Preserved Stories Blog

Pages 8 & 9 of Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Guidelines Draft focuses on 3.4 Driveways & Garages

Update:

A more complete and highly informative  overview of the contents of the Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines Draft Document  is available at the website of Ward 6 Councillor Mark Grimes. We owe thanks to Councillor Grimes for the role that he and his office have played in the initiation and development of the Pilot Project.

Click here to access the overview at the Ward 6 Councillor’s website >

[End]

 

The second half of the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Guidelines Advisory Group was devoted to feedback concerning the Reference Material Draft. Jaan Pill photo

The second half of the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Guidelines Advisory Group was devoted to feedback (each table shared two or three key comments) concerning the Reference Material Draft. Jaan Pill photo

Previous posts, in a series related to the Draft Guidelines Reference Material (f0r discussion purposes only), include:

Urban Design Guidelines Pilot Project has been launched in Long Branch – June 28, 2016

How to read the streets of Long Branch: Urban Design Guidelines Pilot Project is now underway – July 12, 2016

Long Branch Guidelines Pilot Project: David Godley shares his version of an Illustrated Analysis Grid – Aug. 11, 2016

Advisory Group for Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines had a productive meeting on Feb. 7, 2017 – Feb. 7, 2017

Pages 2 & 3 of Guidelines Draft: Exmoor Drive above TTC Loop is now included in Long Branch Guidelines project – Feb. 8, 2017

Pages 4 & 5 of Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Guidelines Draft focuses on 3.2 Height & Massing – Feb. 9, 2017

Pages 6 & 7 of Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Guidelines Draft focuses on 3.3 Building Elements – Feb. 10, 2017

Source: Draft of Reference Material (for discussion purposes only), Feb. 7, 2017

Source: Draft of Reference Material (for discussion purposes only), Feb. 7, 2017

Focus Questions

I have previously shared a detailed set of questions, that members of the Advisory Group were asked to comment upon at the Feb. 7, 2017 Advisory Group meeting. Time remains, at the time of this writing, for such comments to be sent to the Guidelines Pilot Project team. If you have any comments (or questions) please contact Sabrina Salatino directly by email at Sabrina.Salatino@toronto.ca

A short version of the list of questions reads:

1. Do you have any suggested refinements to the Long Branch Character Framework Plan?

2. What do you like about the draft guidelines? How could they be improved?

3. Are there any additional guidelines we should consider?

4. Do you have any suggestions for the approach / format for the public meeting?

A public meeting about the Long Branch Guidelines will be held in future.

3.4 Driveways & Garages

The introduction to pages 8 & 9 of the Draft Reference Material reads:

The predominant parking condition in Long Branch is through a driveway in the sideyard with a side-entry garage or detached garage at the rear, though a range of other conditions exist from front surface parking to integrated front entry garages.

Driveways and garages should comply with zoning regulations and be compact and well integrated so as not to dominate the front facade and maximize soft landscaping.

Diagram of Driveways & Garages. Note below image reads: Refer to City-Wide Template for further information.

Diagram of Driveways & Garages. Note below image reads: Refer to City-Wide Template for further information. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 8

The Objectives for 3.4 Driveways & Garages read:

  • Garage structures: Determine an appropriate height and width of garage in relation to the main building and locate it at grade, behind the primary plane of the front facade to avoid it becoming the dominant element of the entire facade. It is also important to use materials that are coherent with the rest of the building in terms of type, size, fine-grain detailing and quality
  • Integration: Define the dominant character(s) of other on-site elments, such as materials, articulation, and vegetation, and ensure the surface parking and driveways integrate within the parcel
  • Ground Permeability & Solar Reflectance: Minimize width of driveway and length of curb cut to fit just one vehicle in front of the building to reduce the amount of hardscape and increase soft landscaping wherever possible. Recommend permeable materials to encourage natural drainage and minimize surface run-off. Protect any green areas in proximity to driveways by requiring a clear division band (eg. textured curb) and ensure easy maintenance by planting drought resistant species. Additionally, recommend light-coloured materials that reflect heat.

*

Click on the images to enlarge them; click again to enlarge them further

*

On page 8 of the Reference Material you will find the following additional text:

Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 9

Figure 75. Incompatible double-wide integrated garage condition. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 9

How does the zoning regulate driveways & garages?

Though the zoning regulations vary by type, detached garage structures are generally required to follow the established setbacks for the residential building on the lot with the exception of a min. rear yard setback of 0.3m.

Zoning also sets a max. width of vehicle entrances through the front main wall of 6m and a range of driveway widths between 2-6m (max. of 2.6m if all parking spaces are in the rear yard). Importantly, a min. of 50% of the front and rear yard (60% for lot frontages of 15m >) is required to be soft landscaping, limiting the size of driveways/parking space.

3.4 page 9 detail (2)049

Figure 76. Incompatible front surface parking condition. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 9

What is the zoning’s intent?

The intent is to ensure the design of compact and well integrated parking & driveway solutions that do not distract from other front yard elements, allow for permeable or soft landscaping to support site drainage and that are compatible with the predominant character of the street.

Garages, whether integrated or additions, that dominate the front facade due to inappropriate scale and/or location as well as unnecessarily wide driveways which overcrowd front yard space are not compatible with Long Branch character.

What are the key design guidelines?

Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 9

Figure 77. New house with well integrated garage beside older house with garage addition. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 9

In order to achieve the objectives related to garage structures, integration, ground permeability and solar reflectance in the context of Long Branch, some key design guidelines include:

  • Garage structures should be no taller that the height of the front door, located at grade and preferably behind the primary plane of the front facade so as not to dominate the primary building
  • Limit both width of driveway and curb cut to 6m or less in order to reduce the amount of hardscape and increase soft landscaping wherever possible. Clearly delineate the limits of the driveway and protect any green areas adjacent to driveways by a clear division band (e.g. textured curb). Ensure that surface parking and driveways are integrated within the lot; consider consolidation of driveways with neighbouring properties.
  • Permeable materials are highly recommended to minimize surface run-off, such as gravel or permeable pavers. Light-coloured materials are required to reflect heat.

