Report to: Development
Services Committee Report
Date:
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION REPORT
Mobius
Corp.
Applications
for Site Plan Approval to permit commercial developments on the east side of
File Nos: SC 06 129362 & SC 06 129667
PREPARED BY:
East District Team
RECOMMENDATION:
That the report
dated June 26, 2007, entitled “Applications for Site Plan Approval to permit
commercial developments on the east side of Markham Road, north and south of
Karachi Drive” be received;
That the Site Plan Applications (File Nos: SC 06 129362 & SC 06 129667) submitted by Mobius Corp. to permit commercial developments on the east side of Markham Road, north and south of Karachi Drive, be endorsed in principle, subject to the conditions attached as Appendix ‘A’.
That the site
plan approval be delegated to the Director of
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Mobius Corp. has submitted two
site plan applications to permit commercial developments on the east side of
A total of
fifteen commercial condominium buildings, comprised of 208 units ranging in size
from 43.5 m2 (468 ft2) to 124 m2 (1335 ft2)
are proposed (Figures 5 & 6). The
proposed buildings fronting onto
It is felt that the two sites,
located to the north and south of
Based on the Parking By-Law provisions which apply a standard of 1 space per 18.5 square metres to the entire shopping centre, there is a parking deficiency of 135 spaces on Site C and a surplus of 19 spaces on site “B” for a combined deficiency of 116 spaces. However, it is felt that the parking standard (1 parking space per 22 square metres) applied to retail space within the Armadale shopping centre to the northeast, across Markham Road, could be applied, together with the reduced parking standard of one space per 30 square metres for second storey office applied elsewhere in the Town, to encourage second storey office use. Application of these standards would result in site “B” to the north of Karachi Drive having a surplus of 86 parking spaces and site “C” to the south would having a deficiency of 55 spaces, for a combined surplus of 31 spaces. In addition, approximately 11 or 12 on street lay-by parking spaces are also available. A parking study has been initiated to review parking requirements for the proposed development, as staff acknowledge that the Armadale shopping centre with a number of larger retail uses is somewhat different from the proposed shopping centre containing smaller condominium units. A minor variance application to address the parking shortfall will be submitted to the Committee of Adjustment, and in a condition of site plan approval.
The proposal
was presented to Development Services Committee on
·
The applicant is not prepared to add residential
uses or additional office space along the new
·
The applicant is marketing to the south-east
Asian community and feels a cultural ‘theme’ will come through in the final
uses of the units and in the signage.
·
The applicant notes that marketing has been very
successful and that their marketing agent does not anticipate any issues with
the sale or long term viability of units fronting on
·
The applicant has revised the landscape plans to
introduce some additional soft landscaping (trees) and permeable paving (along
pedestrian pathways) within the sites.
Any additional landscaping will have to be balanced with parking needs.
·
The applicant has provided improved pedestrian
connectivity between and within the two sites and has incorporated on site furniture, specifically
benches and bicycle racks, to encourage pedestrian and cycling activities.
As a result of
the significant drop in grade between
The proposed development complies with
Secondary Plan policies and, with the exception of noted variances, complies
with the Major Commercial (MJC) zoning of the lands. Staff is generally satisfied with the
proposed site plan and building elevations and feel that the applications can
be supported subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix ‘A’. The matters detailed in this report,
particularly those with regard to parking spaces and grading, will have to be
addressed to staff’s satisfaction prior to the Director of
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Not applicable
The purpose of this report is to recommend endorsement of two site plan applications submitted by Mobius Corp. to permit commercial developments on the east side of Markham Road, north and south of Karachi Drive, between New Delhi Drive and Kirkham Road.
The subject
lands are situated on the east side of Markham Road, on the north and south
sides of Karachi Drive, within the Community Focus Area identified in the
Markham Road Corridor Study (see discussion below) (Figures 1 - 4). The site to the north side of
To the north, across
Proposal is for commercial developments
comprised of retail units and offices
Mobius Corp.
has submitted site plan applications to develop both sites with commercial
buildings that will be comprised primarily of retail units and some
offices. The following is a brief
development summary of both sites.
Site B – North Side
Site “B”, north
of
Of the four
single storey buildings only one will house thru-units (Building “B2”) and this
building will face the interior parking lot as well as the Costco parking lot
to the east across new Delhi Drive. The remaining
three buildings will have of back-to-back units, with each unit having a single
entrance, and one row of units facing a public street.
This site will
have access from both
Site C – South Side
Site “C”, south
of
The site will
have access from both
Official Plan and Zoning
The Armadale
Secondary Plan (through OPA 125) designates the subject lands Community Amenity
Area. The intention of this designation
is to provide for a multi-use, multi-purpose centre offering a diverse range of
retail, service, community, institutional and recreational uses serving several
nearby residential and/or business areas.
The designation provides for the proposed land uses (retail, service,
and offices uses), subject to good urban design considerations.
