1 Installation of a 40 K/Hour Speed Limit on Denton Avenue and Newport Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

2 Parking and Traffic Conditions on Highview Avenue at Birch Cliff Heights Public School Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

3 Proposed Right-Turn Lane Designation on Eglinton Avenue East at Lebovic Avenue Wards 13 and 14 Scarborough Bluffs and Scarborough Wexford

4 Installation of a 40 K/Hour Speed Limit on Ellington Drive - Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

5 Parking and Traffic Conditions on Nelson Street and Farmbrook Road at Cedarbrook Junior Public School Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

6 Parking and Pedestrian Crossings in Front of St. Sylvester Catholic School and Silver Springs Public School Silver Springs Boulevard Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

7 All-Way Stop and Pedestrian Crossover in the Area of Alton Towers Circle and Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection) Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

8 Part Lot Control Exemption Application SL1998010 Petro Canada, 70 Guildwood Parkway Guildwood Community Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

9 Servicing Agreement between Lesspeak Investments Ltd. and The City of Toronto (formerly City of Scarborough) 1281 Meadowvale Road - Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

10 Acceptance of Services
Wise World Enterprises (Canada) Inc. North Side of Passmore Avenue, East of Middlefield Road Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

11 Outdoor Liquor Licence Application
Big Time Burgers Inc., 1157 Ellesmere Road, Units 1 and 2 Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

12 Request for Fence By-law Exemption Bruce Cossar and Laurie Vogan 34 Allangrove Crescent Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

13 Request for Fence By-law Exemption Gail Bolubash, 62 Cornell Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

14 Request for Fence By-law Exemption Edgar Bourne and Carol Bourne 95 Merkley Square Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

15 Request for Direction
Appeal by the University of Toronto Ontario Municipal Board Hearing
Scarborough Official Plan Amendment No. 988 Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

16 Variance Application SA100/99
Midov Developments Limited 325 Morrish Road, Highland Creek Community
Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

17 Preliminary Evaluation Report Official Plan Amendment Application SP1999006 Underwriters Laboratories of Canada, Crouse Road Wexford Employment District

18 Other Items Considered by the Community Council

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 7, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To investigate the need for a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit on Denton Avenue and Newport Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the speed limit signs is available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget estimates, Account No. 100-TP10226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the 40 kilometre per hour speed limits identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

During a public meeting in the Oakridge Community, Transportation Services received a number of requests including a concern with regard to speeding on Denton Avenue and Newport Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Denton Avenue and Newport Avenue are residential collector roads located north of Danforth Avenue, near Pharmacy Avenue. Oakridge Public School and Samuel Hearne Senior Public School abut both streets, east of Pharmacy Avenue. The speed limit on both streets is 50 kilometres per hour. Appropriate School Area signs are posted in advance of the school and a signed School Crossing exists on Newport Avenue at Byng Avenue, and a pedestrian crossover exists on Denton Avenue at Byng Avenue.

Speed studies were conducted on both Denton Avenue and Newport Avenue on Wednesday, September 23, 1998. The following was recorded:

Note: The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of motorists are travelling.

Staff investigated both roads for the installation of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit. The justification for the introduction of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit on a roadway in the former City of Scarborough is based on a technical warrant adopted by the former Scarborough Council. Neither street fully satisfies all of the necessary requirements for a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit, mainly due to the fact that the 85th percentile speed slightly exceeds 50 kilometres per hour and the minimum distance between controls is less than the requirement.

However, on the location of Denton Avenue and Newport Avenue in proximity to schools, and considering the warrants for a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit are predominantly satisfied, we believe it would be appropriate to reduce the speed limit to 40 kilometres per hour, east of Pharmacy Avenue.

Our review of the reported collision history for both roads for the period between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 1997 revealed a total of eight collisions on both roads. None of these collisions involved speeding.

Conclusions:

Based upon the existing speed profile, the volume of traffic, and the proximity to schools, staff recommend that both Denton Avenue, east of Pharmacy Avenue and Newport Avenue be posted with a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"40 kilometre per hour Speed Limit"

Regulation to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2

Highway From To

Denton Avenue Pharmacy Avenue Patterson Avenue

Newport Avenue Pharmacy Avenue Patterson Avenue

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 12, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To address the need to amend the parking and stopping regulations on Highview Avenue at Birch Cliff Heights Public School.

Funding Sources:

The $300.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the parking restriction signs is available in the 1999 budget estimates, Account No. 100-TP10220.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the stopping regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2) the parking regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted;

(3) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly;

(4) copies of this report be sent to the Toronto Board of Education, and Birch Cliff Heights Public School for their information; and

(5) a copy of this report be sent to the Toronto Police Service, Parking Enforcement Unit requesting selective enforcement of the existing parking regulations near Birch Cliff Heights Public School.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the request of Councillor Brian Ashton's office, traffic studies were conducted at Birch Cliff Heights Public School to evaluate the suitability of parking regulations in the vicinity of this school and to determine if a modification of these regulations would be beneficial.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Currently, along the north/school side of Highview Avenue, both "No Stopping Anytime" and school bus loading zone signs are posted. "No Stopping Anytime" signs are also posted along the south/opposite side of Highview Avenue. A pedestrian crossover is located on Highview Avenue at the west limit of the school property. Toronto Transit Commission bus stops also exist on both sides of the street.

