Toronto Planning Report on The Two Kings

STAFF REPORT INFORMATION ONLY The Two Kings – Status Report – For Information Date:

April 7, 2014

To:

Giulio Cescato, MCIP, RPP

From:

Nikolas Koschany 500 524 631, Kim Behrouzian 500 513 540, Noel Cubacub 500502412, Sarah Ashley Grace 500 471 029, Nicole Cheng 500 533 544, Andrea Patsalides 500 508 310

Wards:

Ward 20 – Trinity-Spadina & Ward 28 – Toronto Centre-Rosedale

Reference Major Assignment – The Two Kings Number:

SUMMARY Developed in the 1980s, the two kings, inclusive of King-Parliament (East), and KingSpadina (West), were plans that intended to provide a policy framework to act as a catalyst for redevelopment and reinvestment in, what were at the time, industrial districts.

The policy was developed in response to poor economic conditions and lack of productivity in the existing industrial neighbourhoods. From this, the notion of complete livable neighbourhoods enforced by mixed-use land regulations was introduced via Secondary Plans for both King-Parliament and King-Spadina. The areas shared common, almost identical goals in terms of their regeneration - they aimed to stimulate economic investments/reinvestments, foster a positive pedestrian realm, the synergy of a working and living environment and the retention of existing character or heritage through the processes of intergenerational planning.

INTRODUCTION Study Areas King-Spadina and King Parliament Located in Toronto’s downtown core, the King-Spadina Study Area is bounded by Bathurst Street on the west, Simcoe Street and John Street to the east, and south of Queen Street to Front Street. Similar principles apply to King-Spadina’s counterpart, King-Parliament. Situated on the east end of Toronto’s Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

1

downtown core, the King-Parliament Study Area is bounded by Bayview Avenue on the east, Jarvis Street, Sherbourne Street and Parliament to the west, and south of Queen Street to Front Street.

The King-Spadina and King-Parliament areas were early established as two of the City’s main manufacturing and industrial areas. As such, zoning regulations had casted KingSpadina and King-Parliament as traditional, heavy-industrial areas, prohibiting most, if not all other types of development activity. A trend emerged in the 1970s however, as increased liberalization of global markets changed manufacturing processes, placing greater competitive pressure on local manufacturing firms. As a result, many companies shifted operations offshore or to new suburban facilities. Rather than having a major industrial employment center in the central downtown area, cities had begun to sprout suburban low-density employment belts along highways and major exurban industrial employment centers. Only a fraction of urban industrial employment is still located in the central downtown core.

In response to the growing market pressures, the manufacturing sector entered a period of decline in the 1970s, which accelerated throughout the 1980s. Since the prevailing zoning regulations prohibited other types of development, vacancy rates increased dramatically and many warehouses were left empty, allowing urban decay to settle in. In order to reduce realty taxes, property owners began demolishing structures without regard to historical context. By the 1990’s it became apparent that the areas of King-Spadina and King-Parliament could no longer compete as viable manufacturing districts.

Recognizing the deterioration of the areas and the rigid planning and zoning regulations that were hindering development, the City of Toronto adopted a new land use planning approach that eliminated the long-standing planning and zoning regulations that kept these areas a fully industrial district. The new land use controls re-designated the areas as Regeneration Areas in the Toronto Official Plan, and new guidelines were put in place, providing minimal restrictions on uses and increased flexibility for redevelopment, while at the same time emphasizing the importance of accommodating mixed uses within the existing and new built form to reinforce and preserve the character and heritage of the area.

Policy Context Toronto Official Plan and Central Waterfront Secondary Plan Both the King-Spadina and King-Parliament areas are designated as Regeneration Areas in their corresponding secondary plans. Regeneration areas, according to Toronto’s Official Plan, are key to the city’s growth by reinvigorating areas that are no longer productive within an urban context due to shifts in local or global economies. As such, the areas seek to attract investment by allowing an ever-evolving mixture of land uses such as commercial, residential, live/work, institutional, and light industrial, within the same areas or even the same buildings. Not all Regeneration Areas will have the same mix of uses or development policies, as each set of regeneration policies must be “tailor made” to the designated area, and grounded in frameworks set by corresponding Secondary Plans. Secondary Plans guide the revitalization of Regeneration Areas through

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

2

policies regarding urban design, transportation and, community services and improvements, among others. In the case of the Two Kings, both have their own secondary plans, but the King Parliament-Area is also partially contained within the Central Waterfront Secondary Plan which seeks to remove barriers to the waterfront, promote a clean environment, create diverse new communities, and build a network of ‘spectacular’ public spaces and waterfront parks.