A note at the page bottom reads:

See Character Defining Conditions >     d., e., f., i.

Please note: I’ve broken longer paragraphs into shorter ones, for ease in online reading.

 

Share this:

Posted in Long Branch, Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines, Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

Urban Toronto’s Growth to Watch For Takes Stock of Toronto’s West End: Feb. 8, 2017 Urban Toronto article

Population change between 2011 and 2016 by percentage by census tract, Toronto. Source: This Census Canada image is available from varied media outlets, including the Urban Toronto article for which a link is provided at the page you are now reading.

Population change between 2011 and 2016 by percentage by census tract, Toronto. Source: This Statistic Canada image is available from varied sources, including on Twitter as well as the Urban Toronto article for which a link is provided at the page you are now reading.

A Feb. 8, 2017 Urban Toronto article is entitled: “UT’s Growth to Watch For Takes Stock of Toronto’s West End.”

The article includes a link to a Jan. 20, 2017 Urban Toronto article entitled: “Growth to Watch For 2017: South Etobicoke.”

Click on the image to enlarge it

Click here to access a February Statistics Canada overview of Census 2016 data >

Also of interest:

A February 2017 CBC interactive article is entitled: “Census 2016: Did the population in your hometown shrink or grow?”

A Feb. 8, 2017 CBC article is entitled: “Milton and other Toronto ‘outskirts’ growing fast, census data shows: Milton, King, Whitchurch-Stouffville all experienced high growth rates from 2011 to 2016.”

A Feb. 8, 2017 CBC article is entitled: “Census 2016: Big cities home to big share of 35 million Canadians: Rapid population growth in the West sees cities trying to limit urban sprawl.”

A Feb. 10, 2017 CBC article is entitled: “Census shows Conservatives still hold sway in Canada’s fastest growing regions: Population in Liberal and NDP ridings growing at slower pace.”

More Demographics

Click here to access Toronto Demographics portal at City of Toronto website >

Also of interest: Neighbourhood Change website.

A Feb. 12, 2017 World Economic Forum article is entitled: “5 charts that show what is happening to the middle class around the world.” I learned of the link through a Clarkson Today Twitter post, which has a link to a share by Sven Spengemann @SvenTrueNorth (Member of Parliament, Mississauga-Lakeshore).

A Feb. 13, 2017 Social Planning Toronto article is entitled: “New census report shows Toronto faces unprecedented density surge, leaving city struggling to keep pace.”

Click here to access the full report referred to in above-noted article >

 

Share this:

Posted in Newsletter, Toronto | 6 Comments

Well-attended Government & Community Services Fair was held on Feb. 11, 2017 at Cloverdale Mall

Etobicoke-York MPP Ptere Milczyn, in conversation with a visitor at the Government & Community Services Fair, Feb. 11, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

Etobicoke-York MPP Peter Milczyn, in conversation with a visitor at the Government & Community Services Fair, Feb. 11, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

I’ve been attending the annual Government & Community Services Fair at Cloverdale Mall since at least 2013, when I was setting up displays for the Jane’s Walks that I was organizing in previous years in Long Branch, with my friend Mike James.

In more recent years I’ve been there as a volunteer helping out with Etobicoke-York MPP Peter Milczyn’s Office.

Reinhabitation through narrative

The experience of being at the same mall, year after year, to take part in the annual Government & Community Services Fair, brings to mind for me the concept of reinhabitation of a place through narrative, a topic that I’ve discussed at a previous post about storytelling. The Oxford Dictionary defines reinhabitation as: The action or an instance of reinhabiting a place.

I arrived at the mall at 10:00 am, at a time when the displays were still beings et up. The vent began at 11:00 am. Jaan Pill photo

I arrived at the mall at 10:00 am, at a time when the displays were still being set up. The event began at 11:00 am. Jaan Pill photo

The performance of reinhabitation through narrative is a key element of storytelling (as I see it) and it’s a key feature of the cycles of everyday life. Metaphorically, at any given time and place, we can celebrate the fact that “the people make the place.”

Every year, when the Government & Community Services Fair is held at Cloverdale Mall, it’s reinhabited all over again through the people who attend, and the stories that they share, that day.

Painting at Community Living Toronto display. I very much like this painting. Great composition, Great use of colour. I'm really pleased I had the opportune to take a photo of it. Jaan Pill photo

Painting at Community Living Toronto display. I very much like this painting. Great composition. Great use of colour. I’m really pleased I had the opportunity to take a photo of it. Jaan Pill photo

Certainly, it’s the people who make Cloverdale Mall what it is, from one day to the next – and in fact, from one decade or even quarter-century to the next. I have heard that some people have been spending time, meeting with friends, at Cloverdale Mall for 30 or 40 years. What a great connection to have, with a place!

Helping out as volunteer at this event, from 10:00 am until 1:00 pm on Feb. 11, 2017, was a thoroughly enjoyable experience for me.

When you’re wearing a vest that says “Volunteer,” people stop to chat or ask questions. Because I’ve been at these events for many years, I know the answers. It’s satisfying to know that, by being a volunteer, a person can help out to ensure that things run smoothly at such an event.

I recalled that last year, one of my ongoing reading projects, at the time, had to do with what was happening in Venezuela.

This year, other topics, such as storytelling and urban design issues in Long Branch, where I live, are top of mind for me. I had not thought much about Venezuela recently, until today, when I thought about what I had written at a blog post, entitled Well-attended Government and Community Services Fair took place at Cloverdale Mall on Feb. 20, 2016, a year ago.

