the of centre the of characteristics unique the of recognition In as perthepreviousurbandesignguidelines. update. The eastern portion of the Village Court has been built out Guidelines - its general function continues to be supported in this Design Urban Strip Motel previous the and Plan Secondary the in conceived was Court Village This area. study of portion eastern is provided on axis with the Gardiner Expressway access Court road on the Village the as designated space open urban central A 4.3.2.4. • • • • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment e emte wti te ordr rvdn ta te are they that consistent withpublicutilityrequirements. providing corridor the within permitted be will uses underground private above, outlined andappearance access public for requirements the Notwithstanding The spaceisaccessibletothepublicatalltimes. The spacewillbebarrierfreethroughout. Marine the of Parade Drive. elevation lower the to access facilitate to required where except level in changes unnecessary of free and appearance in unified be will space the of design The the at existing correlating positiononLakeShoreBoulevardWest. grade the below or at be will surface The landscape or obstructions barriers. building ramps, parking No The Village Court and/or restaurantsonbothsides. should organizethespaceanditbeframedbyretail pedestrian onlyareasimilartoapiazza.Acentralfeature The designoftheVillage Courtshouldbeconsistentwitha Boulevard West Lake Shore
Marine ParadeDrive Brookers Lane Brookers Gardiner Off-Ramp Village Court • • • • • Ground flooruseswithsummerspilloutareencouraged. southern portionoftheVillage Court Area. the around clustered be should uses restaurants and Retail with bollardsonly. or gutters and if allowed a vehicular route would be denoted curbs conventional without priority pedestrian a have to is southern portion of the the Village Court should be through investigated. This area route vehicular a for Opportunities but willbeopeninwarmerweather. winter in enclosed be may and area The form alignment. in in straight regular be will walkways The metres. 4.5 of width of a minimum of 4 metres and a height of a minimum passage clear a have will continuously corridor the of sides located both along walkways, pedestrian covered The building facesalongthecorridor. No truck docks or other service facilities will occur within the direct flow. different fromthestreetscapeandbollardscanbeusedto Paving canbeusedtogivetheareaaconsistentfeelthatis priority shouldbemaintainedthroughouttheentirearea. If vehiclesareallowedwithintheVillage CourtArea,pedestrian 29 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 30 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR ih ult vbat tetcp cniin Te eea ln use land recommendations forthestudyareasfollows. general The a condition. achieving streetscape in vibrant quality essential high is mix This area. study the throughout recommended are uses land commercial and residential of mix A 4.3.3. • • • • especially adjacent totheVillage CourtArea. The allocationof groundfloorretailshouldstrategically createclusteredcommunity destinationareas with shopsandrestaurants, 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment r o te ao es-et tet n/r ln Marine along and/or street Parade Drive. east-west major the on are The preferred locations for major residential tower entrances apartments. of group a for entrances individual or units townhouse for All north-south streets should have multiple grade entrances recommended mid-block withsomeserviceretailasrequired. is development residential Predominately along LakeShoreBoulevardWest. The existing +/- 38 metre commercial buffer is to be retained Land Uses • • • apartment clusters as opposed to single family residential family multiple single to opposed services as clusters apartment entrances the zone. that transition recommended is semi-private It a entrances with building created multiple be of should rhythm a so unlikely is Drive Parade Marine of length entire the along Commercial Plan)to support economicviability. Secondary Strip Motel the in identified (as Court Village the around clustered be should destinations Retail Marine ParadeDrive. for recommended are uses retail and residential of mix A more peoplecomingandgoing. with life street additional encourage to is This dwellings. and doesnotsuggestthatadditionaldensityshouldbeadded. densities allowable existing the to relative is buildings taller these of allocation The lake. the to views ample provide Marine to Drive alongParade buildings for recommended is distance separation greater A 30). page on shown (as area mid-block the within located be buildings tallest the that recommended is It area. the for skyline striking and unique a create the and toward impacts shadow views minimize lake, increased for allow will buildings taller These 32). (page area study the throughout densities) allowable same the (maintaining located been have sites building taller 6 of variety A design andsitingofnewbuildingsdevelopments. the for guidelines provide sub-sections following The . walls exterior all of face exterior the from measured is plate floor The storeys. 10 over building for plate floor sq.m. entire 743 maximum a the with area study throughout increased be to need typology, will building heights slender building more and taller to preferred that the is achieve difference key The document. this of recommendation the with consistent is below) diagram the in outlined (as site the of areas central the in located be should buildings taller and Drive principle that lower buildings should be located along Marine Parade basic The ‘C”. Right-of-Way of east metres 45 than taller are that Right-of-Wayexisting of west building metres and 75 ‘C’ than taller are that buildings preclude Guidelines Design Urban existing the example, For applicable. still are tools these behind principles the of Many form. development shaping for tools several Shores identifies Area Bay Humber the for Guidelines Design Urban existing The 4.4. 4.4.1. • • • ground floorplaza, primarybuildingentrance, etc. courtyards, entrance include could this condition, design façade and articulation of the building must fulfill a special Where tall buildings meet the ground (without stepbacks) the storeys 3 of directly adjacenttoanystreet. maximum a with storeys 4 of maximum base a building have to are storeys 10 then taller Buildings the creation ofaseriesviewcones. with up open lake the toward views the that ensures distance separation increased This Drive. Parade Marine to adjacent area block the in metres 50 and area, mid-block includes a minimum distance separation of 35 metres in the Master Plan (Section 4.6). Criteria for locating tall buildings the on identified are buildings tall for locations Preferred Building MassingandSiting Height &Massing
distance separation of35metres. Tall buildingswithintheMid-Blockshould haveaminimum minimum distanceseparationof50metres. Tall buildings alongMarineParadeDriveshouldhavea 31 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 32 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR Entrances canbearticulatedwith over-hangs. preferred. Seepages31,46-47forexceptions. building entrance,insomesituationsbasesarenot Taller buildings shouldmeetthegroundwithanarticulated 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment o cnrbtn twrs vbat ulc el truh well a through realm public vibrant a towards contributing for patios and outdoor spill out locations. Outlined below are guidelines for allow to recommended is area setback façade building flexible a recommended, is at-grade retail Where grade. in change a and private area yard front expanded and an include could Transitionzones realms. public between mediates it how and zone transition each of description a include should applications plan Site base zones. transition building semi-private defined of clearly with variety created be a conditions that recommended architectural is its It through expression. conditions streetscape existing the to A well designed building adds visual interest to a street and responds along MarineParade Drive. mid-block area withmedium-tall(Mid-HighTowers) buildings Tallest buildings(High-RiseTowers) arerecommended for the Potential locationsfortallerbuildings areidentifiedabove. designed buildingbase. 4.4.2. • • adjacent pedestrianareas. to life add to and protection weather provide ground to level the floor at awnings and canopies walkways, covered entrances, building frequent vestibules, incorporate should spaces public and streets onto facing façades building All located atthecornerofbuilding. windows display including frontages both along façades through condition corner developed fully feature should and expression architectural the acknowledge should site corner a occupy that developments and buildings new All Building BaseDesign context. surrounding its within fit also should but unique be should building tower Each properties. adjacent to on taper impacts should shadow minimize buildings of tops have The also tops. should building buildings articulated tall requirement, this to addition In sq.m. 743 exceed not should storeys) 10 (above buildings tall plates of ( floor the Guidelines, Building Tall the in recommended As 4.4.3. • • • • may include,detailedbrickworkornamentationormurals. façades side the future should still incorporate a minimum level of articulation. anticipated, This where is e.g. development windows, adjacent using from prohibited are buildings Where façades. blank have not should Buildings actively throughoutthearea. pedestrian encourage and connectivity greater achieve help to will connections These trails. park waterfront the or sidewalk routes public the network and with transit with pedestrian stops on Lake maximize Shore connect Boulevard West to public site should the new throughout create developments to and opportunities buildings New the groundwithoutstepbacks. meet buildings tall where locations potential also are These ways. entrance central and/or walkways, pedestrian block ‘breaks’ featuring opportunities for public open space, mid- well-designed incorporate that façades street continuous with designed be shall developments and buildings new All negative impactsonpublicandpedestrianareas. potential any mitigate to process design architectural the leaders, within integrate the wall plane or other façade should features during rainwater or vents developments as such elements, building mechanical and buildings new All Tower Articulation opportunities forresidents. Terraced buildingscanprovideprivateopenspace massings. the goalofachievingadiversitybuildingdesignsand A recessedentrancewaycanalsobeappropriate,with 33 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 34 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR hud e osdrd hn ragn bidns ihn h study area. the within buildings arranging when considered be should a site can benefit the adjacent public realm. The following conditions exposure. Shown on the sun right is an example of how of rearranging the massing on amount adequate an get buildings surrounding based on predetermined shadowing goals will help ensure the area’s heights building determining Strategically building. the that spaces surround the influence greatly buildings tall by cast Shadows Shadow Study of ConceptPlanat10am,on September 21. 4.4.4. • • • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment oe ulgt o ec te rud ln n te public the and plan realm ground the reach to sunlight more allow to used be should plate floor possible smallest The receive themaximumamountofsunexposurepossible. to designed be should buildings of courtyards interior The during theday. time some at sunlight direct receive should buildings All maintained onopenspacesbetween10amand2pm. be should sunlight possible, where on and space shadows open public avoid to located be should density Building cast shadows. Tall buildings should be oriented in a manner that minimizes Shadow Studies