The Provincial Policy Statement Many Regeneration Areas are former industrial or ‘brownfield’ sites which pose opportunities for economic prosperity and intensification according to the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement.

The King-Spadina Secondary Plan The King-Spadina Secondary Plan has five major objectives: to attract new investment to the area; to provide for an ever evolving mixture of compatible land uses; to retain and promote commercial and light-industrial uses to preserve employment, specifically the media design and fashion industries; to provide for the retail-service industry, as to support the changing demands of the area, and; to protect, retain, restore, and re-use historic buildings. To achieve these goals, the King-Spadina Plan sets out policies regarding urban structure and built form, heritage, community improvement, and transportation and parking, among others. A summary of the policies exists below.

Existing public streets and lanes shall be retained and improved, while opportunities for new laneways and mid-block connections shall be explored. Significant streetscapes will be enhanced through design guidelines, zoning, and streetscape improvement programs.

These streetscapes include major connector roads, like Spadina and Bathurst, which provide connections to the waterfront, Front, King and Queen, which link the study area to the Financial District, as well as distinctive neighbourhood roads such as Peter/Blue Jays Way, and Duncan. Other areas of special identity such Victoria Square shall be given design guidelines which promote their unique characteristics and identity. Any streets which terminate at these areas shall be given prominent treatment for view corridors. Draper Street, which is designated a Heritage Conservation District, shall have no development.

Where possible, servicing shall occur in laneways rather than on the street, and vehicular parking shall minimize pedestrian and automobile conflicts. The addition or expansion of any surface parking lots is prohibited, while the removal of them is encouraged. New or replacement parking shall be done above or below grade, shall not interfere with the pedestrian streetscape, and be accessed from side streets or service laneways wherever possible. Automobile use shall be minimized through the promotion of public transit and minimum-maximum parking standards. New buildings must front upon streets and public spaces in such a way that defines the edge of the space, while providing surveillance opportunities and public uses which are directly accessible from at grade.

“Big box” retail is allowed within the area, so long as heritage is conserved, and no vehicular parking comes between the sidewalk and its entrance, which must be accessed from the front of the property.

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

3

Heritage buildings shall be protected, re-used and restored through appropriate legal agreements, as they are essential elements in the character of the area. New buildings shall achieve a compatible relationship with heritage buildings through matters such as height, massing, scale, setbacks, stepbacks, and architectural character. The height of new buildings on lots containing heritage may be increased beyond what is specified in the zoning by-law, provided the restoration and maintenance of said heritage buildings is agreed to between the owner and the City through section 37 benefits, as outlined by the Planning Act. Section 37 benefits are also promoted to establish new community services and improvements such as childcare facilities, or sidewalk widening and beautification.

These needs will be determined by the City of Toronto planning staff.

The King-Parliament Secondary Plan The King-Parliament Secondary Plan is more specific than the King-Spadina Plan.

Among its major objectives are: to attract new investment to the area; to target growth in commercial, institutional, light industrial, entertainment, recreational and live/work activities, all of which are mutually compatible; to retain and re-use heritage buildings; to create attractive and safe streets, and; to retain and promote employment in the area, especially in the business services, film, media design, and technology sectors.

Like in the King-Spadina Plan, existing public streets and lanes shall be retained and improved, while opportunities for new laneways and mid-block connections shall be introduced either to serve development or alleviate the need for parking and loading access. New development will recognise the unique character of designated “special streets� including Parliament Street, which connects the waterfront to emerging areas such as the Distillery District, King Street East, which connects King-Parliament to Downtown, and Berkeley Street, which has a small scale fine grained character. In addition, certain buildings and landscape elements shall be created in conjunction with new development to create view termini.