Venezuela

Jaan Pill photo

Etobicoke Historical Society display at Government & Community Services Fair a year ago (Feb. 20, 2016) at Cloverdale Mall. Jaan Pill photo

Etobicoke Historical Society display, Feb. 7, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

Etobicoke Historical Society display, Feb. 7, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

At the above-noted post, I noted that I had bought a copy of the New York Times, probably at Cloverdale Mall, which included an article about Venezuela. The article, which I read with much interest, prompted me to start borrowing books from the Toronto Public Library dealing with Venezuela.

Among the posts that I subsequently wrote, a year ago, was one entitled:

The Revolution in Venezuela: Social and Political Change Under Chávez (2011)

IMG_0362

A couple of puppies (here one of them is posing for a photo with a volunteer) at the Lions Foundation Dog Guides Canada display, got a lot of attention at the Fair. Jaan Pill photo

A subsequent post was entitled: Venezuela continues to move deeper into economic disarray: Feb. 9, 2016 New York Times article

Mississauga Halton LHIN

This year, one of the key pieces of information that I picked up, at the Fair, was in relation to the Mississauga Halton Local Health Integration Network (LHIN) which, as a brochure that I picked up notes, “guides ongoing and future initiatives in the development and implementation of a seamless health system for our communities.”

Detail from map showing boundaries for Mississauga Halton LHIN. Source: Mississauga Halton LHIN website

Detail from map showing boundaries for Mississauga Halton LHIN. Source: Mississauga Halton LHIN website

What I found noteworthy is the fact that South Etobicoke is part of this particular health network. That makes perfect sense to me. As I see it, I live in a city-region which includes both Toronto and Mississauga and extends far beyond as well.

Lots of brochures and reading materials to pick up

I will refer briefly to some of the reading materials that I picked up while I was at the Fair.

Among other things, I picked up:

    • A business card from Brands for Canada
    • A brochure entitled “The Living City Classroom: Bringing Nature Education to You” (Toronto and Region Conservation)
    • A St. James Food Basket brochure
    • A pamphlet, “Complaints about Municipalities” (The Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario)
    • “We Are Humber Quick Facts” (Humber College)
    • “Bird Gardens” brochure (TRCA)
    • Poster from Farm & Food Care Ontario. At the bottom of it, a text reads: “Virtual Farm Tours – Visit a real farm on your computer www.virtualfarmtours.ca “
    • Data visualization handout from the Central West LHIN and the Toronto Central LHIN
    • Poster for MPP Peter Milczyn’s 3rd Annual March Break Free Family Skate on March 15, 2017 at 2:00 – 4:00 pm at the MasterCard Centre for Hockey Excellence
    • “The Benefits of Inclusion in the Classroom,” a brochure from the Brock University Faculty of Education and Community Living Toronto
    • A pamphlet entitled: “The Journey Together: Ontario’s Commitment to Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples” (Ontario.ca/Reconciliation)

That’s a partial list.

For part of my time as a volunteer, I spent time at the the entrance to Cloverdale Mall where the Metro store is located. Every once in a while, a visitor to the Fair would ask a question, usually having to do with how to get to a particular display at the Fair. Sometimes people just stop[ to chat. When you're at the mall, there's lots of time to stop and talk.It's what people like to do, at Cloverdale Mall. Jaan Pill photo

For part of my time as a volunteer, I spent time at the the entrance to Cloverdale Mall where the Metro store is located. Every once in a while, people would ask me a question usually having to do with how to get to a particular display at the Fair. Sometimes people just stopped to chat. When you’re at the mall, there’s lots of time to stop and talk. It’s what people like to do, at Cloverdale Mall. Jaan Pill photo

I’m really pleased I’ve been to a good number of such events over the years.

One thing I’ve learned is that, if I pick up a brochure, I should make a point of reading it, within a day or two after the event. Otherwise, I’ll forget to have a closer look and the brochures just get left somewhere.

I much enjoyed the Government & Community Services Fair at Cloverdale Mall today. If you have the opportunity to attend a future Fair, I strongly recommend it.

Click on the photos to enlarge them; click again to enlarge then further

 

Share this:

Posted in Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

Lots happening at the Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre: Here’s a link to Feb. 11, 2017 message from the Centre

Click here to access Feb. 11, 2017 Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre message >

The text of the message reads as follows (I have omitted the graphics, which you can find at the link at the top of this page):

Find us at 2 Colonel Samuel Smith Park Drive (WEL-104)

It’s Official!

On January 26, 2017 the Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre officially opened! Thank you to everyone who was in attendance and to everyone who made this launch possible. We are honoured and enthused at the interest and support you have all shown in the development of the Lakeshore Grounds Interpetive Centre and in the preservation of the history of the grounds.

Thank you to everyone who joined us for the launch of the Student Welcome and Resource Centre, Fitness Centre, and Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre.

NOW ON: OUR FIRST EXHIBIT

BEHIND THE BRICKS: Recovering the Stories of the Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital explores the loss of the records of the Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital following the closure of the institution in 1979 and how, together, we can recover the missing history. It also serves as an invitation to contribute your own memories of the grounds by either sharing a short thought on the wall of our exhibit space or booking a time to participate in an oral history interview.

On display until May 31, 2017.

Pull out a brick to read the story of a former patient or staff member of the Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital in the BEHIND THE BRICKS exhibit on now in WEL-104

NEW ART EXHIBIT SPACE ON THE 3rd FLOOR

Visit the 3rd floor of the Student Welcome and Resource Centre to view an exhibit of nature photographs by Nancy Barrett.

Through A Lens, Brightly showcases the diversity of wildlife that can be found at our very own Colonel Samuel Smith Park. Snowy and horned owls, hawks, raccoons, and minks, are just some of the creatures you can see in the exhibit; all accompanied with descriptive insights written by the artist.

On display until April 29, 2017.

ONE DAY ONLY: SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25th

secrets of an ever changing landscape, the tunnel exhibition is a one day pop-up art show that will be held in the tunnels underneath Humber College’s Lakeshore campus on Saturday, February 25th from 11am to 5pm.