The following table shows the results of on-street parking observations as well as vehicle movements in/out the parking lot of Birch Cliff Heights Public School on Tuesday, May 26, 1998:

Our studies revealed that most motorists prefer to park along the north side of Highview Avenue in front of the school. While parking along this portion of the road is currently illegal, and motorists doing so risk being ticketed, by parking in this area they avoid having their passengers cross in front of through traffic.

It should also be noted that several vehicles were recorded making "three-point-turns" along the front of the school. Transportation Services is concerned about motorists making "three-point-turns" in sensitive school areas because when vehicles reverse, driver visibility of pedestrians, especially small children, may be severely reduced. Although less convenient, perhaps the safest way for motorists to change their direction of travel would involve going around the block.

Along with the vehicular study, pedestrian traffic observations were taken simultaneously. The following tables show these observations:

These tables show that most pedestrian crossings are taking place at the highly visible pedestrian crossover (PXO). Over 70 percent of the children crossed at the PXO, while others were assisted by adults at various mid-block locations. This PXO operation is further augmented by an adult crossing guard during the busiest times of school generated pedestrian activity. Throughout the observations, no conflicts between pedestrians and motorist were recorded.

Collision History:

In addition to the studies outlined above, Transportation Services conducted a two-year, ten-month collision review for the years in which we have the most current data, (from January 1, 1995 to November 30, 1998.) Four collisions have been reported during this time period in the area of the school.

The first of these collisions was the most serious because it involved injury to a student of Birch Cliff Heights Public School. This collision occurred on a Monday afternoon in January of 1995. The particulars of the police collision report show that the road conditions were clear and dry and that the motorist was driving slowly (15 kilometres per hour) when the student ran onto the roadway and into the path of the motorist. The eight year old pedestrian sustained minor injuries. The driver was not charged in this incident.

Of the remaining collisions, no injuries were sustained and two involved parked vehicles. In both cases, the motorists responsible for the damage failed to remain at the scene and report the damage. In the most recent case, occurring in October of 1998, the damage was reported as occurring in the parking lot of Birch Cliff Heights Public School.

Conclusions:

Based on the results of our investigations, we are recommending the standard "school side parking/opposite side no stopping" regulations on Highview Avenue. To achieve this standard, "30 Minute Parking, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" signs are recommended along a portion of the school/north side of Highview Avenue sufficient to park 10 private vehicles temporarily .

The existing "No Stopping Anytime" prohibition on the south or opposite side of Highview Avenue is not recommended to be altered. The intention of these signs will be to prevent passengers from boarding or alighting on the opposite side of the road and crossing in front of through traffic, and to maintain two lanes of travel. This recommendation provides for a safer situation in the vicinity of the school and an effective means of enforcement.

In addition, it is recommended that the current dimensions of the school bus loading zone be reduced from 68 metres to 44 metres and that it be shifted slightly to the west. By altering the school bus loading zone in this manner, the school's centre walkway will still be positioned such that it will remain convenient for school bus passengers and the amendment will provide more on-street parking for vehicles.

We are also aware that the Toronto District School Board has recently been considering the installation of a turning loop along the front of this school. While this loop could alleviate some of the traffic congestion along the school's frontage and within the parking lot, this proposed loop would not affect the recommended on-street parking regulations.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-Mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Highview North Kennedy South Woodrow Anytime

Avenue Road Boulevard

Appendix 2

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Highview North Kennedy 194 Metres east of Anytime

Avenue Road South Woodrow

Boulevard

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Maximum

Period

Highway Side From To Times or Days Permit

Highview North 120 Metres 74 Metres 8:00 a.m. to 30 Minutes

Avenue east of South further 4:00 p.m.

Woodrow east Monday to

Boulevard Friday

Scarborough Bluffs and Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 7, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To designate the existing eastbound right-turn lane on Eglinton Avenue East at Lebovic Avenue as an exclusive right-turn lane and provide an exception for buses.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $200.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of new signs are contained in the Transportation Services 1999 budget estimates, Account No. 100-TP10220.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the right-turn lane designation identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2) that the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the request of staff of the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), we have investigated the feasibility of implementing a right-turn lane designation on the eastbound approach of Eglinton Avenue East at Lebovic Avenue, with an exemption for buses.

Toronto Transit Commission staff are concerned that their buses presently travel through the intersection from the eastbound right-turn lane to access a bus stop located on the east side of the intersection, claiming that this movement is confusing to other motorists.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The eastbound approach of Eglinton Avenue East consists of three through lanes, including a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) curb lane, and an exclusive right-turn lane at Lebovic Avenue. A TTC bus stop and bus bay are located on the far side of the intersection, immediately east of Lebovic Avenue. In order to access the far side stop, TTC buses use the eastbound right-turn lane to travel through the intersection.