Where possible, servicing shall occur from laneways rather than on the street, and vehicular parking shall minimize pedestrian and automobile conflicts. The addition or expansion of any surface parking lots is prohibited, while the removal of them is encouraged. New or replacement parking shall be done below grade with exception to development involving the re-use or conversions of existing buildings. Any above grade parking shall not interfere with the pedestrian streetscape, and be accessed from side streets or service laneways wherever possible. Automobile use shall be minimized through the promotion of public transit and minimum-maximum parking standards. New buildings must front upon streets and public spaces in such a way that defines and animates the edge of the space, while providing surveillance opportunities and public uses which are directly accessible from at grade. New buildings must also provide adequate light view and privacy for neighbouring properties.

Heritage buildings shall be protected, re-used and restored through appropriate legal agreements, as they are essential elements in the character of the area. New buildings shall achieve a compatible relationship with heritage buildings through matters such as height, scale, setbacks, step backs, and architectural character. The height of new buildings on lots containing heritage may be increased beyond what is specified in the

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

4

zoning by-law, provided the restoration and maintenance of said heritage buildings is agreed to between the owner and the City through section 37 benefits, as outlined by the Planning Act. Section 37 benefits are also promoted to establish new community services as outlined through the King Parliament Community Improvement Plan. Needed community services and facilities as identified by staff shall be provided in a timely manner. Once 800 units are occupied within the area, a community services and facilities strategy will be prepared.

In addition to the above policies, The King-Parliament Area is subject to five area specific policies in Jarvis-Parliament, Corktown, The West Don Lands, The Gooderham and Worts District (more commonly known as the Distillery District), and along Queen Street.

Jarvis-Parliament is an area targeted for significant growth, and promotes a variety of uses, institutional, entertainment and other within new and existing buildings, so long as the uses compliment the area. In Corktown, development is mainly restricted to infill development and industrial building conversion, the latter which must be constricted to the building as it was in 1995. New development in this area must be complementary to existing heritage, and conform to its massing, scale, and height. In the West Don Lands the area is designated to be redeveloped in phases for significant growth and mixed uses.

Soil and groundwater remediation is to be monitored and managed in the area, and developments are subject to a holding provision, which may only be removed once such remediation has occurred alongside a strategy for community services and facilities.

District heating and cooling facilities should be extended where feasible, and a plan established to service the area. In the Distillery District, the area may be used for commercial, institutional, and light industrial activities, so long as they are environmentally compatible with residential uses, which are permitted also. Lastly, Queen Street is a mixed use area, which permits residential, commercial and institutional development, either alone or in combinations.

COMMENTS Comparing the Two-Kings Policies As seen above, the secondary plans of the Two Kings contain predominantly identical language. This said, the language is not always consistent, and differs in some respects between the two plans, as each plan is generated with specific forms of policy aimed towards the regeneration of their geographical area.

The differing language begins with the major objectives each plan has focused on. Both plans inherently aim for new investment but the methodology differs. When describing what forms of land uses may be seen within each area the King-Spadina secondary plan makes clear that the area will “provide” for said uses while the King-Parliament secondary plan is “targeted” for growth, making clear that the former area is attracting more investment than the latter. Further discrepancies lie on the emphasis of employment within each objective. Where King-Spadina aims for the retention and promotion of commercial and light industry, specifically the media design and fashion industries, Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

5

King-Parliament focuses on the film, media design, business and technology sectors.

Furthermore, the land uses permitted within King-Parliament are more numerous than those in King-Spadina, including recreational and institutional land uses on top of commercial, residential and light industrial ones. These additional land uses are likely due to the King-Parliament Plan’s area specific policies. For example, recreational land uses are permitted in The West Don Lands, likely because it is centred around an 18 acre park called Corktown Commons.