Artists Gary Blundell and Victoria Ward from Hotspur studio are bringing the collection they created for our fall Instagram Takeover. Inspired and informed particularly by the history of the Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital, secrets of an ever changing landscape is a mixed media visual arts show that brings to life the transformations that have taken place on the Lakeshore grounds throughout its history.

Access the exhibit via G Building (17 Colonel Samuel Smith Park Drive)

The Pigeon’s Passage is Taking Flight!

There are so many things going on at the Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre and we want to give you behind-the-scenes access to it all. Check out The Pigeon’s Passage regularly for articles, images, and vlogcasts from our staff and volunteers as we explore the histories of education, ecology, indigenous issues, and mental health connected to the Lakeshore Grounds.

Available today: Welcome to the Pigeon’s Passage!

Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre Hours

NOTE OUR NEW EXTENDED EVENING AND SATURDAY HOURS

MON 10:00-16:30
TUES 10:00-16:30
WED 10:00-18:30
THURS 10:00-16:30
FRI 10:00-16:30
SAT 09:00-14:00

[End]

 

Share this:

Posted in Long Branch, Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

Pages 6 & 7 of Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Guidelines Draft focuses on 3.3 Building Elements

Update:

A more complete and highly informative  overview of the contents of the Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines Draft Document  is available at the website of Ward 6 Councillor Mark Grimes. We owe thanks to Councillor Grimes for the role that he and his office have played in the initiation and development of the Pilot Project.

Click here to access the overview at the Ward 6 Councillor’s website >

[End]

 

Jaan Pill photo. Click on the image to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further.

Jaan Pill photo. Click on the image to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further.

The first half of the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Guidelines Advisory Group was devoted to presentations about the contents of the Guidelines Draft. Jaan Pill photo

The first half of the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Guidelines Advisory Group was devoted to presentations about the contents of the Guidelines Draft. Jaan Pill photo

We are now on pages 5 & 6 in a series that will end with pages 12 & 13.

Focus Questions

As noted at a previous post, the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Long Branch Guidelines Community Advisory Group addressed a series of Focus Questions, namely:

1. Do you have any suggested refinements to the Long Branch Character Framework Plan?

What do you like about the draft guidelines?

How could they be improved?

3.3 page 6 smaller024

Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 6

3.2 Height & Massing

3.3. Building Elements

3.4  Driveways & Garages

3.5  Setbacks & Landscapes

3.6  Special Features

3. Are there any additional guidelines we should consider?

4. Do you have any suggestions for the approach / format for the public meeting?

[End]

3.3. Building Elements

I am posting each set of pages, roughly one set of pages per day, from the Long Branch Draft Reference Material (which are for discussion purposes only) that was distributed at the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Community Advisory Group, and that will be available (if it’s not already posted) at the City of Toronto website.

Yesterday’s post was about 3.2 Height & Massing; today’s post is about 3.3 Building Elements.

3.3.2 Front Entrance Design

The introduction to page 6 reads:

Long Branch is characterized by a variety of entrance conditions but these are predominantly limited in height and situated close to street grade.

Front entrance designs should reinforce existing horizontal datums and the rhythm of facades along the street while providing active uses that serve to animate the public realm.

Diagram of Front Entrance Envelope for Objectives: 3.3 Building Elements. Note below image reads: Refer to City-Wide Template for further information. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 6 (detail)

Diagram of Front Entrance Envelope for Objectives: 3.3 Building Elements. Note below image reads: Refer to City-Wide Template for further information. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 6 (detail)

The text for the Objectives for 3.3 Building Elements reads:

  • Scale: Define a minimum / maximum envelope for the entrance (height, depth, width). An example of incompatibility is a full-facade portico in a street with lower porches/entrances
  • Entry floor height: Identify appropriate entry floor heights. A common incompatibility is higher entrances with a subsequent larger stair area occupying a large share of the front entrance
  • Massing: Define the type / level of enclosure of the entrance structure: colonnades, railings, parapet walls, etc. While flexibility in design is key to preserve the diversity and variety of a street, major incompatibilities should be avoided, such as a fully enclosed entrance structure in a street dominated by porches.

*

Click on each image to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further

*

On page 6 you will find the following additional text:

*

Figure 59. Incompatible front entrance design. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 7

Figure 59. Incompatible front entrance design. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 7

How does the zoning regulate front entrance design?

While the zoning does not directly speak to front entrances, their design is directly influenced by regulations related to finished floor heights, driveways and garages as well as front yard landscaping.

The zoning regulates a maximum first floor height of 1.2 metres above established grade for detached and semi-detached dwellings and all residential zones are subject to a maximum vehicle entrance width of 6m (where the required minimum lot frontage is less than 24m).

What is the zoning’s intent?

The intent of these regulations is to establish a strong interface with adjacent streets, ensuring a sense of animation at street level, and to ensure that integral garages do not dominate the primary facade.

Long Branch is characterized by a variety of entrance conditions: decks, covered open and enclosed porches, steps, and flush entry ways. These entrances are predominantly situated close to established grade.

However, in some cases entrances are located significantly above grade, many with uncharacteristically tall front porch roofs.

Figure 60 Incompatible front entrance design

Figure 60. Incompatible front entrance design. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 7

Objectives

In other circumstances, integral garages are proportionately dominant and/or project well beyond the primary building entrance.

These conditions are incompatible with the prevailing character of Long Branch.

What are the key design guidelines?

In order to achieve the objectives related to scale, entry floor height and massing in the context of Long Branch, some key design guidelines include:

  • Minimizing height of roofs associated with front entrances to reinforce existing horizontal datums along the street
  • Integration of front entrance steps into the general front yard landscaping through the use of gradually sloped front lawns, raised planters and/or hedges in order to strengthen the perceived connection to grade
  • Ensuring entrances face the street, are clearly visible, and proportioned to reinforce so as not to visually dominate the front facade.
Figure 61 Front entrance designs vary in type but generally reinforce the established street rhythm

Figure 61. Front entrance designs vary in type but generally reinforce the established street rhythm. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 7

A note at the page bottom reads:

See Character Defining Conditions >        a., b., & f.