buildings (shownintan). Plan Master the the with by brown) dark cast in (shown shadows development the existing comparing by seen be can This plane. the day allowing for a greater diversity of light access on the ground building forms cast longer shadows but they move faster slender throughout more and Taller open possible. wherever public minimized and are spaces private on impacts to shadows have that would Plan demonstrate Precinct Owners Land The 2pm. hours to the 10am of between 21 September on taken were studies Shadow the in proposed forms development the Preferred MasterPlan. by cast be would that shadows the demonstrate pages two these on studies shadow The density totheothersideofsiteminimizesshadows(11am) Massing studiesfortheVillage Courtshows(left)howmovingthe
Court
Village Village
Court Village Village Shadow Study of ConceptPlanat2pm,onSeptember 21. Shadow StudyofConceptPlanat12pm,onSeptember21. Shadow StudyofConceptPlanat11am,onSeptember21. Shadow StudyofConceptPlanat1pm,onSeptember21. 35 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 36 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR are outlinedintheCity’s GreenDevelopmentStandardinclude: designs building sustainable achieving for considerations key Other and permeablepavingforallon-streetat-gradeparking. district heating and cooling with geothermal technology, green roofs recommended that new development specificallyis considerit centralized Area Shores Bay Humber the For areas. landscaped extensive reductions in the building footprint to create public and open spaces and surfaces, hard of reduction the features, built preservation and natural the of runoff, and consumption quality, water include to buildings new of design through the for considerations Key implementation. phase design early the from principles sustainability environmental of integration Green the Toronto’sfor calling Standard of Development City the incorporate should development New 4.4.5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment Water usereductionandwastewatertechnologies. Waste management;and, Dark skydesign; Day lightdesign; Natural ventilation; Building envelopedesign; Green roofs; Renewable energy; Alternate transportationoptions; Storm watermanagement; Urban heatislandmitigation; Sustainable landscapedesign; Building orientation; Sustainable Design island effectandminimizewater runoff. Naturalized greenroofsareeasy tomaintain,reduceheat still minimizingstormwatermanagementinfrastructure. Naturalized drainagesystemscanbeurbanindesignwhile environments. be naturallyventilatedandcreates positiveresidential Access totheoutdoorsanddaylight allowsbuildingsto while mitigatingtheenvironmental effectsofnewdevelopment. Programmed greenroofscanprovide essentialcommunityspaces 37 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 38 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR ensuring aconnectedcommunity. and/or Lake Shore Boulevard West. Outlined below are guidelines for Parks Bay Humber waterfront, the as such destinations anticipated means that all travel routes must be continuous and must connect to This design. first pedestrian have that walkways and streets create to is community friendly pedestrian a creating in step essential An 4.5.1. private and sites asidentifiedinthePublicRealmPlanSection4.3. public through connections mid-block includes This development. entire the throughout priority a be to considered are any successful new community development. Pedestrian connections Pedestrian amenities and landscape elements are central to creating 4.5. • • • • • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment provide adequateprotectionfrom theelements. to connections mid-block along and areas pedestrian site on- sidewalks, facing façades on coverings) walkway other and canopies (awnings, amenities and incorporate features should building developments and buildings new All intersections). and crosswalks aisles, drive encounter (at route their may along vehicles pedestrians where and areas identify andwalkways) clearly (sidewalks areas clearly to pedestrian used define be shall lighting pedestrian and paving accent of application consistent a areas, pedestrian all In preserve sightlinesandsafety. to development public or private to through views obscure not should heights fencing and landscaping other or Shrub a case-by-casebasis. The appropriate amount of lighting should be determined on the publicstreetorotherareasarepreferred. from visible and accessible are that walkways Pedestrian neighbouring properties. Pedestrian walkways should have adequate sight lines from metres 3 wide. of minimum a be should walkways Pedestrian Pedestrian Walkways Landscape ElementsandPedestrianAmenities by the use of on-street parking and street trees and by including streetscape elementsandstreetfurniture/amenities. by and trees street and parking on-street of use the by are identified and then fostered through buffering from street traffic Areas Pedestrian that preferable is It walkways crosswalks. well-marked and spaces, open sidewalks, barrier-free navigated, suchas areas easily traffic vehicular from separately identified is that route pedestrian defined clearly a means friendly Pedestrian Study area. Shores Bay Humber the within streets new for requirement primary the is streetscape pedestrian-friendly active and vibrant A 4.5.2. • • • • • • • Street trees shall be planted within each sidewalk boulevard l nw ulig ad eeomns hud incorporate should developments and buildings new All publicopen and spaces. streets frame shall additions and developments, infill buildings, new exist, opportunities Where with publicbuildingentrances. façades all along and streets public all to adjacent metres 5.5 of width maximum and m 4.0 of width minimum a at All new buildings and developments shall include sidewalks in identified as Section 4.3.1. ‘D’ Street along especially m driveway 30.0 one every exceeding not frequency a at and possible new with wherever consolidated be shall developments, associated existing and points, access vehicular and curb cuts conflict, pedestrian-vehicular reduce to effort an In landscaping should beaminimumof2metresdeepby10long. with area This design. sidewalk the bump-outs of element an as treatment boulevard incorporate should developments new permit, conditions traffic Where that suchareaswillnothinderpedestrianmovement. locate areas intended for the sale of merchandise, and and identify ensure clearly shall developments and buildings New Toronto StreetscapeStandards. open of City the with and consistent be shall techniques installation street and distances a separation locations, facing planting Tree space. walkways to adjacent and Streetscapes mid-rise buildings anda6metrepedestrian pathway. Mid-block connections betweenbuildingsshould haveaminimumwidthof 15metresbetweenbuilding bases,25metresbetween • f aeil ad te ce fr ae peitbe and predictable safe, for cues comfortable pedestrianmovement. other and use materials consistent of the through achieved be pedestrian can enhance This areas. and define create, to maximize opportunities shall developments and building existing and are new All area. environments urban successful a to components essential pedestrian-friendly and Pedestrians interior spaces. into street the from view a allow that glazing transparent and elements, landmark setbacks, covered awnings, entry including pedestrians, for amenities necessary the provide elements design a These achieve building. the to that arrival’ of elements ‘sense design and features building streets andpublicspacestoobtainincreaserealestatevalue. Lower floorsofhighrisebuildingsneedinteresting,active 39 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 40 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR design criteriafortheconceptplan. contained within this section is a block-by-block description of the owners in developing a coordinated Precinct Plan for the area. Also land assist could Plan Master Preferred this sites, the of nature constrained the given but guidelines these of goals the achieving of way one just is plan The area. study the within opportunities design key a highlights and guidelines pages these of recommendations previous the articulates plan the This developed. on was Plan Master outlined Preferred guidelines the on Based 4.6. Preferred Master PrecinctPlan 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment Preferred MasterPlan
previous sections. the from guidelines overall general the should to addition guidelines in These followed be 42). page on (map areas block 4 these with accordance in treatments recommended the outline guidelines Parade Block; and d) Private Open Space Area. The following detailed Marine the c) Mid-Block; the b) Block; Blvd. Shore Lake the a) as to this document. Four zones are identified in the plan and are referred are massing structured and in accordance from with the urban urban design guidelines height, outlined in density, of distribution The
Court Village Village 41 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 42 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR Gardiner Expressway atGrandAvenue. 3D viewofthePreferredMaster Plan,usingexistingas-of-rightdensities,buildings areshownindarkbrown-viewfrom southwards 3D viewofthePreferredMasterPlan,usingexistingas-of-rightdensities,buildingsareshownindarkbrown- view looking 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment northwards. 3D viewofthePreferredMasterPlan,usingexistingas-of-rightdensities,buildingsareshownindarkbrown- view looking 43 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 44 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 4.6.1.1. TheLakeShoreBlvd.Block 4.6.1. BlockSpecificGuidelines • • • • considered inaddition tothepreviousgeneral guidelines. The studyarea was furtherdividedinto4district blocks,designguidelines foreachblockisidentifiedin thisSectionandshouldbe 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment uses tothesouth. residential/mixed- and north the to uses commercial both for access parking and service provide should laneway The providing west endsofthelane. laneway dedicated unobstructed public access to public streets at the and east and continuous owned, privately but accessible publicly a be should laneway The property. the buildings within the boundary of the commercially zoned of a 7 metre curb-to-curb laneway flanking the south side of The depth of buildings should generally allow for the provision depth. in metres 38 are average which Westareas commercially-zoned the Boulevard Shore Lake onto fronting blocks The • • • • • adjacent developments. between consistent be should articulation façade of rhythm and party massing, heights, floor asgeneral the and buildings designed wall be should Block Blvd. Shore Lake the Buildings abutting an adjoining development property within lighting andstreettreeswherepossible. design its paving, attractive incorporating quality high lanewaya of be should the overlook will uses residential As provided fromLakeShoreBoulevardWest be shall parking or services building to access vehicular No All ground floors should be a minimum of 4.25 metres inheight. metres 4.25 of minimum a be should floors ground All floors andamaximumof7or27.0metres 2 of minimum a be to recommended are heights Building • • • • • • • • • • • etuat, r gleis srie eal n destination and retail. retail service galleries, art restaurants, cafés, outdoor hotels, include Block West Boulevard Shore Lake the for uses commercial streetfront appropriate Some Lake ShoreBoulevardWest. of treatment streetscape the of part as provided be should Street benches, decorative planters and high quality paving and placesofpedestriancrossings. intersections all at provided be should Bump-outs pavers. unit of use the by designated be should areas parking The side. south the on provided be should metres 2.8 of width Lake ShoreBoulevardWest anon-street parkinglanewitha To support the existing and remaining commercial uses along light on-street poles. provided be should attachments Banner be usedwherepossible. Shared-use poles combining street lights and signals should in additiontodowncaststreetlighting. Pedestrian-scaled downcast street lights should be provided linear trench. connected, below-grade, a by supported and provided be should metres 5-7 every of minimum a planted trees Street 4.0 metresfromthebuildingwalltocurb. of minimum Lake a accommodate of should West side Boulevard Shore south the on streetscape the of design The Structured parkingisgenerallyencouragedbelow-grade. appropriate foraminorportionofthefaçadewidth. is massing façade in variety where considered be should guideline setback this to Exceptions height. in floors 7 and 6 buildings for occur should floor 5th the above setback A metres floor-to-floor. 