According to collision records of the Toronto Police Service, no collisions have occurred which involve the subject vehicle manoeuvre in 1998. However, within the City of Toronto, it is common practice to alert motorists to this arrangement by installing regulatory lane designation signs with "BUSES EXCEPTED" tabs. This treatment helps motorists predict the potential movement of buses, and avoid collisions.

Conclusions:

The installation of right-turn lane designation plus bus exemption on the eastbound approach of Eglinton Avenue East at Lebovic Avenue will augment the existing right-turn operations at the subject location and alert motorists to the bus route.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Highway Between Lanes Times or Days Direction

Eglinton Avenue Eglinton Avenue Southerly Anytime Eastbound

and Lebovic and a point Eastbound right-turning

Avenue 30.5 metres (except buses)

West thereof

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 9, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To investigate the need for a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit on Ellington Drive.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the speed limit signs is available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget estimates, Account No. 100-TP10226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the 40 kilometre per hour speed limit identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a request from a resident of Ellington Drive, Transportation Services investigated concerns with regard to speeding on the street.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Ellington Drive is a residential collector road that runs between Lawrence Avenue and Warden Avenue. Manhattan Park Junior Public School has a walkway accessing Ellington Drive. The speed limit is currently posted as 50 kilometres per hour. Appropriate School Area signs are posted in advance of the school and all-way stop controls exist at numerous locations along this street.

Speed studies were conducted at various locations on Ellington Drive on Thursday, February 18, 1999. The following was recorded:

Staff investigated three sections of the road for the installation of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit. The justification for the introduction of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit on a roadway in the former City of Scarborough is based on a technical warrant adopted by the former Scarborough Council. The total traffic volumes fall slightly short of the 1,000 vehicle requirement, however, we acknowledge that daily and monthly fluctuations could increase this over 1,000 vehicles per day north of Guild Hall Drive. Furthermore, although the 85th percentile speed exceeds 50 kilometre per hour, a curve exists in Ellington Drive that can not be negotiated safely at 50 kilometres per hour. Therefore, this criteria is achieved.

Our review of the reported collision history for Ellington Drive for the period between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 1998 reveals seven collisions have been reported over the past three years. None of these collisions involved speeding.

Conclusions:

Based upon the existing speed profile, the volume of traffic, the proximity to a school, and the alignment of the road, staff recommends that Ellington Drive be posted with a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"40 kilometre per hour Speed Limit"

Regulation to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2

Highway From To

Ellington Lawrence Warden

Drive Avenue Avenue

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 11, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4, subject to deleting Recommendations Nos. (1) and (2) and renumbering the remaining Recommendations, so that the Recommendations shall now read, as follows:

"(1) the existing on-street parking restrictions on Nelson Street remain unchanged;

(2) copies of this report be sent to the Toronto Board of Education, and Cedarbrook Junior Public School for their information; and

(3) a copy of this report be sent to the Toronto Police Service, Parking Enforcement Unit requesting selective enforcement of the existing parking regulations near Cedarbrook Junior Public School."

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (March 11, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To provide a follow-up account of recently installed parking restrictions on Nelson Street and Farmbrook Road near Cedarbrook Junior Public School.

Funding Sources:

The $400 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the stopping prohibition signs is available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget estimates, Account No. 100-TP10220.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the stopping regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted;

(2) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly;

(3) the existing on-street parking restrictions on Nelson Street remain unchanged;

(4) copies of this report be sent to the Toronto Board of Education, and Cedarbrook Junior Public School for their information; and

(5) a copy of this report be sent to the Toronto Police Service, Parking Enforcement Unit requesting selective enforcement of the existing parking regulations near Cedarbrook Junior Public School.

Council Reference/ Background/History:

As directed by the Scarborough Community Council in July 1998, Transportation Services staff restudied school related traffic/parking conditions in the fall of 1998 following the installation of new parking/stopping regulations at Cedarbrook Junior Public School.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Currently, along the north/school side of Nelson Street, a 30 minute parking limit applies between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday. This same restriction exists along the west/school side of Farmbrook Road. On the south/opposite side of Nelson Street there is a "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" regulation.

The east/opposite side of Farmbrook Road has no posted parking regulations. When last reported on, staff recommended, "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" regulations for the east side of Farmbrook Road to maintain consistency with the signage on Nelson Street and to prevent parking on both sides of the street from restricting traffic movements in this sensitive school area. However, as some residents opposed this recommendation, it was not supported by Community Council and this side of the road has remained unsigned.

Studies conducted on Monday September 28, 1999, following the installation of these restrictions, have revealed that parking on the east side of Farmbrook Road has actually increased. The following table compares the results of the first on-street parking observations taken on Monday, April 7, 1997, to the restudy observations from Monday, September 28, 1998.