Please note: I have broken longer paragraphs into shorter ones, for ease in online reading.

 

Share this:

Posted in Long Branch, Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines, Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

You Can Make Things Happen – Mississauga Culture: Community Meeting Dates: We see here a celebration of community engagement

Click here to access a February 10, 2017 Mississauga Culture message about Community Meetings Dates >

You Can Make Things Happen

The text of the message, from the link at the top of this page, reads:

Have your say!

We’ve added more dates to our Future Directions Culture Master Plan public meetings.

Grab a friend and attend one of our upcoming public meetings where you can share your vision for the future of culture in Mississauga.

Community Meeting Dates:

February 16, 2017 6 p.m.
Meadowvale Theatre, 6315 Montevideo Road

February 28, 2017 6 p.m.
Malton Community Centre, 3540 Morning Star Drive

March 4, 2017 10 a.m.
Clarke Memorial Hall, 161 Lakeshore Road West

Can’t make the in person meetings? Join us February 22 at 11 a.m. for a twitter chat that explores diversity, accessibility and collective identity. Follow along with @SaugaCulture

Visit the Future Directions Culture Master Plan website.

City of Mississauga Culture Division
201 City Centre Drive, Suite 202
Mississauga, Ontario L5B 2T4

[End of text from above-noted link]

I've posted the image to underline that how we express things determines what we see. Source for the image: New York Times Arts ‏@nytimesarts 21h21 hours ago More The @MetMuseum just made 375,000 art images available online for free, including this van Gogh http://nyti.ms/2k7dEnN

I’ve posted the image to underline that how we express and represent things determines what we see. Source for the image: February 2017 New York Times Arts ‏@nytimesarts 
The @MetMuseum just made 375,000 art images available online for free, including this van Gogh http://nyti.ms/2k7dEnN

Several integrated, community-based, culture-themed projects are underway in Mississauga

Several coordinated events and activities focusing on community engagement related to development of a culture strategy for the City of Mississauga are underway.

The Story of Mississauga

Among the areas where community engagement is playing a key role is an ongoing project called The Story of Mississauga. What a great concept: The story of a city, told by its residents.

Click here for more information about The Story of Mississauga initiative:

MississaugaHeritageManagementStrategy_May2016

A related file is entitled: “City of Mississauga – Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee (Approved May 10, 2016).”

A June 1, 2016 City of Mississauga news release is entitled: “City’s First Heritage Management Strategy Brings Heritage to the People.”

I am very impressed with Mississauga’s approach to community engagement – on using community input as the driving force for City-wide projects.

Posts about Mississauga at the Preserved Stories website

Click here for previous posts about Mississauga >

Among my recent posts about Mississauga is one entitled:

City of Mississauga demonstrates a great sense of scale in decision-making

Another one is entitled:

Great interview re: Human Scale Development, Councillor Jim Tovey at News Talk 1010 on Jan. 7, 2017

What makes a good story?

The Story of Mississauga project has prompted me to think about what makes a good story:

Storytelling: Getting attention; playing the role; collaboration

The elements of good storytelling include (4) backstaging, (5) re-inhabitation of places through narrative, and (6) open-endedness

Several studies have a connection with storytelling as it relates to cities (and city-regions):

The Altered Landscape (2011)

The Cambridge Introduction to George Orwell (2012). Orwell matters because when you’re talking about stories you’re talking about language.

The Deadly Life of Logistics (2014). Stories about cities are stories about tactics, strategies, and logistics.

City-Regions in Prospect? (2015)

Places of the Heart: The Psychogeography of Everyday Life (2015). Cities are about psychology and geography, and the overlap and interaction between the two disciplines and ways of seeing.

Sustainability

Mississauga is very much focused on sustainability, as is evident by way of example through the focused, disciplined urban-planning work and research of City of Mississauga Ward 1 Councillor Jim Tovey and University of Toronto landscape architect John Danahy among others.

With regard to the topic of sustainability, a Jan. 3, 2017 Toronto Star article is entitled: In 2017, Mississauga will have to decide how it grows up: Mississauga’s recent booming growth will continue, but will growth be sustainable and will it be what residents want?”

 

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Pages 4 & 5 of Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Guidelines Draft focuses on 3.2 Height & Massing

Update:

A more complete and highly informative  overview of the contents of the Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines Draft Document  is available at the website of Ward 6 Councillor Mark Grimes. We owe thanks to Councillor Grimes for the role that he and his office have played in the initiation and development of the Pilot Project.

Click here to access the overview at the Ward 6 Councillor’s website >

[End]

 

Jaan Pill photo. Click on the image to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further.

Jaan Pill photo. Click on the image to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further.

Focus Questions

As noted at a previous post, the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting of the Long Branch Guidelines Advisory Group addressed a series of Focus Questions, namely:

1. Do you have any suggested refinements to the Long Branch Character Framework Plan?

What do you like about the draft guidelines?

How could they be improved?

Source: Long Branch Draft (f0r discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017

Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 4

3.2 Height & Massing

3.3. Building Elements

3.4 Driveways & Garages

3.5 Setbacks & Landscapes

3.6 Special Features

3. Are there any additional guidelines we should consider?

4. Do you have any suggestions for the approach / format for the public meeting?

[End]

3.2 Height & Massing

I am posting each set of pages, roughly one set of pages per day, from the Long Branch Draft Reference Material (which are for discussion purposes only) that was distributed at the Feb. 7, 2017 meeting, and that will be available (if it’s not already posted) at the City of Toronto website.

Yesterday’s post was about 2.2, a Character Summary establishing the Long Branch Character Framework Plan. Today’s post focuses on 3.2 Height & Massing.

3.2.1 Building Heights

The Introduction to page 4 reads:

Throughout Long Branch, building heights vary in type from detached bungalows to four-storey walk-up apartments.

