//Committee of Adjustment Hearing (#2) for 1000-2 Bathurst St Wednesday March 27th 4:30pm

Committee of Adjustment Hearing (#2) for 1000-2 Bathurst St Wednesday March 27th 4:30pm

Brief from Committee of Adjustment hearing for 1000-2 Bathurst St January 23, 2013
It was decided that:

-Street animation not provided by proposed at grade retail opportunity. Live work unit NOT considered retail opportunity but instead CofA qualified it as essentially residential;
-References, points and contexts very different planning references and not at all appropriate or relevant thus, dismissed (cited 483 Dupont st., Vermont Sq Towers senior’s residence @ Barton, B2 development at Bathurst and Bloor (east side);
-Main Streets Initiative: the lot is too small and constrained for the size of the proposal. It pushes envelope and RB remained unconvinced it is an appropriate Main Streets approach. Go back to Councillor’s office/Planning Dept. to discuss;
-Set Back : requirement 7.5 m. According to variance request, Current plan provides only 5.2m. It was then stated that it isn’t liveable space but one story stairwell projection that reduces number. RB asserted does NOT comply with 45degree angular plane (3rd floor) and this is the most impactful aspect of the design/plan. As such, the rear yard proximity to 2 Olive st is problematic (where is 45 degree angular plane being issued from?)
-Characterized project as “over-reaching” and stated “the Devil is in the details” regarding the cumulative impact of the variances

• All 4 members were against the proposal in the present form and the debate among them was whether to turn down the proposal or defer it with the hope that a resolution could be reached between the residents and the developer.

Paulo Oh (developer) argued:
-minimal infringement from angular plane
-Planner Barry brooks qualified the project as “supportable and acceptable” as per most recent revisions January 2013
-neighbourhood has not honoured “agreed to” approval process with the alterations he has made to the structure and so is leery/mistrustful of further collaborative process
-A city “traffic study” assures there are 250 parking spaces available in Seaton Village so he is covered and exempt from providing 8 parking spaces as required by scope of project/3 of units in building
CofA unanimously denied the proposal and mandated ongoing collaboration between Paulo Oh and the Community.

Jh, Mark Fram and Edward Leman met with Developer who offered minor alterations to the 4th and 5th floor balconies by suggesting a 1-2 foot reduction on exterior balconies. Oh argued this would satisfy compliance with 45 degree angular plane, but felt concessions had already been made to the neighbourhood so no further changes would be offered.

SVRA requested from Councillor Vaughan;1) a meeting at Councillor Vaughan’s office with the councillor mediating and Barry Brooks, City Planner be in attendance to speak to Mr Oh’s claims regarding his support of the project and;
2.) a copy of the “Transportation Study” Mr Oh refers to

A meeting was not able to be accommodated within the Councillor’s/others’ schedule.
Concerned members of the community and the SVRA met March 12th, 2013 at St Albans to discuss moving forward and this hearing and a potential date at the OMB

Here are the most recent revisions to 1000-2 Bathurst St:
1000 Bathurst_1st Floor
1000 Bathurst_2nd Floor
1000 Bathurst_4th Floor
1000 Bathurst_4th Mezzanine Floor
1000 Bathurst_Basement Floor
1000 Bathurst_Rear Elevation
1000 Bathurst_Roof Floor
1000 Bathurst_Sections 2
1000 Bathurst_Site Plan 2
1000 Bathurst_South Elevation 2<

UPDATE: CofA turned down the proposal for 1000-2 Bathurst St. The developer submitted an application to the OMB. Meeting date TBA