With regards to built form policies, both plans are nearly identical to each other. There is an emphasis placed on “significant” or “special” streets that will be enhanced in the future due to their unique characteristics. The “general built form policies” are practically mirror images of one another, as both call to maintain and enhance public places that are attractive and comfortable. To exemplify this point further, both policies prohibit the creation and expansion of surface parking lots, both require built form to define and animate the edges of public space while providing public uses from at grade, and both call for the introduction of new mid-block connections. One difference within this section however, is the addition of a policy in King-Parliament that allows for the creation of landscape or building elements at specific locations to create appropriate view termini.

While view corridors do exist in the King-Spadina Plan, these are not reliant upon the creation of landscape elements.

When considering other sections of the secondary plans, such as heritage, environment, and community improvement, both plans contain identical language, from the promotion of section 37 funding, to the encouragement of district heating and cooling plants and groundwater contamination management. Other policy differences are mostly due to area specific phenomena within the King Parliament area. For example, the King Parliament Plan calls for the construction of a pedestrian/cycle underpass underneath the CN/CP rail tracks, to connect the West Don Lands to the Don River - something impossible in the King Spadina Area because the geography is specific to King-Parliament. A further example is the use of holding provisions in The West Don Lands, which are only in existence because the area was not serviced by things like roads and sewers when the policy went into effect.

Lastly, monitoring and management policies on both sites are identical, with both calling for the monitoring of diversity of land uses, the amount and type of employment in the area, demands for community services, and transportation requirements and improvements.

Built Form The built form in the two Kings has been altered immensely as a result in the change of zoning by-laws and the policies for the neighbourhoods. Both areas are now extensively mixed-use, while intensification has also occurred. Where King-Parliament has seen a steady influx of development however, King-Spadina has seen a construction boom since the construction of the TIFF Bell Lightbox in 2010, which has radically altered the character of the area.

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

6

King-Parliament’s built form has been guided differently in each of its special policy areas. In Corktown, where the existing built form is small, development has followed height restrictions, while complimenting the heritage in the area. The streets of Corktown are still filled with historic rowhouses and small cottage style homes which reflect 19th century style. Much development within the area has been either infill, or the conversion of industrial buildings to residential ones. On King Street, new developments have followed Corktown’s special policy quite well. Many industrial buildings have been converted into lofts, such as at 340 King Street East, and new buildings compliment the heritage through their brick looking exteriors, albeit mainly purple-brick rather than redbrick. Most developments are sensitive to height and provide step backs after three, four or five stories, mostly giving the illusion of identical height to the existing built form. In all cases along King, retail is at grade and fully accessible to the public.

On the other side of Parliament Street, the Jarvis-Parliament area’s built form differs quite dramatically from that in Corktown. Height is a major differential, with the buildings on King rising generally around 8-10 stories in comparison to Corktown’s maximum of 6. Many of these tall developments are located alongside restored heritage properties, which explains their height due to section 37 benefits. Development is very complementary to existing heritage, especially through the red brick imitation which facades most of these new buildings. Some tall buildings without red brick facades or not alongside heritage properties do exist, but these developments are few.

On Queen Street, which binds the area to the north, and is designated as a mixed use area, little development has occurred. Much of the built form consists of low-rises, either in the form of rowhouses, or historical Romanesque revival buildings with retail at the bottom.

These, along with a few industrial buildings, which have since become lofts, make up the majority of built form in this area.

Lastly, the Gooderham and Worts District is the largest collection of Victorian-era industrial architecture in North America. The area is characterized by its brick-paved streets from which automobiles are prohibited, and its extensive collection of low to midrise industrial buildings. The area contains a variety of uses, commercial and residential included, but is heavily defined by its arts and culture institutions, with much of the built form containing studios for artists. New development in the area includes two high rise buildings, which at the base, have imitated and complimented the existing brick heritage, while providing a more modern glass exterior higher up.

While the built form in the King-Parliament area is orderly and neat, in King-Spadina it is haphazardly placed, particularly in the East Precinct, where the development of the 40+ story TIFF Bell Lightbox in 2010, set a precedent for large-scale development in excess of the set height limit, which has since engulfed the area. Now in the East Precinct, entertainment buildings and glass high rises, often mixed use, are intermingled among heritage buildings, with no discernable pattern. Nowhere is this more apparent than across the street from the TIFF Bell Lightbox itself where a historic row of two and three buildings known colloquially as “restaurant row” sit. While most development is occurring on top of vacant parking lots, some is occurring on heritage sites, where only the facades of historical buildings are being preserved.