Buildings should comply with zoning permissions and be consistent in height with existing houses along the street and/or, through articulation of volumes and sensitivity to existing datums, should transition relative to adjacent conditions.

p 4 detail022

Building Height Diagram for Objectives: 3.2 Height & Massing. Note below image reads: Refer to City-Wide Template for further information. Source: Long Branch Draft (for discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 4 (detail)

Objectives

The text for Objectives for 3.2 Height & Massing reads:

  • Volume: Maintain a similar scale between new and old buildings. The perceived scale of new buildings can be minimized by designing multiple smaller volumes or articulations to avoid a large, single mass. Common com­patible elements are porches, stepbacks/balconies for upper levels, asymmetrical plans with setback, integra­tion of upper levels within the roof, etc.;
  • Access to natural daylight: Ensure that the building does not block neighbours’ access to natural daylight as much as possible, including on yards and main windows;
  • Entrances: Minimize the appearance of stairs to en­trances, in order to decrease the perceived height, through additional elements (e.g. plantings) or integrate it well into the overall front facade (e.g. low-wall, porch). [Refer to Section 2.3.2 Front Entrance Design.]

*

Click on each image to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further

*

Page 4 features the following additional text:

*

Figure 44. Modern house dwarfs existing 1-storey bungalow

Figure 44. Modern house dwarfs existing 1-storey bungalow. Source: Long Branch Draft (f0r discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 5

How does the zoning regulate building heights?

Building heights in Long Branch vary from 1 to 3.5 storeys with the exception of a few isolated apartment blocks that are generally setback generously from the street and fronting on larger open spaces.

The predominant zoning regulation sets a maximum building height of 9.5m (see section 1.3.2 for more detail) and encompasses much of the neighbourhood’s RD zones.

In the RM Zones which permit a variety of residential building types, the max. building height varies between 10-12m.

In addition to height, the zoning regulates a ratio of main walls that can achieve the max. building height.

Figure 45. Incompatible building volumes accentuate height difference

Figure 45. Incompatible building volumes accentuate height difference. Source: Long Branch Draft (f0r discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 5

What is the zoning’s intent?

The intent is to ensure that new development fit an appropriate scale with the existing built form through the integration of taller forms into sloped roof massing (e.g. dormers) or in the case of flat roofs through stepbacks.

Particular importance should be placed on evaluating building height compatibility based on relationships to adjacent properties in order to mitigate issues related to overshadowing and privacy/overlook.

What are the key design guidelines?

Figure 46. New development transitions height in relation to adjacent buildings

Figure 46. New development transitions height in relation to adjacent buildings, Source: Long Branch Draft (f0r discussion purposes only) Reference Material, Feb. 7, 2017, page 5

In order to achieve the objectives related to volume, access to daylight and entrances in the context of Long Branch key design guidelines include:

  • Stepbacks of taller forms and/or articulation of building massing through the use of projections and/or recesses to achieve a transition in height relative to adjacent buildings
  • The use of building elements such as porches, canopies, overhangs and well integrated stairs/plantings to mitigate the percieved height and massing and create alignments with existing datums of the streetwall

A note at the page bottom reads:

See Character Defining Conditions >      a. and f.

Please note: I have broken longer paragraphs into shorter ones, for ease in online reading.

 

Share this:

Posted in Long Branch, Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines, Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

Feb. 7, 2017 message from Jane’s Walk

Click here to access this Jane’s Walk message in your browser >

At the above-noted link you can find the links and photos that are not included in the text below.

Following message is from Jane’s Walk:

Hello, friends of Jane’s Walk!

The 2017 festival is officially in the works now and we are excited about our growing movement of city-building and walking conversations. The global Jane’s Walk festival will take place on May 5th, 6th, and 7th and we look forward to seeing you out and exploring your neighbourhoods.

Denise Pinto. Source: Jane's Walk

Denise Pinto. Source: Jane’s Walk

There is one big change as we begin the year. We want to extend a very warm thank you to Denise Pinto, our Project Director, who has stepped down from Jane’s Walk to pursue a very exciting book project. Denise has been a dynamic and articulate voice for our project and will continue to be a Jane’s Walk champion and friend. Be sure to follow her journey across Canada on Twitter @denisepinto.

In light of this change, Jane’s Walk is pleased to announce that our 2017 Toronto City Organizer will be Alia Scanlon. Alia is well known to many of you as last year’s City Organizer and is also our current Global Cities Coordinator. She will be dividing her time between the two positions, supported by our wonderful volunteers and a soon-to-be-announced Program Assistant. We know that having Alia at the helm will ensure a phenomenal 2017 festival.

One last piece of news! You are invited to join us for the opening night of the documentary film, “Citizen Jane: Battle for the City” on Friday, April 21 at TIFF Bell Lightbox in Toronto. At the screening, a select panel will discuss the film and its ideas. A percentage of proceeds from ticket sale will be donated to Jane’s Walk. Mark your calendars and stay tuned for on-sale updates.

Looking ahead, Jane’s Walk aims to build on our record 2016 success. During our 10th Anniversary year there were 1,500 walks in 212 cities. We’d love to grow that number again. Is 2017 the year you lead a walk?

Stay up to date with our plans at janeswalk.org and by joining our mailing list.

From one neighbour to another, thank you for your ongoing enthusiasm and support.

The Jane’s Walk Team
Copyright © 2017 Jane’s Walk, All rights reserved.
Thanks for being a friend of Jane’s Walk. You are on our email list because you care about your city (and because you opted in on our website/during an event).

Our mailing address is:
Jane’s Walk
170 Bloor St West, Suite 903
Toronto, On M5S 1T9
Canada

[End of message from Jane’s Walk]

 

Share this:

Posted in Jane's Walk, Long Branch, Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

Pages 2 & 3 of Guidelines Draft: Exmoor Drive above TTC Loop is now included in Long Branch Guidelines project

Update:

A more complete and highly informative  overview of the contents of the Feb. 7, 2017 Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines Draft Document  is available at the website of Ward 6 Councillor Mark Grimes. We owe thanks to Councillor Grimes for the role that he and his office have played in the initiation and development of the Pilot Project.