KEY: ^ indicates a private vehicle - these vehicles have also been included as being parked on the north side of Nelson Street. Only school buses may park within the defined limits of a school bus loading zone.

This table shows that in both the "before" and "after" studies, most parents/guardians prefer to park directly abutting the school grounds. This is significant because vehicle passengers are being attended to along side the school and are not crossing in front of potentially dangerous through traffic.

Prior to the first study, the "lunch" period was not identified as a time requiring examination and, therefore, there is no related data available. Nonetheless, there is a clear requirement for continuation of the signed parking regulations given the significant amount of on-street parking being generated during this time.

Also shown in this table is the pattern of some motorists choosing to park on the "opposite" side of Nelson Street and Farmbrook Road. When vehicles park on both sides of the street, roadway congestion restricts regular through traffic. To help improve the levels of sign compliance, selective police enforcement of these controls is recommended by copy of this report to the Toronto Police Service.

At the same time as the vehicle observations, pedestrian studies were also undertaken. The following table shows a comparison of these observations:

(Assisted Children are children crossing the road accompanied by a youth, an adult or the school safety patrollers.)

This table shows that the majority of pedestrian crossings associated with Cedarbrook Junior Public School are taking place at the highly visible pedestrian crossover (P.X.O.). This table also indicates the need for day-long parking restrictions because the greatest number of pedestrian movements occurred at lunch. Throughout the observations, no conflicts were recorded between pedestrians and motorists.

Collision History:

In addition to the studies outlined above, we conducted a three-year, five month collision review of this area (from January 1, 1995 to May 31, 1998) which revealed that three collisions have been reported during this time period.

Each of these collisions occurred during non-school hours and the common factor in each collision involved drivers failing to yield the right-of-way to other motorists, resulting in minor injuries and limited property damage. Although any collision is regrettable, based on the frequency and the nature of these collisions, they are not indicative of a safety problem.

Conclusion:

Based on the results of our investigations, we are recommending the continuation of the standard "school side parking/opposite side no stopping" regulations on Nelson Street as they currently exist. Although not originally supported by some residents, our study results reveal that these same standard regulations should be applied to Farmbrook Road. Specifically, "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" signs should be installed along the east/opposite side of Farmbrook Road.

These regulations are recommended because they do not allow even temporary parking. The intention of these signs will be to prevent passengers from boarding or alighting on the opposite side of the road and crossing in front of through traffic, and to maintain two lanes of travel. This recommendation provides for a safer situation in the vicinity of the school and an effective means of enforcement.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-Mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Farmbrook East Nelson Street 178 metres 8:00 a.m. to

Road north of 4:00 p.m.

Nelson Street Monday to Friday

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (November 25, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To address the need to amend the parking/stopping restrictions in the area of St. Sylvester Catholic School and Silver Springs Public School on Silver Springs Boulevard.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the parking/stopping restriction signs is available in the Transportation Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the stopping regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2) the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a verbal request from Principal Jim Lockett, of St. Sylvester Catholic School, Transportation Services examined school related traffic/parking conditions. Given the close proximity of Silver Springs Public School, simultaneous traffic studies where also taken at this location. A number of adjustments to the parking/stopping restrictions were examined.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Currently both schools have a "No Stopping, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" restriction posted along the frontage of the schools along with a school bus loading zone at each school. At Silver Springs Public School the school bus loading zone is within an on-street bus bay. On the opposite side of the road, no signs are currently posted. A pedestrian crossover (PXO) is also located on Silver Springs Boulevard at Dancy Avenue and contains the appropriate "No Stopping" restriction 9 metres on either side of the crossover.

On-Street Parking Observations:

Site traffic studies were conducted on Monday, March 30, 1998 during the morning and the afternoon admission/dismissal times. The following table shows the results of these observations:

This table shows that while some parking violations are occurring, much of the school generated traffic volume is being accommodated by off-street parking lots. Transportation Services supports this action as we have always encouraged any institution creating traffic to accommodate it off the public road allowance whenever possible.

What was also noted in this table is that the majority of motorists are ignoring the stopping restriction along the frontage of the schools at dropping off and picking up passengers. While this provides improved safety for passengers, not only is it currently illegal but it creates congestion with those motorists who are currently obeying the posted restrictions and parking on the west/opposite side of the road.

Pedestrian Crossing Concerns

Transportation Services staff also recorded the volume and location of pedestrian crossings by this school simultaneously with the parking observations. This information has been detailed in the following tables.

A comparison between the uncontrolled mid-block pedestrians crossings and those occurring at the Pedestrian Crossover shows a fairly equal division of pedestrian volume at all locations (A.M. mid-block crossings:123, A.M. crossings at the PXO:104, P.M. mid-block crossings:125, P.M. crossings at the PXO:117). Nonetheless, pedestrians attending either the separate or the public school should be encouraged to make use of the existing traffic control devices at the intersection of Silver Springs Boulevard and Dancy Avenue. However, it is worthwhile to note that, no difficulties between any pedestrians or motorists were recorded during our studies.

