On January 25, 2017 the Mirvish Village Task Group met to assess the third submission from Westbank. This is a summary of the group’s comments, which were sent to City Planning and are now part of the public record.

Paul MacLean, chairperson.

Heritage:

• What is the position of Heritage (department of City Planning) on this application?
• Is WB retaining the full volume of Bathurst St buildings, or just the facades?
• We believe that the full set of 5 buildings running north from Lennox should be retained in order to preserve the symmetry of the block. It is not impossible to retain at least the façade of the 5^th building as an entrance to the tower.
• We would prefer that the ‘3^rd sister’ be retained (at least in its façade), while appreciating the issues created by the parking ramp below this building. (The 3 sisters are the block of heritage buildings on Bathurst to the north of ‘Trainers’. As with the 5 buildings to the south, they form a unique heritage block. The heritage is diminished if the integrity of these two blocks is not maintained.)
• To retain all 8 heritage buildings on Bathurst would enhance the street wall and provide a sense of unity along the street.
• We recommend using brick for the lower walls so as to fit in with the existing on- site heritage and adjacent heritage buildings.
• We are in favour of preserving as much of Markham St as possible as the charm and feel of the street depend upon maximum retention. We will be losing some heritage on the west side in favour of the park. However, it should be possible to retain the building on the east (northernmost heritage building) if the proposed east/west laneway is narrowed into a pedestrian walkway. Narrowing the laneway would also assist retention of the endangered heritage building (3^rd sister – façade at least) on Bathurst (see comments under ‘Traffic’).

Park & green space:

• We need to think through the use of the park in order to create a design that will work effectively.
• Any design should relate to the public space along Markham.
• We understand that WB will be required to convey land along Palmerston Lane to the City, ostensibly for widening the lane. We think there is no longer a valid reason to widen this lane, and we recommend that this conveyed land be developed as green space to enhance the park.
• We note that the park will probably see a lot of usage as a place for people to eat food purchased in the market. This can create a lot of garbage. We recommend that WB agree to maintain the park, given the lack of City resources to do so.
• We like the idea of retail facing the park on the north side.
• Lennox should be kept to 2 lanes. In addition to benefits for traffic management, this would also allow for tree planting along the street.
• This project offers a great opportunity for tree planting along all the streets. Extensive tree planting (& retention where possible) would enhance the development itself and also tie it in with the heavily treed neighbourhood.
• When the site plan comes up for discussion, we would like to see a design competition for the public realm on Lennox and Markham, the streetscapes and the park.

Towers and built form:

• We note that the tower heights are the maximum allowed under the new zoning. We believe that these heights will be strongly opposed by residents. Tower heights have a strong symbolic element, which will be resistant to argument, and they will be seen as unsuitable for the neighbourhood.
• The northern tower to the east of Markham St has an improved podium. However, this building still needs improvement. At 24 stories it will have a major impact on Markham and dominate the street. Also the street wall presents a sheer face to the street, which detracts from the overall ‘village’ effect the design is trying to achieve on Markham. The building itself is calmer, which is an improvement. We would like to see the tower set back deeper than the current 3.5 meters above the podium base.
• The southern tower to the east of Markham is 19 stories, whereas City Planning had recommended 12 as an appropriate height. There are pros and cons to the new design of this building, but we still think that the height should be reduced and the design of the building reconsidered.
• The street walls are for the most part an improvement.

Traffic management:

• We are opposed to widening Lennox. Traffic can be managed by signaling and a ‘left turn, right turn only’ at Lennox and Bathurst (proceeding east, which means that traffic could not enter Harbord Village from Lennox). See also comments under ‘park & greening’.
• Preventing traffic from entering the neighbourhood remains a key issue that needs attention. We request a meeting with the relevant City Traffic staff to discuss further.
• There is no longer a reason to widen Palmerston Lane. The conveyed land provides an opportunity for additional green space. (see above)
• The proposed east/west lane from Bathurst to Markham is very problematic if it is vehicular, not least of which would be the access and egress onto Bathurst. We do not see that is serves a useful vehicular purpose. On the other hand, it is a very important pedestrian entry to the site, and creating a narrower pedestrian-only lane is a much better plan.

Retail:

• The bylaw forbidding restaurants on the west side of Markham needs to be retained in the OPA. Given the amount of grief caused to residents by the Victory and its patios, we recommend that a similar restriction be added to the north east corner of Markham and Lennox.
• There are no Markham entrances to retail in the northern tower to the east of Markham. (see comment above). This should be changed.
• There are many improvements to the retail structure: omitting loading bays, increased market, reducing large retail units, getting rid of dual entrances.
• What is planned for the large underground commercial space? Is there just one entrance from ground level?
• If there is to be a delivery service as part of the market, space should be allocated on the plan.

Usage:

• We would like to see a diverse usage of the site, which will contribute to its vitality and success. In addition to the planned residential, retail and commercial usages, would WB consider non-retail daytime small businesses such as a digital media company or small architectural firm? These small to medium sized offices could replace some of the residential and provide daytime activity.