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

7

In the West Precinct, development has been slower, and as such, the area is characterized by smaller structures. Much of the existing built form is composed of industrial midrise buildings which are not mixed use. New developments, while not respectful of the industrial heritage of the area, being mostly glass, continue this height trend with predominantly 8-10 story buildings being put up along Richmond and Adelaide Streets.

Industrial buildings which have been revitalized instead of torn down and replaced with condos are located mainly along Wellington and King Streets, and are generally 3-5 stories in height. Mixed use development is existent in the precinct along King and Queen Streets, but mostly contained in the low rise buildings which characterise much of Queen Street in the King-Parliament area.

Lastly, the Spadina Corridor is characterized by former industrial buildings ranging anywhere from 2-12 stories. Many of these industrial buildings are now used as lofts, while providing retail at grade. New development in the area is typically respectful of the industrial-style street wall, and uses yellow brick alongside its more modern glass balconies, in order to compliment the heritage of the area. One development at King and Spadina reaches over 17 stories, but partially steps back after 12, providing consistency with the streetscape.

Demographics Our specific demographics focus on gender, income, and marital status 2011. Of the two areas, the more populous is King-Spadina, 8634 persons, compared to King-Parliament’s which has a population of 7487. Since 1996, King Spadina’s population has increased in excess of 800%, most of which occurred between 2006 and 2011, likely due to the highrise construction boom in the area. The majority of the population is composed of individuals aged 25-39 in both King Spadina (38.47%) and King Parliament (38.29%).

Those in King-Spadina also have greater recorded incomes. Over 17% of the population makes over $100000 per year, and this is the most prominent income category. This is in contrast to the King-Parliament areas, whose’ largest income bracket is $60000-79000 per year with 15.51% of the population earning this. Lastly, the majority of residents (over 30%) in both areas are not married, encompassing the single, widowed and divorced populations.

Graphs showing these factors in more detail are contained in the appendix at the end of this report.

Policy Analysis Successes and Challenges in the Two Kings It is undeniable that the Secondary Plans for Two Kings have attracted investment and reinvigorated their respective areas, but in many instances there has been a gap between the development that has occurred and the development that should have been. Both communities have been successful fulfilling their visions of economic revitalization, through means other than generic retail. While King-Parliament focuses on its institutions for employment, particularly its arts and culture hub in the Distillery District, King Spadina has maintained its jobs thus far, in the creative culture industry, as well as the fashion industry. While economically the areas are doing fine, King Spadina in particular

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

8

is struggling with the issues surrounding its tremendous population growth.

King Spadina’s population growth is the area’s most prominent issue, placing an unbearable strain on community services including transportation, libraries, schools, child care centres, and parks and open spaces. This influx of development poses a further threat when the Mirvish-Gehry proposal is taken into account. If passed in its current form, either through city council or the Ontario Municipal Board, the 86, 84, and 82 story buildings could set a height precedent that increases density within the area beyond the city’s means to provide services to it. The aforementioned development also poses threats to the city’s heritage and cultural employment sector, as it requires the demolition of four heritage buildings along with the Princess of Wales Theatre. The heritage threatened by new developments also includes restaurant row. The increased high-rise development in the area also poses problems relating to affordability of housing through gentrification, and privacy and sunlight issues due to tower proximity. Lastly, another challenge exists with the incredibly flexible mixed land-uses allowed by the secondary plans. In particular, loose regulations have led to the clustering of entertainment and late-night facilities, which many residents in the area oppose due to nuisances like noise levels.

On the other end of this spectrum, the King-Parliament area has been tremendous in its successes, particularly among built form and heritage conservation, partially due to its very precise area specific policies. Corktown and the Distillery District are both mixeduse areas for example, but development policies within each of the two are unique to the existing built form, with the latter preserving and emphasizing industrial architecture, and the former restricting height limits to maintain a continuous streetscape. The West Don Lands, while not being finished developed is another example of the area’s success regarding built form, from its brownfield remediation to its 18 acre park, which development is most heavily focused around in the area. While development in KingParliament has been incremental, rather than exponential like in King-Spadina, most development that has occurred conforms to the area’s policy, hence allowing us to successfully target needed services towards the area, rather than reactively provide them.