Collision History

In addition to the studies outlined above, Transportation Services conducted a three-year collision review, for the years in which we have the most current data (from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1996), that revealed that four collisions have been reported during this time period in the area of the schools.

One collision occurred in February 1994 when a motorists improperly reversed and struck a second vehicle. This collision was not investigated at the scene, and nothing beyond minor property damage was reported. The next collision occurred in April of 1995 and was the result of an improper turning manoeuvre at slow speeds. No charges were issued in this minor collision. The remaining two collisions occurred in May 1996. The first of which, being the most serious, involved a 38 year pedestrian being struck by a vehicle as she tried to cross Silver Springs Boulevard in inclement weather. This collision is quite serious because the driver failed to remain at the scene, fortunately the pedestrian sustained only minor injuries. The remaining collision occurred as the result of an improper lane change. Once again, however, the particulars of this collision indicate that it was of a very minor nature and, as such, it was not investigated at the scene nor were any charges laid. Further collision analysis would not likely reveal any other pertinent details and, therefore, is not warranted at this time.

Conclusions:

As a result of our investigations and discussions with the principals of the schools, we are recommending the following:

(1) Installing "30 Minute Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" signs along the school/west side of Silver Springs Boulevard directly in front of St. Sylvester C.S. and Silver Springs P.S. schools. Permissive parking restrictions of this type allows private vehicle passengers to directly access the school without having to cross in front of through traffic. To accommodate these new restrictions, the existing "No Stopping, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" signs will be removed. If the school side "permitted parking" change is approved, there will be sufficient room for approximately 12 private vehicles to park temporarily by the catholic school and 9 private vehicles to park temporarily by the public school.

(2) Installing "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" signs on the opposite/east side of the schools. Currently, on this side of the road there are no signed parking restrictions. If properly obeyed, passengers will not be boarding or alighting on opposite side of the road and subsequently crossing in front of through traffic. The new restrictions would also be consistent with 73 other similarly signed school areas altered in the Scarborough District. The recommended "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m, Monday - Friday" signs should also help to eliminate congestion at the private driveways on the opposite side of Silver Springs Boulevard of school generated traffic.

These revised parking restriction times attempt to reflect typical hours of school operation and are intended to consider the occasional on-street parking needs of area residents during "non-school" hours. The "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" restriction will also help to maintain two lanes of traffic movement by these schools.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Silver West Rakewood Crescent North Limit of 7:00 a.m to

Springs (North Intersection) 260 Silver Springs 6:00 p.m.

Boulevard Boulevard Monday to

Friday

Appendix 2

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Silver East 30 metres north 70 metres north 8:00 a.m to

Springs of Rakewood of Revlis Crescent 4:00 p.m.

Boulevard Crescent (North (North Intersection) Monday to

Intersection) Friday

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Maximum

Period

Highway Side From To Times or Days Permitted

Silver West 30 metres north 70 metres north 8:00 a.m. to 30 minutes

Springs of Rakewood of Revlis 4:00 p.m.

Boulevard Crescent (North Crescent (North Monday to

Intersection) Intersection) Friday

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 12, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To investigate the need for an all-way stop on Alton Towers Circle at Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection), and a pedestrian crossover on Alton Towers Circle south of this location.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $15,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the all-way stop, overhead flashing beacon and pedestrian crossover is available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget estimates, Account No. 100-TP10226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the pedestrian crossover identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2) the pedestrian crossover identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted;

(3) the all-way stop control identified in Appendix 3 of this report be adopted; and

(4) the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Transportation Services received a request from Councillor Balkissoon regarding replacing the pedestrian crossover on Alton Towers Circle at Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection) with an all-way stop, and installing a new pedestrian crossover south of this intersection. Also we received a request from Councillor Cho for the police to investigate the need for an adult crossing guard at the intersection of Alton Towers Circle and Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection).

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The intersection of Alton Towers Circle and Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection) is located south of Steeles Avenue and west of McCowan Road. The speed limit is currently posted as 40 kilometres per hour. Appropriate School Area signs are posted in advance of the schools in the area, Banting and Best Public School and Prince of Peace Catholic School. Goldhawk Community Centre and Library are located on Alton Towers Circle, south of Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection). A pedestrian crossover (PXO) currently exists on Alton Towers Circle at Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection).

A number of traffic studies were conducted in the area on Thursday, November 26, 1998 to determine the need for additional traffic control. Study results are as follows.

Pedestrian Crossover Operation:

Transportation Services examined the operation of the existing pedestrian crossover and observed the following.

Note: (A) Motorist PXO disobedience is registered when the investigator determines that the motorist could have stopped safely, but failed to do so.

• This recorded volume of compliance by motorists is considered excellent in comparison to other locations.