3.0 of minimum a be may which uses hotel of exception the with metres 3.65 of minimum a be generally should floor Floor-to-floor ground the above uses commercial for heights be createdwherepossible. visual interestalongthestreetscape, sidestreetpatiosshould New andinnovativebuildingdesigns andfaçadeswillprovide commercial areathatservicestheentirearea. Lake ShoreBlvd.W. hasthepotentialtobecomeastreetfront 45 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 46 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 4.6.1.2 TheMid-Block • • • • • • • • • • • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment 3.0 metres of a minimum be should heights floor-to-floor Residential metres floor-to-floor. 3.0 of minimum a be may which uses hotel of exception the with metres 3.65 of minimum a be generally should floor Floor-to-floor ground the above uses commercial for heights bea uses should or commercial minimum of4.25metresinfloor-to-floor height. lobby floor ground All floors inheightshouldbe25metres. 8-14 buildings between distance separating minimum The buildings between distance between 14-24floorsinheightshouldbe30metres. separating minimum The 24 floorsinheightshouldbe35metres. over buildings between distance separating minimum The Street ‘C’asillustratedinthedraftPrecinctMasterPlan. along wall street active an form consistently that basebuildings street-related create to utilized density of portion a Building heights shall be based on allocated densities, with sq. m.areproposedtobelocatedintheMid-Blockarea. Tall Point Tower buildings with a maximum floor plate of 743 adds which configuration road complexity andinteresttobuildingformstreetscape. curved can a has which ‘C’ Street depth block deeper a accommodate thetallestbuildingsinarea. for provides This Humber BayShoresarea. Way ‘C’ as configured in the existing developed portion of the Right-of- of location the to relative south further located be As illustrated in the Preferred Master Plan, Street ‘C’ should right-of-way a have ‘C’ dimension of18.5metres. Street that recommended is It west laneway(describedinsection4.3)andStreet‘C’. east- proposed the between located is area Mid-Block The contribute toahighqualitypublic realm. A diversityofbuildingdesigns andsharedcourtyardspaceswill • • • • where variety in façade massing is appropriate for a minor a for appropriate is massing façade in variety where buildings. considered street-related be should of guideline setback the floor to Exceptions 3rd or 2nd the above occur should metres 1.5 of setback minimum a Generally of 8floors. maximum and floors of 3 of minimum side a be should north ‘C’ Street the onto fronting buildings Street-related Building MassingandSiting. 4.4 Section in illustrated as treatments possible of variety a through expressed be should buildings tall to Entrances residential unitsat-grade. containing buildings of portions right- all for street required the is from of-way metres 6 to 4 of zone transition A portion ofthefaçadewidth. • • • • • • • • • • • as partofthestreetscapetreatment ofStreet‘C’. provided be should planters decorative and benches Street all intersectionsandplacesof pedestriancrossings. at provided be should Bump-outs pavers. unit permeable of use the by designated be should lanes parking On-Street on north-southstreets. be provided on the north side of Street ‘C’ and where possible should metres 2.8 of width a with lane parking on-street An in additiontodowncaststreetlighting. Pedestrian-scaled downcast street lights should be provided linear trench. connected, below-grade, a by supported and provided be should metres 5-7 every of minimum a planted trees Street its tightestcondition. minimum of 4.0 metres from the building wall to the curb at a accommodate should streets north-south the on Street and ‘C’ of side north the on streetscape the of design The entrances shouldbeminimizedasmuchpossible. of visibility and width the however, ‘C’, Street the from be garages for development on the south parking side of Street ‘C’ shall and rooms garbage loading, servicing, to Access the northboundaryofMid-Block. to the greatest extent possible, be located in the laneway on garages for development parking on the north and side of rooms Street ‘C” shall, garbage loading, servicing, to Access the Section4.3.1StreetsandStreetHierarchy. for residential buildings should be designed in accordance with screening landscape including treatments Transition terraces, setbacksandmaterialchange. front overhangs, windows, bay entrances, unit individual of designed through a variety of treatments including a rhythm Individual expression of at-grade residential units should be between 0.6and1.1metresabovesidewalklevel. entrances and a ground floor elevation that is a minimum of facing street incorporate shall at-grade units Residential techniques shouldbeusedto minimize newinfrastructure. Innovative landscapingandstorm watermanagement new development. Mid-block connectionsprovidehardscapedwithin 47 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 48 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 4.6.1.3. TheMarineParadeBlock • • • • • • • • • • • • 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment units at-grade. is required for all portions of buildings containing residential A transition zone of 4 to 6 metres from the street right-of way illustrated inSection4.4. as treatments possible of variety a through expressed be Entrances to Mid-Tall and Mid-Rise Terrace buildings should 3.0 metres of a minimum be should heights floor-to-floor Residential metres floor-to-floor. 3.0 of minimum a be may which uses hotel of exception the with metres 3.65 of minimum a be generally should floor Floor-to-floor ground the above uses commercial for heights bea minimum of4.25metresfloor-to-floor height. should areas or commercial lobbies floor ground All façade width. the of portion minor a for appropriate is massing façade in variety where considered be should guideline setback the to Exceptions buildings. street-related these of floor 4th the at occur should metres 1.5 of setback minimum a Generally shall generallybeamaximumof4floors. Drive Parade Marine facing buildings base related Street Precinct draft the Master Plan. in illustrated as Drive Parade Marine along wall street active an form consistently that buildings base street-related create to utilized density of portion a Building heights shall be based on allocated densities, with 14 to floors toamaximumof45metres. 7 from height in range buildings Terrace Mid-Rise 4 locationsintheMarineParadeBlockarea. in located be to proposed are metres 20 of width plate floor north-south maximum a with buildings Terrace Mid-Rise not includingmechanicalpenthouse. the within buildings Marine Mid-TallParade Block is 24 floors to a maximum of 75 metres for height maximum The Master Plan. Preferred the in illustrated as locations three in area Block Parade Marine the in located be to proposed are m. sq. 743 Mid-Tall Point Tower buildings with a maximum floor plate of a 1.5metresetbackabovethe 3rdstoreytoamaximumof4. Building basesalongMarineParade shouldbe2-3storeyswith along MarineParadeDrive. Spill outspaceforretailandrestaurantsshouldbeprovided • • • • • • • • • • • • s at f h sresae ramn o Mrn Parade Marine of treatment Drive. streetscape the of part as provided be should planters decorative and benches Street all intersectionsandplacesof pedestriancrossings. at provided be should Bump-outs pavers. unit permeable of use the by designated be should lanes parking On-Street where possibleonnorth-southstreets. and Drive Parade Marine of side north the on provided be should metres 2.8 of width a with lane parking on-street An in additiontodowncaststreetlighting. Pedestrian-scaled downcast street lights should be provided linear trench. connected, below-grade, a by supported and provided be should metres 5-7 every of minimum a planted trees Street condition. tightest its at curb the to wall building the from metres 4.0 the Marine Parade Block should accommodate a minimum of in streets north-south the on streetscape the of design The from thebuildingwalltocurbatitstightestcondition. Parade Drive should accommodate a minimum Marine of 6.0 metres of side north the on streetscape the of design The provided fromMarineParadeDrive. be shall parking or services building to access vehicular No north the on located ‘C’ boundary oftheMarineParadeBlock. Street from be shall garages parking and rooms garbage loading, servicing, to Access Section 4.3. residential buildings should be designed in accordance with for screening landscape including treatments Transition terraces, setbacksandmaterialchanges. front overhangs, windows, bay entrances, unit individual of designed through a variety of treatments including a rhythm Individual expression of at-grade residential units should be between 0.6and1.1metresabovesidewalklevel. entrances and a ground floor elevation that is a minimum of facing street incorporate shall at-grade units Residential Residential usesshouldbelocated aboveanactivegroundfloor. 