The subject lands are zoned Major Commercial (MJC) under By-law 177-96, as amended. With certain exceptions noted in this report, the proposed development complies with the current zoning. The zoning for both Site B and Site C include a Hold provision. Removal of this hold is subject to, amongst other things, execution of a subdivision and/or site plan agreement.
The
urban design vision for the
At the May 22,
2007 Development Services Committee (DSC) Meeting (Part A), staff outlined the
history of the Markham Road Corridor Study and the evolution of the ‘Main
Street’ within the Community Focus Area identified in that Study. Staff noted that as a result of certain
significant shortcomings of Karachi Drive as a Main Street, including the
restricted access from Markham Road and the lack of any direct links to
residential uses, it is now felt that the east west portion of New Delhi Drive
was the most appropriate location for the Main Street in the area (Figure 4).
A New Delhi
Drive ‘Main Street’ would have a signalized access from Markham Road; it would
terminate at a future Community Centre which could be designed to enhance the
Main Street; it would allow the opportunity to take advantage of existing storm
water management ponds to the southeast through linking pathways and
landscaping; and it could link the Main Street through an enhanced Golden Avenue
to the Armadale Community and public open spaces to the west. In addition, a
The new concept
for the
Minor Variance Application is required for
parking and other deficiencies
As previously stated,
there is a parking by-law deficiency of 135 spaces on Site C and a surplus of 19
spaces on site “B”. However, for the
purposes of parking calculations it is felt that both sites “B” and “C” can be
reviewed together as one shopping complex.
Staff of the Town’s Transportation Division, having reviewed the traffic
volume and anticipated speed of traffic on Karachi Drive, as well as factors
such as the restricted access at Markham Road, short block length and the stop
signs at New Delhi Drive, have advised that movement of vehicular and
pedestrian traffic between the two sites is not of concern and can be achieved
without significant difficulty. They
have also advised that once the two shopping centers are built and occupied
they will monitor the cross traffic and, if necessary, additional measures to
reduce any conflicts can be considered.
When taking into consideration the total number of parking spaces provided for both sites, the overall parking by-law deficiency is 116 spaces (total number of parking spaces provided for both sites is 650; whereas, the total number of required parking spaces is 766). This represents an overall deficiency of approximately 15%.
However, the
noted deficiencies are based on the By-law standard of 1 parking space per 18.5
square metres of leasable floor area for the entire plaza. It is felt that the current standard may be
too restrictive for large shopping centres and staff are currently in the
process of initiating a review of this standard to determine its
appropriateness. Based on a site
specific parking study, the Armadale plaza to the north-west, across
It is felt that
the 1 space per 22 square metre standard applied at the Armadale shopping
centre could be applied to the retail space within the subject sites. Also, in keeping with past practice of
allowing a reduced parking standard for second storey office space (employed to
encourage second storey offices within shopping centres) it is felt that a
standard of 1 parking space per 30 square metres could be applied to all second
storey offices. If these standards are
applied to this proposal, site “B” to the north of
It is
acknowledged that the Armadale shopping centre with a number of larger retail
uses is somewhat different from the proposed shopping centre containing smaller
condominium units. A parking study has
been requested by staff and initiated by the applicant to review parking
requirements for the proposed development.
The applicant has been advised that once the parking study is submitted,
and if parking is determined to be an issue, staff will work with the applicant
to restrict the amount of restaurant floor space within the shopping centre as
well as reduce the overall floor area to reduce the parking requirement to
manageable levels.
A minor
variance application to address the parking shortfall will be submitted to the
Committee of Adjustment. The amount of
reduction to be supported will be determined as discussed above, including
consideration of the required parking study.
The applicant
will also be submitting a minor variance application to deal with other
deficiencies that were identified in the zoning review of the site plan
applications. These include: reduced lot area and lot frontage (both are
existing situations), reduction of building height along Karachi Drive from
eight metres to six metres, and elimination of loading space requirements (a typical
variance in shopping centres containing small units). The deficiencies with regard to minimum
height and loading spaces have been reviewed by staff and were found to be
acceptable in light of the desire to achieve a
The applicant has responded to certain
matters raised by Members of Council
At the May 22,
2007 Development Services Committee meeting, following staff’s presentation on
the proposed new Main Street, the applicant presented the subject development
proposal. At that time members of
Committee raised certain matters which have been addressed by the applicant as
follows:
Explore the
feasibility of adding some residential uses near the proposed ‘
The applicant
has indicated their position that they are commercial developers and that they
are not prepared to go through the process necessary to add residential uses to
this development. They have also advised
that additional office space is not feasible for two reasons. First, site ‘C’ already has limited parking
and additional office space would make that situation worse. Second, the applicant’s real estate agent has
advised that leasing / selling of third storey office space is very difficult
in this market area. However, the
applicant has advised that they are agreeable to provide an additional half
storey height and massing at the immediate corner of
Consideration
of a south or southeast Asian theme for the shopping centre
The applicant has
advised that they are marketing to the south east Asian community and that unit
sizes and marketing material have been specifically designed for that
purpose. The applicant is of the opinion
that the south east Asian ‘theme’ will come through in the final uses of the
units and in the signage.
