Council considered a report at its meeting held Monday 28th September, on the outcome of the token and limited “community consultation” for the proposal to construct a boutique café on the Bath Street site. The report provided the outcomes of the survey along with a recommendation that Council formally proceed with the café proposal.
The café is certainly a far better proposal than the previously mooted six storey apartment building. It appears to be welcomed by the community and the Toronto Foreshore Protection Group (TFPG), with 77% of the 420 survey respondents being either supportive or very supportive of the proposal.
Concerns still exist, however, with this proposal, that things aren’t as good as it may initially appear for the desperately needed community parkland. Some 64 survey respondents picked this up and unprompted by the survey, raised the need to reclassify the land as Community. Following closure of the online survey, four TFPG representatives accepted an invitation from Council officers to attend a meeting.
This meeting was advised of the intention to keep the proposed site as Operational Land, which from a Council perspective, makes it primarily a commercial operation. This also means that at a later date the café could be sold and/or extended both in size and height. The reason given for this unusual approach was supposedly that it gives Council greater freedom in business negotiations, including longer term leases. The report also claims under “Economic Impacts” that it will allow the provision of businesses “not allowable on Community Land.”
Such an approach to management of this important site is questioned, as while the Local Government Act does have some limited controls on businesses conducted on parks to provide for community protection, they are not unduly onerous. The Act steps out the processes that permits long term leases, enabling Council to grant leases for up to 21 years (even 30 years can be granted subject to the consent of the Minister). Proposed leases on Community Land are often advertised in the classified section of newspapers and are common practice throughout the State including Lake Macquarie. Why not at Toronto?
During discussions with Council the comment was made by the Council representatives about the likely small return to Council of this current business proposal, which is starting to ring alarm bells for local residents. Most people don’t object to Council undertaking some property development to increase its revenue base. It is, however, of real concern when property and business development is allowed to predominate over Local Government’s primary responsibilities of providing facilities and services to the community. Council cannot just singularly treat this important waterfront site as a short-term money-making project. It needs to apply good planning to ensure an integrated outcome for Toronto, considering all the community’s needs with attractive urban design and function that encourages visitors and promotes economic development.
While most people would be happy with a modest café on the site there is a great need at the same time to acknowledge the recommendations of both State and Council planning guidelines, suggesting important public owned waterfront land be made community parkland. In September last year Council resolved to investigate the option of reclassification of all or part of the Bath Street site to Community Land and to date (one year later) there has been no formal response to this particular resolution.
Unfortunately, the vague building concept varies in detail from time to time regarding both the building size and actual business operations, with the Mayor referring to it during the meeting as a “restaurant.” Fortunately, Cr Wendy Harrison moved an amendment to establish a maximum size for the development and also requested the site be made Community Land. The motion was successful in firming up the maximum development size but the Community Land proposal did not have sufficient supporting numbers to be successful. There is evidence though that some Councillors are beginning to appreciate the importance of this public waterfront land being reclassified and fully integrated with the long-awaited Foreshore Master Plan for our park.
No comments:
Post a Comment