49 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 50 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR • • • • • • • spaces withinthisarea. open and buildings design the Outlined to specific guidelines the are below requirements. dedication parkland to conform to need reviewed as part of a development application for the site and would be should area specific this in parkland for requirements The Plan. The Private Open Space Block is identified as parkland in the Official 4.6.1.4. PrivateOpenSpaceBlock trees shouldbe retainedwherepossible. The PrivateOpen SpaceBlockislocatedalong thewesterncurveofMarine ParadeDrive.Thestudyarea isheavilyvegetated,existing of 4.25metresfloor-to-floor height. All ground floor lobby or commercial area should be a minimum massing isappropriateforaminorportionofthefaçadewidth. setback guideline should be considered where variety in façade at the 4th floor of these street-related buildings. Exceptions to the occur should metres 1.5 of setback minimum a Generally generally beamaximumof2-3floors. shall Drive Parade Marine facing buildings base related Street view corridors. proposed for the area would have to clearly demonstrate the key Parks should be maintained and observed. Any new development Key views through the site towards the Lake and the Humber Bay single openspace. a into amalgamated be should area the in dedication Parkland of zsq.m. plate floor maximum a have to are allowed, if Tallerbuildings, to anydevelopmentthatisoccurwithinthisarea. apply also should document this in outlined are that hierarchy street and streets realm, public for guidelines applicable All 04 ShapingFutureDevelopment • • • • • • • • • A transition zone of 4 to 6 metres from the street right-of-way street the from metres 6 to 4 of zone transition A a variety ofpossibletreatmentsasillustratedinSection4.4. through expressed be should buildings taller to Entrances metres 3.0 of a minimum be should heights floor-to-floor Residential floor-to-floor. metres 3.0 of minimum a be may which uses hotel of exception the with metres 3.65 of minimum a be generally should the ground floor above uses commercial for heights Floor-to-floor o eiua acs t bidn srie o prig hl be provided fromMarineParadeDrive. shall parking or services building to access vehicular No parking and rooms garbage garages shallbefromacontinuedStreet‘C’. loading, servicing, to Access for Section 4.3. with accordance in screening designed be should landscape buildings residential including treatments Transition front terraces, setbacksandmaterialchange. overhangs, windows, bay entrances, unit individual of rhythm a including treatments of variety a through designed be should units residential at-grade of expression Individual between 0.6and1.1metresabovesidewalklevel. of minimum facing a is that street elevation floor ground a incorporate and entrances shall at-grade units Residential units at-grade. residential containing buildings of portions all for required is • • • • • • • • • contained with retaining walls. There isalarge transitionisheightthatcurrently bermedor osbe hud e riuae wt etro sarae and staircases ramps. exterior with where articulated and be height should in possible changes transition should form Built part ofthestreetscapetreatmentanynewstreets. as provided be should planters decorative and benches Street intersections andplacesofpedestriancrossings. all at provided be should Bump-outs of pavers. unit use permeable the by designated be should lanes parking On-street provided onwherepossible. be should metres 2.8 of width a with lane parking on-street An addition todowncaststreetlighting. in provided be should lights street downcast Pedestrian-scaled trench. linear connected, below-grade, a by supported and provided be should metres 5-7 every of minimum a planted trees Street to thecurbatitstightestcondition. wall building the from metres 4.0 of minimum a accommodate The design of the streetscape on the north-south streets should connections should beestablishedthroughtheentiresite. pedestrian private and public of combination A building walltothecurbatitstightestcondition. the from metres 6.0 of minimum a accommodate should Drive The design of the streetscape on the north side of Marine Parade elevation mightnotmake itfeasible. Drive buthasto befurtherinvestigatedasthe changesin This optionwould createanotherconnection toMarineParade limit accessibilitythroughthesite. availability oflandforalargepublicopenspacebutwould also A cul-de-sacdesignwouldminimizeroadsandincrease community structure. Completing theroadnetworkwouldcreateaninterconnected 51 The Humber Bay Shores FOUR 52 The Humber Bay Shores FIVE 5.1. 5.1.1. rescinded. applicable if and evaluated reviewed, be should document this by superseded are that Guidelines Design Urban Strip Motel The 5.1.4. properties asfuturedevelopmentapplicationscomeforward. to the committee as the tool to that will guide coordination between presented be also should Precinct Owner Land The consideration. and comment their for Panel Review Design the to presented be should Shore Bay Humber for Guidelines Design Urban final The 5.1.3. be required forfuturedevelopmentapprovals. should owners land area study between coordination going on- of demonstration A observed. were configurations ownership not is land existing the but Plan Consolidation Master Preferred the within precluded owners. land between coordination and Plan Master Preferred The demonstrates how the area can be developed guide. through cooperation a as Plan Master Preferred the to refer should and document this reflect of recommendations must the Plan Precinct The applications. development and development future guide to intended is plan the precinct This City. with consultation in representatives, their and owner land A Land Owner Precinct Plan should be developed by the study area 5.1.2. present aconsistentvisionfortheHumberBayShoresArea be framework to As document. this policy of recommendations the the reflect to updated that recommended is It Guidelines. Design Urban these of recommendations the reflect the Secondary not do Plan and Plan, Official Toronto the By-laws, City The 05 Implementation Next Steps Policy UpdatesandAmendments Guidelines Existing MotelStripUrbanDesign Review City ofToronto DesignReviewPanel Plan Development ofLandOwnerPrecinct 5.2. • • • • implementation issuesshouldbeaddressed: Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guidelines the following policy and In order to coordinate the existing policy framework with the Updated index.htm www.toronto.ca/wes/techservices/involved/transportation/future_streets/ City ofToronto StandardsforLocalRoads www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/tallbuildings_udg_aug17_final.pdf City ofToronto Tall BuildingGuidelines www.toronto.ca/environment/greendevelopment.htm City ofToronto Green DevelopmentStandard 5.4. Precinct Plan. Plan. The Preferred Master Plan can be the basis for the Land Owners accepted by the City and review by the City of Toronto Design Review be to is plan precinct The . guidelines, these on based owner, land between process collaborative and coordinated a through developed Land Owners Precinct Plan - Humber BayShoreUrbanDesignGuidelines - Plan Master Preferred 5.4. at thecompletionofeachsubstantialportiondevelopment. Preferred Master Plan the and the guidelines, Land Owners design Precinct Plan urban should be undertaken these of review periodic A • • • • 5.3. Determination ofPublicOpenSpaceRequirements; Maintaining existingdensityallocations; should beevaluatedandupdated; Existing land uses including properties with a “hold” designation Coordination ofLandUseDesignations; Introduction ofPublicParkingSpacesinNewDevelopment. Boulevard West; and, Introduction of a Continuous Rear Lane System along Lake Shore Height Amendments; Assessment ofOn-StreetParkingLocations; Zoning Recommended OfficialPlan,Secondaryand Document References Glossary ofKeyTerms Updates andReviews Amendments The concept plan developed to reflect these reflect to developed plan concept The A precinct plan for the study area that is Appendices
b. DesignReviewPanelMinutes-Nov22,2007 a. CharretteSummary-Nov8,2007
www.toronto.ca/planning/designreviewpanel.htm
53 The Humber Bay Shores APPENDICES Prepared by BMI/Pace
Working Together ...
Humber Bay Shore Urban Design Guideline Update & Public Realm Plan
CHARRETTE SUMMARY REPORT
November 8, 2007
Table of Contents
1.0Introduction 2
2.0Visioning Exercise 4
Group 1: concept & presentation
Group 2: concept & presentation
Group 3: concept & presentation
Group 4: concept & presentation
Group 5: concept & presentation
Group 6: concept & presentation
3.0Concluding Remarks 17
4.0Appendix 18 1.0 Introduction
This document is a summary of the Humber Bay Shores Design Charrette held on November 8, 2007. The charrette provided an important opportunity for the City and consultant team to consult with key stakeholder about their vision for the Humber Bay Shores area and the remaining lands to be developed. The objective of the charrette was to gather feedback and ideas on the development that has happened to date and the successes of existing policy framework as well as to determine guiding principles for the remaining developable land. The charrette scope was designed to assist in the review and update of the existing Urban Design Guidelines and the Public Realm Plan.
The charrette was attended by area residents, land owners, land owner representatives, city staff and the consulting team lead by BMI/Pace. Approximately fifty participants attended and participated in the days events.
The day’s events followed the schedule outlined below (a detailed charrette schedule in located in appendix A): Introductions Image of Study Area looking North Context and Background Presentations Post-It note Visioning Exercise Site Tour Lunch (provided) First Exercise: A Framework for the Future Second Exercise: Area Visioning and Development Concepts Group Presentations A “Visioning Post-It” notes exercise was conducted by BMI/Pace after Context Presentations. Each participant was asked to write their top three issues or ideas for the area. The participant’s top priorities are as follows:
#1- Building Design Allow for taller, slender, well-designed buildings to achieve a high quality public realm, new public open spaces and to facilitate views to the lake
# 2- Public Open Spaces Build on the strength of the existing open spaces with new connections including new public spaces within new developments
# 3- Pedestrian Realm Increase overall pedestrian connections throughout the area especially Image of Secondary Plan area looking east between Lake Shore Boulevard West and Marine Parade Drive
2 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 # 4- Street Design Create high quality streetscapes with well designed ground floors and retail at grade where appropriate, with increased activity along Marine Parade Drive
#5- Traffic and Transportation Minimize curb cuts and private access along Lake Shore Boulevard West to minimize traffic impacts
Other Key Comments • Maximize views • Consolidate properties • Accommodate existing land uses
In the afternoon, the participants were divided in to six groups to undertake a visioning exercise. Each of groups was provided with aerial photographs, key maps and other materials to be used for the duration of the charrette. In the first exercise “A Framework for the Future” groups discussed and Charrette Study Area developed their recommendations for key guiding principles, key opportunities, transportation framework, access and egress, key views and green spaces. In the second exercise “Area Visioning and Development Concepts” groups focused on developing site plan designs and typical block layouts, street design and hierarchy, public open space design, building design: height, massing, architectural characters, etc. At the end of the day, each group presented their sketches, plans and sections and summarized their common overviews. BMI/Pace conclude the charrette by presenting the summary of “Post-It” notes, concluding remarks and next step schedules The Urban Design Guidelines Update and Public Realm Plan is anticipate for completion early 2008 , the study’s recommendations are intended to shape future growth/redevelopment and potential civic improvements and will identify an implementation strategy for achieving a high quality public and private realm for the remaining Humber Bay Shores Lands.