Concern that
uses in the units fronting onto
The applicant
has indicated that marketing of units within this shopping centre has been very
successful to date and that they do not anticipate any issues with the sale or
long term viability of these units fronting on
Nevertheless,
the applicant has indicated that they would be very interested in accommodating
lay-by parking along
Investigation
of the feasibility of additional soft landscaping and permeable paving
Committee members had requested that the applicant explore
the feasibility of providing additional soft landscaping (trees) and permeable
paving within the sites. The applicant
has revised the landscape plans to introduce some additional soft landscaping
(trees) while minimizing the loss of parking spaces to achieve this
objective. Once the parking study is
available staff will review these matters with the applicant to balance the
desire for additional landscaping with parking requirements. The applicant has also incorporated permeable
pavers in the pedestrian walkways through the parking areas.
Greater
pedestrian connectivity within and between the two sites
The applicant has
enhanced the pedestrian connectivity between and within the two sites, as
suggested by members of Committee, by incorporating pedestrian walkways through the parking
areas. The pathways within the parking
areas are delineated wherever possible by the use of permeable pavers. Staff, with regard to pedestrian safety, has
asked that the plans be modified to direct pedestrian traffic between the two
sites through the intersection area of
Grading requires further review in
consultation with the applicant
For the design
and layout of the subject sites, the applicant has struggled somewhat to
address the significant drop in grade from
Site Plan and Building Elevations are considered
acceptable subject to certain matters to be finalized
The proposed
development incorporates two storey buildings at appropriate locations, along
Each site is
proposed to have two full moves accesses, one each from
While buildings
occupy much of the street frontages, there are significant gaps between
buildings along
The applicant has worked with staff to create building designs that incorporate a number of design elements, such as store front fabric awnings, along all parking lot and street elevations, to achieve a visually cohesive development. Appropriate cornice treatments and wall surface articulation help to provide balanced facades. The building materials proposed for all buildings will consist of masonry piers and E.I.F.S., which is a form of synthetic stucco. Earth tone building colours of red-brown and buff have been proposed with accent colours provided in the signage bands (Figure 7). Staff will continue to work with the applicant to fine tune the elevations. Given the large number of buildings, only typical elevations of the proposed buildings are included in Figures 7 – 9.
The elevations
show the proposed sign locations on buildings.
The amount of signage at the site will be controlled through the sign
by-law. However, staff will ensure that
the site plan agreement as well as the future condominium agreement will
address the objective of consistent signage throughout this development.
Conclusion
Staff feels
that the proposed site plan and elevations drawings can be supported subject to
the matters detailed in this report, and recommend that they be endorsed in
principle subject to the conditions attached in Appendix ‘A’. The outstanding matters, particularly those
with regard to parking and grading, will have to be resolved to staff’s
satisfaction prior to the Director of Planning & Urban Design signing-off
on the endorsed plans.
FINANCIAL TEMPLATE (external link):
Not applicable.
There are no
significant natural features on the site.
As already noted in this report, the applicant will be undertaking a
number of measures in support of the environment such as encouraging pedestrian
and bicycle use, planting of additional trees (subject to satisfying parking
requirements) and the incorporation of permeable pavers in the pedestrian walkways through the
parking areas. In addition, the
applicant has advised that they will be incorporating lighting controls to
reduce site lighting during non-business hours in order to reduce light
pollution and energy consumption, use high efficiency HVAC equipment which will
reduce energy consumption, and provide white roofs will reduce heat island effects. The applicant is proposing to not provide an
irrigation system within the parking areas in order to reduce water and energy
consumption. To accommodate this they
intend to modify the landscape plan to include more tolerant native species,
subject to approval of this scheme by the Town.
ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS:
As noted previously, due to grade changes at this site, there have been some concerns regarding the ease of accessibility to the stores for the physically disabled and for wheel chairs. Staff will continue to work with the applicant to increase accessibility to the greatest extent possible.
Proactive
growth management is identified as a goal of the Town and good urban design is
seen as critical to this. The designs of
the proposed buildings in both site plans are consistent with the Town’s high
quality design requirements.
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:
The site
plan applications submitted by the applicant have been circulated to various
departments and external agencies.
Requirements of the Town and external agencies have been reflected in
the preparation of this report and conditions of endorsement.
RECOMMENDED
BY: ________________________ ________________________
Valerie
Shuttleworth, M.C.I.P, R.P.P Jim Baird, M.C.I.P, R.P.P
Director,
Services
Figure 1: Location Map
Figure 2: Area Context/Zoning
Figure 3: Air Photo, 2005
Figure 4: Area Contest
Figure 5: Site Plan - Site B
Figure 6: Site Plan - Site C
Figure 7: Typical Two-Storey Coloured Elevations
Figure 8: Typical Two-Storey Elevations
Figure 9: Typical Single-Storey (back to back units)
Elevations
Figure 10 : Typical
Single-Storey (thru units) Elevations
AGENT:
David McKay
MHBC Planning Limited
Tel: (905) 761-5522
Fax: (905) 761-5589