Note: (B) Of the 494 pedestrians not using the PXO correctly:

• 413 pedestrians (191 assisted and unassisted children, 213 youths/adults and 9 senior citizens) did not activate the overhead flashing amber beacons.

• 81 pedestrians (7 assisted and unassisted children, 65 youths/adults and 9 senior citizens) did not use the PXO but crossed in proximity to it.

We have concerns regarding the high level of non-compliance by pedestrians at this PXO. While we observed excellent compliance by motorists, there was a high number of pedestrians, both children and adults, not using proper crossing techniques.

Fortunately, despite this high level of non-compliance, there is not a significant history of collisions at this intersection. In a three year period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998, eight collisions occurred at this intersection, none of which involved pedestrians. We are aware that, in speaking with Councillor Balkissoon, a child was hit at the PXO in 1999 and we have since managed to locate a copy of the collision report for this incident.

This collision occurred in the morning of January 20, 1999 involving a nine year old child crossing within the pedestrian crossover. It appears, according to the police report, that the pedestrian was crossing properly, however, the motorist failed to yield the right-of-way. Fortunately the child only sustained minor injuries.

Considering the high levels of non-compliance by pedestrians, we did examine other traffic options at this intersection. Our study results are as follows:

Traffic Control Signals:

The justification for the installation of traffic control signals (TCS) is based on a technical warrant established by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). The analysis of this warrant is based on data compiled from an 8-hour traffic study.

To warrant the installation of traffic control signals, compliance levels of 100 percent are required in one of the above categories or 80 percent in each. In brief, these findings indicate that there is insufficient vehicular traffic entering the intersection on both the major and minor roads to satisfy the Traffic Control Signal Warrant at this time.

All-Way Stop Control:

The justification for the installation of an all-way stop control is based on a technical warrant established by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). Our eight hour study results are as follows.

* Warranted Hours

Evident by the above results, the vehicle volume requirements are close to being satisfied.

Pedestrian Crossover:

We also examined the feasibility of installing a PXO 170 metres south of Alton Towers Circle and Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection). The justification for the installation of a PXO is based on a technical warrant established by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). The analysis of this warrant is based on data compiled from an 8-hour traffic study and a 12-hour vehicle count.

To warrant the installation of a PXO, compliance levels of 100 percent are required in both of the above categories. The "Required Pedestrian Volume" is based on the "12-hour vehicle volume" of the road. Evident by the above results, a PXO is warranted at this location.

Adult Crossing Guard:

The Toronto Police, Community Policing Support Unit, have investigated this location for both an adult crossing guard and/or a school safety patrol program. The police have indicated that this is not a suitable location for an adult crossing guard, and the principal of Banting and Best Public School and the police are reluctant to utilize children to assist in crossing at this location.

Conclusions:

Application of study data revealed that traffic control signals are far from being warranted, whereas an all-way stop control is close to being warranted at the subject intersection. Furthermore, we do have some concerns regarding the high level of non-compliance by pedestrians at the existing PXO at this location. While we observed excellent compliance by motorists, there was a high number of pedestrians, both children and adults, not using proper crossing techniques.

Based on our study results, and the meeting with the police, we are recommending an all-way stop because the All-Way Stop Control Warrant criteria are achieved in 6 of the 8 required hours. Even in the hours when the criteria are not achieved, the vehicle volume split is close to being satisfied. It is for these reasons that we believe vehicle compliance of an all-way stop at the north intersection of Alton Towers Circle and Goldhawk Trail will be good. Overhead red flashing beacons are also recommended to supplement this all-way stop control.

Typically we prefer the use of a pedestrian crossover to an all-way stop when pedestrian crossing protection is of prime concern, however, as the level of compliance by pedestrians at the PXO is so poor, and neither an adult crossing guard nor a school safety patrol programme are supported, we feel an all-way stop would operate more successfully at this location.

Application of study results obtained on Alton Towers Circle, at a location approximately 170 metres south of Goldhawk Trail (North Intersection) revealed that the warrant requirements for a pedestrian crossover are achieved. Therefore, a pedestrian crossover at this location is recommended.

To emphasize proper crossing techniques, we have requested that the police educate students to promote the proper usage of the proposed pedestrian crossover and all-way stop. Following the installation of the proposed all-way stop control and pedestrian crossover we will monitor these locations to determine if they are operating successfully.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Pedestrian Crossover"

Regulation to be Rescinded

Column 1 Column 2

Road At

Alton Towers Goldhawk Trail

Circle (North Intersection)

Appendix 2

"Pedestrian Crossover"

Regulation to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2

Road At

Alton Towers 170 Metres south of

Circle Goldhawk Trail

(North Intersection)

Appendix 3

"Compulsory Stops"

Regulation to Be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2

Intersection Stop Street

Alton Towers Circle Alton Towers Circle

and Goldhawk Trail

(North Intersection)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 30, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

Vahe Kouyoumdjian is proposing to construct a residential townhouse development consisting of seven street townhouse dwellings and eight condominium townhouses at the north-west corner of Guildwood Parkway and Rowatson Road (Figure 1). This application requests lifting Part Lot Control on the land fronting on Rowatson Road to permit the creation of seven separate lots (Parts 1-7). The remnant part (Part 8) will contain the eight condominium townhouses, common elements and a landscaping area on Guildwood Parkway (Figure 2).