Working Group Image
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 3 2.0 Visioning Exercises The following section provides a summary of the recommendations made by each of the charrette groups Group 1
Summary Group 1 focused on the west end of the site suggesting a new configuration of open space. The group proposed a north-south open space corridor. The new configuration of this open space would allow for better integrated development at the surrounding sites. This group also identified the on-street parking as a key issue for successful commercial uses along Lake Shore Blvd. West.
EXERCISE 1: A FRAME WORK FOR THE FUTURE
Key Direction
• Strategic configuration of open space at the west end Current land ownership • North-south open space corridor as opposed to flanking Marine Parade • Is Marine Parade angular plane setback necessary? • Commercial at 38 metre depth is not a problem … BUT could be considered differently • Commercial allocation 500,000 sq. ft. need on-street parking… could be off-peak if commuter traffic is an issue • Examine the cross section of Lake Shore • Where can we get 2.8 metres for on-street parking – from streetcar row or setback of properties?
Potential relocation of open spaces
4 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 EXERCISE 2: AREA VISIONING & DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
Key Directions
• Rear vehicular access to commercial – not from Lake Shore Blvd. West • Don’t replicate the park flanking Marine Parade Drive • Dip right of way “C” to the south to facilitate development site on the west side of study area • Taller building along Lake Shore Blvd. West and lower Building along Marine Parade Drive
Potential block confi guration 1
Potential block confi guration 2
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 5 Group 2
Summary
Group 2 focused on creating a pedestrian friendly environment. They suggested minimizing the private access along Lake Shore Blvd. West while providing more public accesses to waterfront. The group identified the appropriate signage, street furniture and multi-seasonal uses as critical to achieve pedestrian friendly streets. This group also suggested Monarch’s building as the most important landmark at the site. Other buildings should step down toward Marine Parade Drive.
EXERCISE 1: A FRAME WORK FOR THE FUTURE
Key Direction
• Signage and way finding is critical • Co-ordination of common vision for the corner area • No private access along Lake Shore (Minimize curb cuts) • Green landscaped street (with trees) • Multi-seasonal use of park area • Pedestrian friendly waterfront connections are recommended Site analysis • Streetscape at Marine Parade Drive should be improved by providing more active uses
6 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 EXERCISE 2: AREA VISIONING & DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
Key Direction
• Buildings should tier up from low-rise on Marine Parade Drive • Monarch should be the highest building at site (37 storeys) • Buildings should step down from this height • A East-West access road should be considered as a main access to site • Another East-West service road should be considered for commercial use along Lake Shore Blvd. West • Terraced low rise buildings are preferred along Marine Parade Drive • North-South streets should be landscaped and combined with public space • Continuous building street wall along Marine Parade Drive
Potential block confi guration
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 7 Group 3
Summary
Group 3 focused on “green”. They suggested park spaces within blocks linking to the waterfront and most of the residential units facing open space and waterfront. This team also thought a variety of uses along Marine Parade Drive was critical for active street life.
EXERCISE 1: A FRAME WORK FOR THE FUTURE
Key Direction
• Marine Parade Drive should allow for varied uses such as parking, markets, festivals etc and should not be dominated by cars. • Marine Parade Drive and waterfront park should be programmed with year round uses such as Jazz festival, book market and art exhibition in the park etc. • Park space within the block should link to the waterfront • Grade access/related units should face the park spaces • Servicing, commercial access and resident access should be thoroughly resolved and considered • Pedestrian/bicycle friendly development is a must Potential character of the site
8 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 EXERCISE 2: AREA VISIONING & DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
Key Direction
• The orientation of blocks is important • An internal east-west road is needed for service and parking • Access to residential units ( condo/townhomes) preferred facing open space or waterfront • Regular block and open space pattern was recommended
Potential block orientation
Potential block layout
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 9 Group 4 Summary
Group 4 focused on the 38m commercial strip along Lake Shore Blvd. West. The group suggested other uses such as parking structures with retails at ground level. They also suggested integrating the school site with community amenity areas. The team also identified preferred high-rise and low-rise zones in the site. In this team’s vision, North-south streets are more important than east-west streets. These streets should be well landscaped with full movements. More over, the group thought the Village-Court should serve as a vibrant retail street rather than just a green space.
EXERCISE 1: A FRAME WORK FOR THE FUTURE
Key Direction
• Integrate school site (if required) with community amenities in a joint-use facility. • Require double sided retail uses along Lake Shore Blvd. West with on street parking, if retail is expected. Site analysis and potential use along Lake Shore Blvd. West • Consider relocation of TTC loop. • Improve the quality of existing open space with better programming and amenities • Respect and incorporate the heritage (i.e. past motel use) of the site • Consider other uses on Lake Shore Blvd. West such as parking struc- tures with retail at ground as opposed to pure commercial uses
10 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 EXERCISE 2: AREA VISIONING & DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
Key Direction
• Mid-block east-west street may not be required if north-south streets are closely spaced and have a strong character • Perhaps Village-Court could serve as a retail street with shops along both sides leading to a plaza at waterfront • View is an important issue of the site. • Design of building should allow view toward & from the lake. • Buildings visible from Gardiner requires high quality of architecture • Maximize the space between buildings. • Local roads need full movement at Lake Shore Blvd • Minimum separation of high-rise building is 30m • High-rise zone should be considered to provide flexibility for design of towers. Potential block confi guration - option 1
Potential block confi guration - option 2
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 11 Group 5
Summary
Group 5 expressed the importance of pedestrian accesses to waterfront and suggested making entire development pedestrian friendly. The group also recommended incorporating sustainable elements such as rooftop garden and making Park Lawn more park like. In this group’s vision, there should be a variety of built forms with different heights and styles. These buildings should tier up from the waterfront with at least 30m separations.
EXERCISE 1: A FRAME WORK FOR THE FUTURE
Key Direction
• Provide street furniture at public open space • Make Park Lawn Road more park like • Create green area with year-round uses such as playgrounds, skating rinks, markets and other activities • Make entire development pedestrian friendly Site analysis and potential use along Lake Shore Blvd. West • Improve the transit and traffic infrastructures before planning major development • Consider school site at west side of the site • Have landscaping and retail on both side of Lake Shore Blvd. West
12 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 EXERCISE 2: AREA VISIONING & DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
Key Direction • • Buildings should tier up from the waterfront. • Variety of height/ styles is preserved • The space between buildings should be about 30-40m. • Rooftop gardens and other sustainable elements should be incorporated • 4-6 storey high buildings are preferred along Marine Parade Drive • Theme based public art and green spaces is recommended
Potential block and building confi guration
Potential road section of Marine Parade Drive
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 13 Group 6 Summary
Group 6 concentrated on the importance of “street walls” and “podiums”. The group felt the continuous podiums would create an unsightly wall blocking the views towards waterfront. They suggested pushing buildings back from streets with varying setbacks, which would create opportunities for sidewalk café, restaurants, etc and bring active street life.
EXERCISE 1: A FRAME WORK FOR THE FUTURE
Key Direction
• Development should incorporate community services and ensure the continuity of open public space. • Number of streets could be reduced through private-to-private lots Site analysis with public easements • Community services could be integrated in school site • Is Monarch to be the central iconic development in terms of height, or can there are buildings over 37 stories? • The Lake Shore Blvd. West street edge does not need to be continuous; there could be setbacks of varying depth. This would create opportunities for sidewalk cafés and weather protection • Make streets more narrow and more pedestrian friendly
Potential road sections
14 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 EXERCISE 2: AREA VISIONING & DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
Key Direction
• Continuous podiums can create an unsightly wall • Variety of building types and unique landmarks • North-South streets for access, East-West streets for service connections • Prefer 12-15m podium height • Consideration of 38m zone with mix of uses • Location of central area should be rethought • Lower buildings along Lake Shore; taller buildings along Marine Parade Drive
Potential block and building confi guration
Potential block and building confi guration
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 15 3.0 Concluding Remarks
The future success of the Humber Bay Shores Areas depends largely on the collaboration between the City of Toronto and area landowners and their commitment to development that contributes to a unified vision for the area. The city itself can also demonstrate its commitment to renewal in the area though investment in the public realm and support for desirable proposals
The ideas developed over this charrette have been summarized in this document. These ideas are intended to guide future discussion with the City and the development of the urban design guideline update.
This charrette provided an opportunity for a variety of stakeholders to express their views on what constitutes desirable development in the area. The intent of this charrette was to shape the long term vision of the area, not to develop finalized designs, and this session was merely one step in the process of engaging landowners and other stakeholders in a discussion about important issues within the area.
