Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Commission, staff clarify RMD‑25 language for Tower Oaks rezoning to avoid unintended nonconformities
Loading...
Summary
Staff and commissioners agreed Feb. 25 to place most background detail about RMD‑25 and Tower Oaks in the map amendment memo while including a concise, prospective rule in the text memo that would allow higher density (25 DU/acre) for Tower Oaks only when access is not provided from Don Mills Court; commissioners asked staff to tighten the language to prevent creating nonconforming situations for other RMD‑25 parcels.
City planning staff and commissioners discussed the RMD‑25 density rules and site‑specific language for the Tower Oaks rezoning, and agreed to a split approach: keep substantive text in the zoning text memo while placing background and explanatory narrative in the map amendment memo.
Staff explained the intention of the draft language: it would allow 25 dwelling units per acre for the Tower Oaks site if vehicular access is not from Don Mills Court; if access is from Don Mills Court, then the lower 10 dwelling units per acre standard would apply. Ms. Simmons told the commission the draft "would allow for 25 dwelling units to the acre if the access is not off of Don Mills Court for that 1 specific property" and that staff had amended language to avoid inadvertently reducing existing RMD‑25 properties elsewhere to lower densities.
Why commissioners focused on wording: Several commissioners raised concerns that the draft's phrasing could unintentionally create nonconformities for other properties already zoned RMD‑25, particularly with respect to how access is determined and whether new cul‑de‑sacs or redevelopment providing new access could change density allowances. Commissioners urged clear, prospective language such as "if the sole vehicular access to a property is provided after the effective date..." so the rule would not apply retroactively and not create nonconforming situations.
Decision and memo placement: The commission agreed to keep the technical regulatory language in the text amendment memo and to place narrative background, figures and site‑specific context in the comprehensive map amendment memo to avoid duplication and version control problems. Commissioners also agreed to include a brief reference in the text memo pointing to the map memo for the detailed background.
Ending and next steps: Staff will clean up the RMD‑25 language to clarify prospective access conditions and will include the consolidated narrative in the map memo; the recommendation memos will be transmitted to the mayor and council March 23.