Click here to access the overview at the Ward 6 Councillor’s website >

[End]

 

Aerial view from November 1949 looking east along Lake Shore Blvd West from near Long Branch Loop, Ontario Archives Acc 16215, ES1-814, Northway Gestalt Collection. On the left is Exmoor Drive, which extended further to the east in this 1949 view, than it does now, as noted at a post entitled: Life at the Long Branch Army Camp, long, long ago! – Garry Burke shares additional comments. Click on the photo to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further.

Pages 2 and 3: Character Summary – Feb. 7, 2017 Draft Reference Material

A previous post is entitled:

Advisory Group for Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines had a productive meeting on Feb. 7, 2017

A much earlier (July 2016) post about the Long Branch Guidelines project is entitled:

How to read the streets of Long Branch: Urban Design Guidelines Pilot Project is now underway

At the above-noted July 2016 post, a preliminary map defining the study area for the Guidelines project omits Exmoor Drive (located just north of the Long Branch TTC Loop).

However, the most recent map (pages 2 and 3 from the Feb. 7, 2017 Draft Reference Material) includes Exmoor Drive and Forty Third St.

Including these streets good sense to me. It makes good sense for the Guidelines, when they are completed, to be applicable on Exmoor Drive and Forty Third St., as much as they will be applicable to other Long Branch neighbourhoods.

February 2017. Figure 34: Long Branch Character Framework Map.

February 2017. Figure 34: Long Branch Character Framework Map. Source: Reference Material published by SvN – Draft [for discussion purposes only]. Reference Material: Character Framework Plan; 5 Key Design Elements. Click on the map to enlarge it; click again to enlarge it further.

View corridors

I very much like how the lake views – that is, the view corridors looking south toward Lake Ontario, are indicated (in blue) on the map. I also like how the full westward reach of Long Branch (with the border along the shoreline extending almost to Applewood Creek) is accurately represented.

An interesting feature of the lake views is that some are unobstructed, whereas the one at the foot of Fortieth Street has some large rocks placed in front of it.

The lake views originated – as I understand, from research connected with several Jane’s Walks that I’ve organized in Long Branch with Mike James in years past – as access points for the Village of Long Branch fire department. The lake was where the fire trucks would get filled up with water.

I look forward to learning of any archival evidence that would be able to provide a definitive account, of this particular “origin” story.

The rocks that are now in place serve to discourage residents from walking out to the southernmost vantage point, which like all of the lake views on the map, constitutes public property, and in fact is open to any member of the public who seeks to enjoy the view.

It would be of interest to know whether a City-installed traffic barrier (to keep people from driving into the lake) was installed at the terminus of the Fortieth St. view corridor, in previous years. If anybody has photos or recollection, please contact me at jpill@preservedstories.com or through a message at this website.

Long Branch Character Defining Conditions: Draft for discussion purposes only

The following list (below) is from page 3 of the SvN Long Branch Reference Material (Feb. 7, 2016) draft document.

The draft is for discussion purposes only. At the Feb. 7, 2017 Advisory Group meeting, people at the discussion tables made suggestions regarding revision of the draft; the original draft, that was available at the outset of the meeting, reads:

View corridor looking south along Fortieth Street toward Lake Ontario. Jaan Pill photo

View corridor looking south along Fortieth Street toward Lake Ontario. Jaan Pill photo

a. Historic Long Branch houses dating back to original “villa” lots; predominantly corner lots of distinctive character

b. Houses with predominantly hipped and gabled roofs, often with front porches, and brick and siding clad

c. Generous front/sideyard setbacks buffered by trees and/or hedges on irregular lots or when adjacent to parkettes or other significant open spaces

Large rocks positioned at terminus of Fortieth St. view corridor. Jaan Pill photo

Large rocks positioned at terminus of Fortieth St. view corridor. Previously, there had been a City-installed traffic sign installed at this location, as I understand, indicating that cars should not proceed past the sign. Jaan Pill photo

d. Predominant 40-50′ lot frontage with generous sideyard setbacks which both provide access to the rear of the lot and establish a street rhythm

e. Significant rear yard open space and tree canopy

f. Isolated apartment blocks are setback generously from the street and adjacent properties, often fronting on to larger open spaces

Exmoor Drive. Feb. 8, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

Exmoor Drive. Feb. 8, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

g. Incrementally stepping setbacks following curvilinear street fabric surrounding Arcadian Circle

h. Consistent front yard setbacks and streetwalls along North-South streets which serve as important view corridors from the public realm t9′ the waterfront.

i. Mature tree canopy frames the streetscape and provides shelter, a sense of enclosure as well as invaluable environmental benefits

Exmoor Drive. Feb. 8, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

Exmoor Drive. Feb. 8, 2017. Jaan Pill photo

[End of excerpt from Reference Material draft document]

Original 25-ft lots (along with 40-50-ft lots) dating from Village of Long Branch era

In discussions at our table, it was suggested that, in addition to referring to 40-50′ lot frontages, it’s also apt to refer to the characteristic 25′ lot frontages that are in a category known (if I have the correct terminology) as legal non-conforming.

Such a form of lot frontages – and associated building footprints – date back from the original lot configurations associated with the prewar subdivisions in the Village of Long Branch.