16 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 4.0 Appendix
The Charrette Groups
1 2 3
Calvin Brook (BMI) David McKillop (City of Toronto) Nathaniel Llyod (BMI) Sol Wassermulh (Page + Steele) Jessica Hawes (BMI) Brian Mercer (City of Toronto) Nick Rassenti (Page + Steele) Mike Wehkind (City of Toronto) Victor Gottwald (City of Toronto) Larry Field (TRCA) Nancy Gaffney (TRCA) Mary-Ann George (TTC) Sal Vitiello (E.I. Richmond Architects Ltd.) Gabriel DiMartino (Graywood) Frank Vona Ted Shore (Quadrangle Architects) Shirley Hitchcock (Resident) Daniel Guizzetti (Empire) Moiz Behar (2175 Lake Shore) Angie Chiu (Resident) Steven Warsh (S&R Development) Josie Petrolo (Resident) Stephen Fagyas (Planner) Bob Johnson (Landowner)
4 5 6 Emilia Floro (City of Toronto) Lorna Day (City of Toronto) Anne McIlroy (BMI) Adriana Gomes (City of Toronto) Zhongwei Shi (BMI) Edna Cuvin (City of Toronto) Laura Nash (Resident) Antonella Nicaso (City of Toronto) Karen Harris (City of Toronto) Leo Blindenbach (Resident) Al Smithies (City of Toronto) Enzo Corazza (Monarch’s Architect) Mario Silva (TDSB) Craig Hunter (Monarch’s Planner) Ed Gadzala (Hillcrest) Thanh Le (City of Toronto) David Gadzala (Hillcrest) Lino Pellicano Kurt Franklin (Weston Consulting) Ken Young (Landowner) Peter Swinton
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 17 The Charrette Schedule
11/28/2007 Schedule prepared by BMI 11/28/2007 Schedule prepared by BMI
DESIGN CHARRETTE SCHEDULE Groups are to prepare for presentation: November 8, 2007 x Key guiding principles x Key opportunities Urban Design Guidelines Update and Public Realm Plan x Plans Humber Bay Shores x Sections x Sketches 9:00 – 9:15 Sign-In and Charrette Team Allocation x Development criteria: What is required to make the area a great place?
9:20 – 9:35 Introductions (City Staff) 4:00 – 5:00 Team Presentations: Frameworks for the Future x Each group presents overview for 5 - 10 minutes x Final comments 9:35 – 9:40 Opening Remarks
5:00 – 5:15 Concluding Remarks and Next Steps 9:40 – 9:50 Post-It Note Exercise (BMI) Name your top 3 priorities for redevelopment of the remaining Humber Bay Shore Lands
9:50 – 10:50 Context and Background Presentations x Area context and background (City Staff) x How the charrette will work: Overview of Agenda (BMI) x Best practices: successful examples from other places (BMI) x Development opportunities and constraints (BMI) x Transportation overview and update (City Staff)
10:50 – 11:20 Land Owner Site Concept Presentations 5 minutes each
11:20 – 12:15 Site Tour – (Groups 1, 2 and 3 with Cal and Groups 4, 5, and 6 with Anne)
12:15 – 12:45 LUNCH Teams assemble at their stations
12:45 – 2:00 First Team Exercise: A Framework for the Future x Key guiding principles x Key opportunities x Transportation framework, access and egress x Key views x Green spaces x Pedestrian and cyclist connections
2:00 – 4:00 Second Exercise: Area Visioning and Development Concepts x Sustainable site plan design and block layouts x Streetscape design and hierarchy x Public open space design x Building design: height, massing, architectural characters x Public art & green spaces
18 BMI/Pace Nov 2007 The Charrette Invitation guide the work of the Consultant of the Consultant the work guide ttendance with the City by Nov 2, 2007 City by Nov 2, ttendance with the Emilia Floro of Toronto City Designer, Urban Senior Urban Design City Planning, 394-2558 416 tel fax394-6063 416 [email protected] Introductions Introductions Presentations and Background Context note Visioning Exercise Post-It Site Tour A Framework for the Future First Exercise: Concepts and Development Area Visioning Second Exercise: Materials Presentation Site Specific Concepts: Exercise: Third Group Presentations x x x x x x x x Lunch (provided) Thursday November 8, 2007. Thursday November 8, As space is limited please confirm your a As space is limited please confirm your This is your opportunity to contribute to the vision for the Humber Bay Shores Bay the Humber for the vision to to contribute opportunity is your This is scheduled Charrette Plan. The Public Realm Guidelines and Design Urban for The Charrette and the study area highlighting presentations Charrette will include The Design groups of Discussion communities. from similar examples of successful areas the to discuss and asked with a facilitator, be formed, each 6-8 will of the study plans by be aided will The discussion outlined above. opportunities area. to be summarized input will The resulting schedule for the preliminary The project. of the remainder Team for the Charrette is as follows: (9:00 am to 5:00 pm) Draft Schedule: INVITATION TO A DESIGN CHARRETTE CHARRETTE A DESIGN TO INVITATION CHARRETTE TO A DESIGN INVITATION and Visioning exercise for the for the and Visioning exercise l provide a unique opportunity to to a unique opportunity l provide Design Charrette THE HUMBER BAY SHORE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINE UPDATE AND PUBLIC REALM PLAN UPDATE AND PUBLIC SHORE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINE THE HUMBER BAY THE HUMBER BAY SHORE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINE UPDATE AND PUBLIC REALM PLAN Map of Charrette Study Area Review and update existing Urban Design Guidelines. Guidelines. Design update existing Urban Review and spaces. open enhance existing Optimize and uses. with existing development new Harmonize environment. Improve the pedestrian on the remaining lands. be best integrated buildings can How new Where public spaces can be created. better connections. with Improve existing open spaces Where landscaping should happen and green strategies strategies happen and green should landscaping Where x x x x x x x x As local landowners/key stakeholders the City of Toronto invites you to to you invites of Toronto the City stakeholders landowners/key As local participate in a day long Humber Bay Shores Area. The Charrette wil Charrette Humber Bay Shores Area. The and gather feedback The charrette will of the area. term vision the long shape Guidelines Design of the existing Urban update ideas to assist in the review and area future Public Realm Plan that will shape of a development and the that Several key opportunities civic improvements. potential and development will address include: the Charrette
Charrette Summary Report - Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guideline Update and Public Realm Plan 19
MINUTES OF THE DESIGN REVIEW PANEL
MEETING 4 – NOVEMBER 22, 2007
The Design Review Panel met on Thursday, November 22, 2007 in Meeting Room 310, Metro Hall, 55 John Street, Toronto, at 12:00 p.m.
Members Present: Regrets: Gordon Stratford, Chair Shirley Blumberg Daniel Leeming, Vice Chair Janet Rosenberg Robert Allsopp Peter Halsall Paul Ferris Eric Turcotte Ralph Giannone Michael Leckman David Pontarini Sol Wassermuhl
Recording Secretary: Hamish Goodwin, Urban Design
Confirmation of Minutes
On motion by Daniel Leeming, the Design Review Panel:
(1) amended Page 6 of the Minutes of Meeting 3 held on October 24, 2007, by replacing the words “green roofs” with the words “consider developing a green roof” (Carried)
(2) confirmed the amended Minutes of the meeting held on October 24, 2007.
MEETING 4 INDEX
Project 1 Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guidelines Project 2 4917-4995 Yonge Street: North York Centre Project 3 18-28 Inez Court: North York Centre
Note: Panel’s Vote at the Fist Stage of Design Review:
The Panelist’s vote demonstrates, in addition to the review comments, their position on the proposed urban design of the project. The vote is not connected to the development application approvals process, and speaks only to the design issues discussed here today.
Support: The Panelist agrees that if the proposal continues through the development approvals process, the proposed design should continue to evolve in the proposed direction, including improvements or refinements of certain aspects of the project that have been pointed out.
Non-support: The Panelist does not support the proposed project's design direction and advises that it needs to be rethought to respond more appropriately to the proposed project's physical context, the planning context, or to the other design-related issues that were noted during the discussion.
1 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 Project 1 – Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guidelines
Humber Bay Shores Urban Design Guidelines Update Address Humber Bay Shores Use Not applicable Zoning Not applicable Threshold Criteria Public realm implication Project Management Urban Design, City Planning Division (City Division) Consultant Brook McIlroy Planning and Urban Design / Pace Architects Review First City Staff Lorna Day, Urban Design
[back to top] Conflict of Interest none
Evaluation: Support (6-0)
Introduction
City staff outlined the area context, history and area policy priorities, and sought the Panel’s advice on the following:
• Given the question and discussion the panel had regarding the Monarch Application at its September meeting, are the consultant’s recommendations heading in the right direction?
• Given the pattern of development in the past, can any property consolidation be a valid assumption for this next set of Urban Design Guidelines?
Calvin Brook, Planner and Architect, described the design rationale and the applicant team responded to questions from the Panel.
Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement
Sustainable Design • Develop and integrate a comprehensive sustainable design strategy throughout the study area (consider LEED Neighbourhood-Construction and LEED Neighbourhood-Design as guides for developing the strategy)
Response to Context • Develop the Lake Shore Boulevard West portion of the plan: - anticipate potential land use changes north of the study area - verify the market acceptance of the amount , location and type of future retail along this street to ensure its long term success - provide on-street parking
• Develop study area skyline prominence relative to “entry point” views to the City seen from the Gardiner Expressway
2 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 Site Plan Design • Consider limitations of the Vancouver precedent relative to study area, including: - podium height (heights shown in study are more appropriate than those in precedent) - waterfront edge (study area needs more variety/density of uses to ensure active life along Marine Parade Drive) • Provide convertible space for residential and/or retail uses along Marine Parade Drive • Develop urban design to address design guideline consistency/continuity given small sites • Develop the presence and placement of towers at ground level • Give highest priority to “street and block making” throughout study area, including: - street width and edge conditions - continuity of street level activity - block edge shaping - well formed outdoor spaces avoiding vague, “left over” conditions - consider decreasing the number of east/west streets - consider precedents of successful streets/blocks (including in Toronto) - particular focus on proposed east/west street immediately south of Lakeshore
Pedestrian Realm Further develop the pedestrian realm to ensure: • high quality street level vitality • well demarcated public/private transition and points of entry
Built Form and Articulation Further develop the placement and form of towers to: • attain optimum sky view, “permeability” and tower spacing • refine slender point tower strategy • address sustainable design principles relative to orientation • avoid “orphan towers” distanced from main cluster of towers • enhance strategy of some towers turned off axis
Landscaping Strategy • The concept of park space extending from Lake Shore Boulevard West through to Marine Parade Drive is positive: - consider the impact of this space relative to potential future redevelopment on the north side of Lake Shore Boulevard West • Develop the quality and continuity of park setting: • along Marine Parade Drive • at southwest end of study area • consider transfer of building density from this area to achieve optimum size/character of park space • develop relationship of park space to other open spaces near the study area (especially on lake side of Marine Parade Drive)
Comments to City Staff • The Panel appreciates and supports the quality of thought put into the evolving urban quality of the study area beyond the existing Humber Bay Shores development to east
Submission Package • Provide information regarding future context west and southwest of study area
3 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007
Related Commentary
Sustainable Design The Panel urged the proponent to incorporate a more formalized plan for sustainable development into the Urban Design Guidelines, which currently addresses the issue broadly through land uses and built form. The purpose of the plan, which could include LEED NC (Neighbourhood-Construction) and LEED ND (Neighbourhood-Design), would be to provide guidance to all stakeholders on how sustainability issues in the study area should evolve.
