On February 6th, 2018, the City of Toronto and the UTSU hosted a presentation and consultation meeting with students regarding the proposed changes to the University of Toronto St. George Campus Secondary Plan.
City Planner Paul Johnson delivered a presentation outlining the primary concerns of the Secondary Plan and the ways in which the proposal differs from the plan currently in place. He then fielded the questions of concerned students.
The University of Toronto St. George Campus Secondary Plan applies to the development of “the lands generally bounded by Bloor Street West to the north, Spadina Avenue to the west, College Street to the south and an irregular boundary generally running along Bay Street to the east.” This includes 77 hectares affiliated with UofT, and another 33 hectares owned by others.
Johnson explained that the University would like “the planning framework to be updated sooner than [the city’s] timelines would allow, so they submitted this application and we are trying to work together to come to some sort of resolution that we can support.” The Secondary Plan was last updated in 1997, and the university first submitted their new application in September 2016. Ideally, says Johnson, these plans should be reviewed every 5 to 10 years.
“The scope of [the proposal] and the level of intensification and development that is proposed pretty vastly exceeds what would currently be permitted” explained Johnson.
The Secondary Plan proposal seeks to “provide an updated policy framework that would manage change and guide new development” surrounding the St. George campus. These policies address, among other things, height restrictions for buildings, and land use restrictions. The Secondary Plan is organized around the protection of heritage locations, expanding the “public realm,” and mobility policies. It seeks to see spaces “protected, conserved, and enhanced over time.”
Johnson emphasized the aim of the city’s revisions to the proposal as finding a balance between allowing flexibility of guidelines for growth and development, and certainty of guidelines that ensures the protection of the integrity of the area; currently, the city would like to see more certainty in the proposal. They would also like to see the inclusion of more environmental policies.
One main focus of the meeting was the “public realm framework” which dictates the functioning of public streets. The proposal would like to transition streets into being more pedestrian-friendly.
Students brought up specific areas of concern, many of which Johnson acknowledged the city was already aware of, or in the process of addressing. Crossing Queens Park Crescent, both near Hart House and by Museum subway station, was mentioned as dangerous and inaccessible. Accessing the architecture building at 1 Spadina was also brought up by multiple students as being particularly hazardous. Johnson shared that issues with sightlines at the crossing to 1 Spadina are already being explored.
UTSU VP External Anne Boucher brought up the 4-way stop at Huron and Russell Street, at which the streets are not aligned. The city would like to see the calming of traffic generally across the campus, but has identified this as a particular area of concern.
West Campus is viewed as needing the most development, and Huron Street was highlighted as a particular area that is currently “uncomfortable.” Dark and less aesthetically appealing, Huron Street could benefit from more green space, Johnson said.
The Secondary Plan limits the heights of buildings in order to preserve “view corridors” for what are identified as “protected views.” “Protected views” include Knox College, Old Vic, University College, as well as the Legislature building. Students presented concerns that the restrictions on building height would prevent the possibility of campus development – in particular, the development of more student housing.
The revised proposal will be presented on March 26th, 2018. Johnson says that the hope is to have the final report prepared in June, but adds that this is “a pretty aggressive timeline.”
A map of the affected territory as well as updates and further details can be found on the City of Toronto’s website.