Suggested Policy Changes and Areas of Further Study With the reinvestment and development in the Two Kings now ongoing, it is easier to identify those policies which have worked, and those which have not. It is valuable to consider these policy options so ‘complete livable neighbourhoods’ can be established within the Two Kings.

In the King Parliament area, the completion of the West Don Lands will enhance the vibrancy of the area around it, including the Distillery District, located just southeast of the site. With the Pan-am games fast approaching, City Council would be wise to direct staff to study the combined area to determine whether its institutional employment uses are maintained, and what opportunities exist for promoting the Distillery District’s arts and culture sector to those in the West Don Lands. A needs assessment should be performed following the pan-am games, to reflect the new demographics in the West Don Lands after the athletes have moved out, and to speak to appropriate services and amenity requirements such as childcare facilities or schools. In the Jarvis-Parliament area, further policies should be put in place regarding new buildings their regard for heritage. In

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

9

particular, new buildings should require a redbrick (or redbrick looking) base, rather than purple-brick or glass one, to further fit in with the heritage in the area.

In both locations, the provision of affordable housing options should be considered, either through promotion of section 37 benefits, or otherwise through development systems (DPS). DPS may also be used to promote other needed “soft infrastructure” and community facilities.

The Green-roof bylaw in the City of Toronto Official Plan, makes any building over 6 stories required to have a green roof. These roofs should be studied to determine whether they can become privately owned public spaces, in order to provide more parks and open spaces for the King-Spadina area. Furthermore, despite the area’s mixed use, it may be wise to implement policy partially segregating entertainment uses from residential uses, or at least that defines and limits nightclubs, which currently compose over 40% of the entertainment uses today. This would return the area to a comfortable balance of entertainment uses, while mitigating the adverse community effects such as noise pollution.

CONCLUSIONS The Two Kings, have seen major upgrades in their infrastructure since their secondary plans were implemented, especially in the past four years. The policy intervention which designated the Two Kings as Regeneration Areas, hence loosening development guidelines, caused a heavy boom in contemporary infrastructure, which benefited the areas at the time, but now needs to keep up with increased population demand. In addition, the plans still do not fully address the topic of “soft infrastructure” including as community services and facilities. In many areas, not enough public facilities exist to accommodate to the population, and this trend will only continue without proactive planning.

The initial plans for the industrial areas were of value for their time. Now, however we see a shift in more than just the economy, but also in lifestyles and expectations of people. The new development strategies in place in King Spadina and King Parliament have come along with favorable economic conditions and stimulated a significant amount of reinvestment in the area. This investment has in turn fostered the visions for the areas by the retaining heritage structures that characterize them. Thus, it is not surprising that we can refer to the area as an example of a successful urban revitalization initiative. This said, it is possible some of the policies were too successful in attracting development.

Increased development pressures pose greater challenges to the urban fabric and community services, so if we are to keep the areas successful, we must proactively plan for the years and decades ahead.

CONTACT

SIGNATURE

Nikolas Koschany 500 524 631 _______________________________ Giulio Cescato, MCIP RPP Professor, PLG400 Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

10

ATTACHMENTS 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

King Parliament Special Policy Areas Map King Parliament View Termini Map King Spadina Three Precincts Map King Spadina View Termini Map Development in the East Spadina Precinct for King-Spadina Demographic Data

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

11

Attachment 1 – King Parliament Special Policy Area Map

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

12

Attachment 2 – King Parliament View Termini Map

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

13

Attachment 3 – King Spadina Three Precincts Map

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

14

Attachment 4 – King Spadina View Termini Map

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

15

Attachment 5 – Development in the East Spadina Precinct for King Spadina

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

16

Attachment 6 – Demographic Data

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

17

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

18

Staff report for Information – The Two Kings

19