Response to Context The Panel appreciated how the plan is sensitive to the views of Toronto and the waterfront that can be seen through the study area as one drives eastwards along the Gardiner Expressway. This approach was viewed as a significant improvement over the previous urban design guidelines for the study area.
In terms of the site specific context, the Panel was in agreement that the plan should make accommodations for smaller building footprints given the limited block consolidation that has taken place in the study area to date. In doing this, the plan must therefore be sensitive to the narrow site dimensions that are typical in the study area; some of these may need to be addressed on a site by site basis.
The Panel recognized the challenges of delivering vibrant and successful land uses to the Lake Shore Boulevard West frontage of the study area. One Panelist commented that a market analysis may be required to determine whether or not retail uses could survive along the strip, while another commented that retail should be viable there given the residential density that is proposed for the study area. It was suggested that retail success in this location would be dependent upon the provision of adequate on-street parking, and that it would also be a function of the proximity of residential towers to these uses. It was also suggested that the future of Industrial uses to the north side of Lake Shore should also be taken into consideration when making accommodations for this portion of the study area.
Site Plan Design Much of the discussion relating to Site Plan Design focused on the emerging streets and blocks pattern in the plan, and the Panel was firm about the need for all new streets to make a positive contribution to the emerging community. The proposed streetscape expression of Marine Parade Drive was identified as a positive element of the plan, and the proponent was encouraged to examine ways of extending this expression inwards to the other streets. The Panel was satisfied with the general intent of allowing for retail uses along the Marine Parade Drive frontage, although it was suggested that it may be difficult to establish vibrant spaces on larger extensions of these blocks. It was also suggested that it may be necessary to allow for a phased, or gradual, implementation of retail uses along this frontage in recognition that the conditions for retail success will not be realized in the immediate future. Incorporating flexibility into the condominium agreements of future development along Marine Parade Drive, whereby developers are required to allow for future retail uses, was suggested as a suitable method of allowing for this.
Further to the issue of creating successful and vibrant streets, the Panel suggested that the Vancouver model for waterfront development may not be entirely appropriate for the study area. The reasoning for this was that the Vancouver model seems more suited to local streets that primarily service residential uses, whereas the area of application in the study area, particularly Marine Parade Drive, has the potential to become a lively and vibrant space that services retail and recreation uses, in addition to residential. Correspondingly, it was suggested that it may be necessary to develop a model that accommodates these different layers, and that this model could be derived from a generalized pattern of successful main streets in Toronto.
4 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007
On the specific streets and blocks layout, there was general agreement that the plan currently includes too many streets in the east-west direction. Following from this, the “service road” to the south of Lake Shore Boulevard West was identified for further refinement. The proponent was also encouraged to re-examine the block layout for the potential school building towards the western edge of the study area, and to give it a street address
Pedestrian Realm The Panel was satisfied with the general intent of the plan to create the conditions for a lively pedestrian realm. The proponent was encouraged to develop active street edges that include well demarcated transitions between public and private spaces, and points of entry.
Built Form and Articulation The Panel was generally satisfied with emerging built form for the study area, given that it has been developed in the absence of a Precinct, or Master Plan. While acknowledging that the built form – particularly the tower locations - will ultimately be shaped by the streets and blocks plan, the Panel provided a number of suggestions for the proponent to consider on this matter. It was suggested that the plan should include “minimums” for height and spacing in order to ensure that podiums are developed at relatively consistent heights, and to ensure the street edges develop in a relatively continuous manner without too many gaps or breaks in them.
The Panel was generally satisfied the with proposed treatment of the density component of the plan, being within tall slender towers, and the Monarch proposal (2123 Lake Shore Boulevard West, Nautilus Condominium) was suggested as being suitable evolving direction on this matter.
Landscaping Strategy Most Panelists supported the concept to introduce a north-south oriented parcel of open space at the western edge of the study area, as it would provide a link through the study area in that direction between the waterfront and Lake Shore Boulevard West. It would also compliment the existing north-south park that is located further east within the Humber Bay Shores (Humber Bay Park East). One Panelist indicated that while the proposed public space is significant, it may be possible to leverage additional benefits to the overall community by introducing other potential land uses, such as residential, to this area. Doing this would also introduce an element of built form continuity to this portion of the plan, which is otherwise disrupted by the proposed north- south park.
Additional Comments The Panel was satisfied with the overall direction of the plan, and appreciated its flexibility given the challenges presented by thin land parcels and varied ownership within the study area. Specific issues identified for further examination as the plan progresses include particular details of how development will take shape on the ground, such as the material palette and the articulation of street-edges (public, semi-public and private realm). It was suggested that it may be useful to develop a model for one block of the study area to test the plan prior to implementation.
5 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 Project 2 – North York District, North York Centre
Yonge-Spring Garden-Hollywood, Proposed Condominium/Commercial Development Address 4917-4995 Yonge Street Use Residential (Condominium) Zoning Site specific by-law 459-2005; RM 6 (155) – mixed use Application Status Site Plan Application, Committee of Adjustment Sal Vitiello, E.I. Richmond Architects Architect Tarek El-Khatib, Zeidler Partnership Architects Owner Rosedale Development Inc. Applicant/Agent Rosedale Development Inc. Review First City Staff Mark Chlon, Community Planning; Helene Iardas, Urban Design
[back to top] Conflict of Interest none
Evaluation: Support (5-1)
Introduction
City staff outlined the site context and area policy priorities, and sought the Panel’s advice on the following:
• How can the building massing and articulation, building design elements, streetscape, publicly accessible open space and other aspects of the proposed development be improved to enhance and support the emerging pedestrian environment on Yonge Street and on the local streets?
• What improvements can be made to how the building base is massed, articulated and organized in relationship to the slab form tower and the ground plane on Yonge Street? Are there suggestions as to how the slab tower’s overall massing and appearance can be improved given the importance of the Yonge Street context?
Sal Vitiello and Tarek El-Khatib described the design rationale of the proposal and the applicant team responded to questions from the Panel.
Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement
Sustainable Design • Develop and integrate a comprehensive sustainable design strategy within the proposal • Develop proposed green roofs as active amenity for project residents
Pedestrian Realm • Further develop side street setbacks to ensure high quality pedestrian environment • Residential entry/lobby on Hollywood Avenue is a long way from the residential elevators - provide major residential access from Yonge Street • Develop pedestrian realm with focus on:
6 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 - improving quality of space along the west side of building - providing attractive green space at grade • Develop street corner concept to ensure attractive civic spaces • Consider shifting the building north to provide a larger civic space at corner of Yonge Street and Spring Garden Avenue • Consider providing a commercial entry/lobby along Yonge Street
Building Form and Articulation • Develop east/west facades of tower and top of tower, including: - further development of syncopated façade expression to alleviate “slab building” impact along Yonge Street - use of point tower shaping/setbacks from north/south facades of building to provide slender shaping along the Yonge Street facade - consider the possibility of increasing the number of podium floors in order to decrease the tower size/mass - setback tower from west podium face to reduce impact on Yonge Street • Develop podium/building base, including: - use of podium “bars” expression (currently seen on north/south facades) along the Yonge Street to break down long façade and provide more articulation/verticality - develop the spacing of retail entrances along Yonge Street, including the potential for outdoor retail extensions (outdoor cafes, etc.) • Maintain the high level of detail and materiality of design concept shown in the submission • Assess wind conditions on proposed design and address as required to ensure the provision of a usable, high quality environment
Landscaping Strategy • Further development of landscape strategy, including: - double row of trees along Yonge Street sidewalk - resident accessibility to podium green roofs as major green space
Submission Package • The following items are needed in order to more fully assess the submission: - landscape strategy (plans, sections, etc.) - surrounding context information - model (real or virtual) that relates project to context - cross sections to show relation of building to surroundings (street level, podium, etc.)
Related Commentary
Sustainable Design The Panel urged the proponent to incorporate a comprehensive sustainable design strategy as the proposal is further developed. This should include the green roofs on the 3rd and 4th levels of the proposal that are shown in the submission materials.
Response to Context In the absence of certain details, such as a detailed context plan and landscape plan, it was somewhat difficult for Panellists to comment on how the proposal relates to its surrounding context. The proponent team provided a general indication of this context, outlining the massing of this proposal (34 storeys; 9,000 sq feet) and the other towers on the subject block (37 storeys; 11,000 sq feet and 36-storeys; 9,000 sq feet).