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1) City Council enact a Part Lot Control Exemption By-law with respect to Block B, Registered Plan M-767;

(2) the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law shall be repealed one (1) year from the date of the passing of the By-law;

(3) all conveyances which occur after the exemption from Part Lot Control shall be in accordance with Reference Plan(s) to be approved by the Director of Community Planning East District, prior to the plan(s) being deposited in the Land Registry Office; and

(4) City Council authorize any unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Exemption By-law as may be required to give effect to this resolution.

Background:

The proposed street townhouse lots will have frontages ranging from approximately 5.9 metres (19 feet) to 12 metres (39 feet) and minimum lot areas ranging from approximately 125 square metres (1,345 square feet) to 206 square metres (2,215 square feet).

A Site Plan Control Application (S97161) indicating the location of the proposed townhouses, access and landscaping, was approved by the Director of Community Planning East District earlier this year.

Comments:

Section 50(7) of the Planning Act, 1990, authorizes the lifting of Part Lot Control on lots or blocks within a registered plan. This method of land division allows lot lines to be finalized during or after construction and is advantageous, especially for street townhouses, because it avoids the potential problem of party walls of dwelling units not coinciding exactly with lot lines.

The preparation of reference plans for the proposed lot divisions, reviewed by the Director of Community Planning prior to registration on title, will ensure municipal monitoring and control and will ensure that the deposited plans reflect Council's approval. There are no Official Plan or Zoning concerns raised by this application.

The application was circulated to reporting Departments and Agencies. Parks and Recreation Services staff indicate that the five percent parkland dedication is to be satisfied via cash-in-lieu of land. No other comments or concerns have been raised.

Conclusions:

The lifting of Part Lot Control on the subject lands will facilitate the finalization of a successful residential development previously endorsed by the Toronto City Council.

Contact Name:

Aristotle Christou

Senior Planner

Telephone: (416) 396-5228

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: christou@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 13, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

Lesspeak Investments Limited entered into a Servicing Agreement with the former City of Scarborough dated October 31, 1990 to service their lands on the east side of Meadowvale Road, north of Sheppard Avenue, known as 1281 Meadowvale Road. We are in receipt of a request from the Owner's agent to terminate the agreement and to release the performance guarantee as the owner is not pursuing the development of the site at this time.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Servicing Agreement dated October 31, 1990 between Lesspeak Investments Limited and City of Toronto (formerly City of Scarborough) be terminated; and

(2) the performance guarantee held by the City be released.

Comments and/or Discussion:

Lesspeak Investments Limited entered into a Servicing Agreement with the former City of Scarborough dated October 31, 1990 to service their lands on the east side of Meadowvale Road, north of Sheppard Avenue, known as 1281 Meadowvale Road.

Staff of Works and Emergency Services and City Planning Departments have reviewed the Owner's request and have no objections to the termination of the agreement and release of the securities.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski, Director

Planning and Administrative Tribunal Law

Tel No.: (416) 392-0080

Fax No.: (416) 392-0005

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 14, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

Wise World Enterprises (Canada) Inc. entered into a Subdivision Agreement with the Corporation of the City of Scarborough to develop the lands located on the north side of Passmore Avenue, east of Middlefield Road.

All departments have now completed the development acceptance form for servicing related to Block 1, Plan 66M-2251 as set out in this report. It is therefore recommended that the services can now be accepted by the City subject to the Owner entering into an amending agreement to be registered on title.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not Applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the services installed relating to Block 1, Registered Plan 66M-2251 be accepted;

(2) upon execution and registration of an amending agreement as set out in the attached report, the Legal Services Department be authorized to release the performance guarantee; and

(3) the City Clerk and Treasurer be authorized to sign the amending agreement and any release or other documentation necessary to give effect to this acceptance.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Owner entered into a Subdivision Agreement, dated March 31, 1989, with The Corporation of the City of Scarborough to develop the lands located on the north side of Passmore Avenue, east of Middlefield Road. The plan of subdivision provides for 1 block fronting on Passmore Avenue with 4 interior blocks fronting on Select Avenue. The development of the blocks fronting on Select Avenue has not commenced as services are not yet available. The timing of servicing is dependant on abutting lands being serviced and remains uncertain.

All Departments have completed the development acceptance form for servicing relating to Block 1 and it would be appropriate for the City to assume those services and release the performance guarantee. The Owner, however, must enter into an amending agreement satisfactory to the City Solicitor to be registered on title to ensure completion of the undeveloped lands, being Blocks 2, 3, 4 and 5, and the streets, namely Select Avenue and Muirpoint Road, all as shown on Plan 66M-2251, and the provision of a performance guarantee prior to commencement of construction.