Click on photos to enlarge them; click again to enlarge them further

 

Share this:

Posted in Long Branch, Long Branch Urban Design Guidelines, Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment

IMB’s hilltop fortress: Built Heritage News – Issue No. 256 | January 31, 2017 (click here)

Click here to access Built Heritage News – Issue No. 256 | January 31, 2017 >

Here are some excerpts [to access the active links (below), go to the above-noted link]:

1. Follow Built Heritage News on Twitter and Facebook

Catherine Nasmith writes:

Subscribers may notice that Built Heritage News has been published less frequently, but in between I regularly post to the ACO Facebook Page, as well as Built Heritage News Facebook and Twitter streams. Recently a Facebook Post reached 20,000 people, quite a reach. You may want to follow:

FACEBOOK https://www.facebook.com/pg/builtheritagenews/posts/

TWITTER https://twitter.com/BHN_cn

Here are instructions on how to follow a twitter feed – https://support.twitter.com/articles/162981

Opening article reads:

2. Modernist Architectural Heritage at Risk as a result of Decision not to Follow through on Preservation Board Recommendations

Geoff Kettel writes [I have broken longer paragraphs into shorter ones]:

A hilltop fortress for IBM

Toronto Preservation Board (TPB) advises Toronto City Council with recommendations for heritage listing and designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. But what if its recommendations get waylaid and don’t actually reach City Council?

This happened recently with recommendations adopted by the TPB for designation of 844 Don Mills Road (Celestica HQ), and listing and designation of 1150 Eglinton Ave. East (Celestica West).

At its October 13, 2016 meeting, North York Community Council referred the Heritage staff report back to City Planning to allow any recommendations with respect to cultural heritage to be made in tandem with recommendations on the comprehensive development framework and the final report on the planning application for the lands.

This had the effect of diverting the report from going to City Council, the regular trajectory for this type of report, so that there could be discussion on the floor of Council, and receiving City Council approval for legal protection of the properties.

Source: Built Heritage News, Issue No. 256, Jan. 31, 2017

Source: Built Heritage News, Issue No. 256, Jan. 31, 2017

844 Don Mills Road and 1150 Eglinton Ave. East are adjoining properties on the north west of the Don MiIls and Eglinton intersection in North York, but are physically separate and architecturally distinct from each other.

The property at 844 Don Mills Road contains the former IBM head office and factory, designed by Clare G. MacLean and completed in 1951 with an extension in 1954. The adjacent property to the west, 1150 Eglinton Avenue East contains the IBM headquarters building designed by John B. Parkin Associates in 1966-67.

Recognition of the heritage values of these properties is not new. Neither are failed efforts to protect them.

Both properties were included in the 1997 North York Inventory of Modernist Architecture. The IBM/Celestica property at 844 Don Mills Road was included in the Citys Inventory of Heritage Properties in 2006, but not 1150 Eglinton East.

The North York Community Preservation Panel (NYCPPP) submitted a heritage nomination for 1150 Eglinton Ave. East to the Toronto Preservation Board (Board) in 2010 and it was referred to staff for assessment.

In 2014 a development application was submitted to the City and on August 7, 2014 Planning and Growth Management Committee considered a Preliminary staff report and as a result:

1. Requested staff to evaluate the property at 1150 Eglinton Avenue East for potential listing on the City’s Inventory of Heritage Properties and report to the Toronto Preservation Board, North York Community Council and City Council in early 2015.

2. Requested staff to evaluate the heritage listed property at 844 Don Mills Road for potential designation under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, and report to the Toronto Preservation Board, North York Community Council and City Council in early 2015.

These reports were not forthcoming.

Fast forward to 2016, plans for the properties have proceeded, and HPS prepared and brought forward a heritage assessment report for the properties. The staff report recommended designation of the 844 Don Mills Road property, and listing and designation of the 1150 Eglinton Ave. East property. Toronto Preservation Board adopted the HPS report (844 Don Mills Road and 1150 Eglinton Ave. East) on September 28, 2016. The as noted earlier North York Community Council at its Oct.13 meeting, referred the Heritage staff report back to City Planning.

On January 11, 2017 the North York Community Preservation Panel requested Planning and Growth Management Committee that the heritage assessment of the properties proceed to City Council as recommended by staff. .- This request went unaddressed however.

So today 1150 Eglinton Ave east is STILL not included in the Citys Inventory of Heritage Properties and neither properties are legally protected.

Spring 1972. Photo Credit The Mirror, Jubilee Edition June. The image is from the link at the bottom of the page you are now reading.

Spring 1972. Photo Credit The Mirror, Jubilee Edition June. The image is from the link at the bottom of the page you are now reading.

Finally a quote from A Hilltop Fortress for IBM, (Toronto Modern, 2009) gives a sense of the important landscape and built form values of 1150 Eglinton Ave. East:

From Eglinton Avenue, the IBM building reads as a sprawling, ground-hugging megastructure of Louis Kahn-ish cubic modules, overlapping and interlocking as they step down the hillside. The influences of Kahn and Alvar Aalto are also apparent in the walls of solid brick, a sharp divergence from Parkins glassy transparency of a few years earlier; the fortress-like impenetrability is only partially relieved by narrow vertical strips of bronze-toned glass in black anodized frames. Most interior spaces are oriented to the southern light, a benefit in Torontos often grey and wintry environment, and to views over the ravine&

Editor’s Note:

The situation is the same misguided strategy that kept the Davisville School from designation….Even though Toronto Preservation Board reports to Toronto City Council, the messages are being blocked by the Community Councils.

[End of excerpt]

IBM Building: Online document

Click here to access an online document with more details about the IBM Building at 844 Don Mills Road >

An excerpt reads:

844 Don Mills Road

The Wall Street Journal reported in March 1953 that IBM (now Celestica) after building Phase I (see photo pages) for $1.5 million two years ahead of the target, has followed up with Phase II (see photo pages) for $2.0 million, providing for 250 permanent jobs. This makes 844 Don Mills Road the first post-modern building to locate in the new business park and IBM the first employer in Don Mills.

IBM’s strong conviction of the future of the business park was emphasized through the planting of a large row of alternately spaced maple trees which will hopefully remain part of the public realm in the future.

[End]

 

Share this:

Posted in Newsletter, Toronto | Leave a comment