7 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 Site Plan Design Many of the site plan details for this proposal have been previously determined at a hearing of the Ontario Municipal Board. Other site planning issues that were discussed by the Panel are outlined below (Pedestrian Realm and Built Form).
Pedestrian Realm Given the spatial challenges presented by the urban context of this proposal, the Panel suggested shifting the building base in order to create more useable space for pedestrians on either the north-west (Hollywood Ave) or south-west corner (Spring Garden Ave). The preference was to shift the base northwards, as it would create a corner space with maximised sunlight.
With the only residential entrance located on the northern edge of the proposal, Hollywood Avenue, the Panel expressed concern with the route that a resident would be required to take when entering or leaving the proposed building. It was also suggested that the residential entrance, being located on a side street beside the service-way, may be difficult to locate. The proponent was encouraged to consider introducing a residential entrance to the western frontage (Yonge Street) of the proposal in order to increase the convenience of the building's occupants and visitors. It was suggested that doing this would help to animate this portion of Yonge Street during periods when the retail uses within the building are closed.
Building Form and Articulation The Panel was appreciative of some specific design elements of the proposal, such as the north and south elevations, and the textured treatment of the west façade. However, a number of concerns were raised with other elements, and how they join to form the overall structure:
Base/podium Spanning one full block along Yonge Street, the Panel was concerned that the base and podium design is too consistent and is not reflective of the traditional rhythm of retail uses that are common to this prominent street. The proponent was encouraged to examine ways of introducing a finer grain of articulation to the building base, similar to what is found along other successful retail strips within the City. It was also suggested that the proposal would benefit from a larger setback between the podium and the tower.
Articulation As previously indicated, the Panel was appreciative of the proposed treatment of the west façade of the tower, indicating that it was urbane and essential for texture. However, the Panel also expressed concerns about the difficulty of actually delivering this type of articulation in the design and engineering phase of construction. It was suggested that the form of the proposal would be significantly reduced if this detail was lost, or diluted, if this treatment is not delivered.
The Panel was supportive of the proposed design of the north and south elevations of the proposal. It was noted, however, that these two narrow elevations are expressed as two pieces yet the west façade, which is much broader and bulky, has been provided with just the one type of articulation.
Massing Several Panellists were concerned about the broad north-south massing of the proposal, which is a general response to the dimensions and orientation of the land parcel. These concerns largely related to the impact this massing will have on sky views as well as wind impacts. It was noted from other experiences that strong prevailing westerly winds can be exacerbated at the pedestrian level by large building masses that are constructed in the path of these winds. The proponent was encouraged to update the wind study that was undertaken for the balance of the development block by including the existing proposal within the study and to make any appropriate changes to the design. It was suggested that one way of addressing the large north- south massing would be to deliver a more slender tower and to increase the height of the podium.
8 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007
Materiality The Panel was appreciative of the proposed material palette and encouraged the proponent to ensure that this palette is delivered during the construction stage of development.
Landscaping Strategy The Panel noted that since the only portion of public realm within this proposal is along the street edges, it is important that these spaces receive an appropriate quality of landscaping detail. It was suggested that this quality would also help to refine and disrupt the continuous Yonge Street façade at the pedestrian scale. The Panel commented that it was difficult to tell from the submission materials whether or not a double row of trees was being incorporated along Yonge Street.
In the overall context of open space shortages, the Panel was supportive of the proposed green spaces at the 3rd and 4th roof levels, indicating that access to these areas to residents of the building should be enhanced as much as possible.
Comments to Staff The Panel requested staff to include specific information within briefing binders about the stage of application for each project review. Staff and the proponent were also requested to provide a package of materials that allows for better understanding of the context of the proposal, and it was suggested that a model (digital or physical) would be a useful component of this package.
Additional Comments The proponent was requested to provide additional submission materials, including cross- sections showing the first floors of the building, the landscaping strategy, and general contextual materials as previously noted.
9 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 Project 3 – North York District, North York Centre
18-28 Inez Court, Hallstone Rodeo Drive Address 18-28 Inez Court Use Residential (Condominium) Zoning R4 residential Application Status Site Plan and Rezoning Application Architect Clifford Korman Owner The Hallstone Group of Companies Applicant/Agent The Hallstone Group of Companies Review First City Staff Robert Gibson, Community Planning; Jacqueline Chan, Urban Design
[back to top] Conflict of Interest None
Evaluation: Non-support (6-0)
Introduction
City staff outlined the site context and area policy priorities, and sought the Panel’s advice on the following:
• Are there alternative ways to organize the site and mass buildings to better respond to the long term planned context, and this site's location and role in North York Centre?
Clifford Korman, Architect, described the design rationale and the applicant team responded to questions from the Panel.
Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement
Sustainable Design • Develop and integrate a comprehensive sustainable design strategy into the proposal
Response to Context • Look to North York precedents in considering future context and the most appropriate design strategy, including Doris Avenue as a potential precedent for quality/character of Service Rd • Develop design through considering the Service Road as a major thoroughfare • Develop design for future area context, including: - consideration of planned density for the area, including to west of site - means of access to sites immediately east of site - transformation of current setting from suburban to urban environment
Site Plan Design • Conduct wind study and design accordingly, ensuring a high quality environment • Develop design to avoid “left over” spaces on site: - for current option consider flipping plan with courtyard on east side, providing pedestrian- focused outdoor amenity space
10 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 • Develop design alternatives to “vestige site” conditions, including: - alternatives to suburban, vehicle-dominated cul-de-sac entry - alternatives to axial, symmetric concept • Develop design to support the creation of a high quality street frontage
Pedestrian Realm • Develop a strong street presence and address along the Service Road, including: - primary residential entries - successful public/private transition - high quality pedestrian environment
Building Form and Articulation • Develop design concepts to: - integrate sustainable design strategies regarding building orientation and massing - provide strong, urban, built edge to the Service Road - consider massing alternatives (building height variation, tower/townhouse podium, etc.)
Landscaping Strategy • Develop high quality landscape environment, including: - enhanced ground level amenity space - high quality streetscape along the Service Road
Comments to City Staff • Provide comprehensive future context information, including: - 3D representation (digital or physical) of planned density and built form - anticipated access to adjacent sites - Service Road design intent - park space design intent
Submission Package • The Panel appreciated the proponent’s submission at such an early stage in the project, and their presentation of very preliminary concept work for review and comment.
Related Commentary
Sustainable Design The Panel encouraged the proponent to develop and incorporate a sustainability plan into the proposal.
Response to Context Much of the discussion during the review of this project related to the context of this site, both from within the boundaries of the site as well as beyond it. From within, it seemed apparent to the Panel that the existing site conditions, which are dominated by a vehicular cul-de-sac, had played a significant role in shaping the proposed built form response. For example, the entrance of the proposal appears to be shaped around the cul-de-sac; the shape of built form appears to follow from this.
Given that the cul-de-sac will be removed as part of redevelopment, the Panel urged the proponent to develop a proposal that is more responsive and engaging to the planned future context rather than the existing one. Future conditions will promote a shift from the existing suburban environment to a more high density, urban environment, and will include replacement of the internalized road layout with new a linear north-south road (Service Road).
11 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007 Staff described this Service Road as being similar to a continuation of Beecroft Road, which currently terminates further south of this site. It will be constructed in tandem with this development, and is envisioned to act as a collector road which compliments the north-south capacity of Yonge Street. As such, it will have a significantly more built up and urban feel about than the existing road network. It was suggested that the character of the Service Road could be similar to that of Doris Avenue, which is another recently constructed street located to the south- west of this site.
The Panel felt strongly that it is possible to re-organize the site and mass to better respond to this long term planning context of the study area. In demonstrating this, the Panel gave consideration to potential development scenarios that would reasonably be anticipated near this site, including to the east along Yonge Street and to the west. For example, one Panelist noted that the built form could be shaped by the introduction of a vehicular access point to the south of the site which would be used to service properties on the east side of Yonge Street. Although this example was speculative, it illustrated the point that it is possible for the proposal to be more responsive to the emerging context in this study area.
Site Plan Design The Panel suggested that a wind study may be required in order to test the conditions of the current proposal, given that it forms a catchment shape for the strong westerly winds.
Pedestrian Realm The Panel encouraged the applicant to develop the built form in a way that enhances the quality street edge and pedestrian realm.
Built Form and Articulation In general terms, the Panel was in agreement that the built form should be less formal/ symmetrical and less responsive to its existing context. Specific suggestions for alternative arrangements to the built form included providing more density, possibly on the north corner to increase access to natural sunlight, as well as using the built form to define the edges of the new street. It was suggested one way of achieving this would be to rotate the current proposal 180 degrees, so that the lengthier bulk of the proposal lines the new service road, and the two end pieces wrapping around the eastern portion of the site to form an amenable pedestrian-scaled common space.
Landscaping Strategy The proponent was encouraged to develop a landscaping strategy that enhances the ground plane, including a common space for occupants of the proposed building.
Comments to Staff The Panel indicated that additional contextual information from staff would have been useful to assist with the review of this proposal. These included more information about the general vision for the new Service Road (including cross-sections) and more information about the future direction of this area (including other development applications in the area).
Additional Comments The Panel was appreciative of the proposal coming forward this early on in the application process. Given the early nature of this application, it was suggested that it would have been interesting to see alternative concepts that had been developed for the proposal.
12 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL PILOT PROJECT
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 22, 2007