The services installed with respect to Block 1, Plan 66M-2251 could now be accepted.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski, Director

Planning and Administrative Tribunal Law

Tel. No.: (416) 392-0080

Fax No.: (416) 392-0005

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1) support the issuance of the liquor licence to Big Time Burgers Inc., subject to the hours of operation of the patio being limited to 11:00 p.m. closing; and

(2) authorize the City Clerk or designate to complete and sign the "Municipal Information" form and forward the form with City Council's decision to the Alcohol and Gaming Commission.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (April 14, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

To receive direction for a request for an outdoor liquor licence received December 7, 1998, from Ms. Toni Travlou, O/a: Big Time Burgers Inc., 1157 Ellesmere Road, Units 1 and 2, (Ward 15).

Recommendations:

It is recommended:

(1) that Scarborough Community Council approve Option (a) or (b), viz:

(a) support the issuance of the liquor licence to Big Time Burgers Inc. with or without operating restrictions; or

(b) object to the issuance of the liquor licence to Big Time Burgers Inc.; and

(2) that the Clerk or designate be authorized to complete and sign the "Municipal Information" form and forward the form with City Council's decision to the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.

Background:

The "Municipal Information" form requires the Municipal Clerk or designate to sign to confirm the "wet/dry/damp" status of the location of the establishment. The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO), formerly the Liquor Licensing Board of Ontario, requires this form to be completed before any new liquor licence hearing can be scheduled.

The City Clerk's Division, Legislative Services Section, Scarborough Civic Centre Office, received a "Municipal Information" form for a liquor licence on December 7, 1998 from Ms. Toni Travlou, O/a: Big Time Burgers Inc., 1157 Ellesmere Road, Units 1 and 2.

A copy of the "Municipal Information" form and the required questionnaire were forwarded to Councillors Berardinetti and Duguid for whatever action they deemed necessary.

Discussion:

The process followed for Liquor Licence Clearance can be found in the Administrative Manual for Scarborough, CA-104-03, dated 01-08-97. The "Municipal Information" form required for new liquor licences and the required questionnaire was circulated for comments to the following, the Ward Councillors, Building, Public Health, Fire Services. Circulation to the MPP and the MP was for information purposes only.

Councillors are advised of the receipt of clearance from Buildings, Public Health and Fire Services and requested to provide one of the following comments:

• •"Satisfied", approve the Clerk or designate to sign the "Municipal Information" form.
• •"Not Satisfied", report by Clerk's for Committee and Council.
• •"Keep Pending", request time to investigate further.

Council may request that the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario restrict the area for serving and consumption of alcohol and the hours of operation. Once the direction from Council has been finalized and a response prepared for the Liquor Licence Board of Ontario, the Clerk or designate can sign the "Municipal Information" form. Council's decision and the "Municipal Information" form are forwarded to the AGCO.

Councillor Duguid is not in support of this application. Councillor Berardinetti is in support of Councillor Duguid's response.

Full compliance/clearances from Building, Public Health and Fire Services have been received.

Conclusion:

The recommendations contained in this report will allow the Clerk to sign the "Municipal Information" form and forward the form and Council's comments on to the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.

Contact Name:

Glenn Vollebregt, Director of Legislative Services,

Phone: (416) 392-4373

Fax: (416) 392-1867

e-mail: gavolleb@mtal.metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

Mr. Peter Kanakis and Ms. Antonia Travlou, Big Time Burgers Inc., appeared before the Scarborough Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (February 2, 1999) from the Director of Municipal Licensing and Standards:

Purpose:

To report to the Scarborough Community Council on an application for a fence by-law exemption deferred from its meeting on December 9, 1998.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that, owing to a lack of resolution as to the location of the fence, City Council not approve the request from the owners of 34 Allangrove Crescent.

Background/History:

At its meeting on December 9, 1998, the Scarborough Community Council deferred a report concerning a request for a fence exemption by Bruce Cossar and Laurie Vogan. The deferral took place because a survey was produced showing the fence to be partially on the Wong's property which is directly behind the applicant's property. It was the Legal Services' advice at the time that the Community Council could not consider the application until the fence encroachment was resolved.

As a result of this deferral, a letter was sent to the applicants and Mr. Wong on December 14, 1998, outlining the Community Council's reasons for deferral and requesting a timely resolution or else enforcement would proceed. Since then, attempts to contact the parties have been unsuccessful and re-inspection on February 1, 1999 revealed no change at the site. While weather conditions may preclude any work on the fence, staff believe that more than adequate time has been allowed for the applicants and their neighbour to resolve the issue of the fence location.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, District Manager

Tel: (416) 396-7731

Fax: (416) 396-4266

byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 31, 1999) from the Manager of Municipal Licensing and Standards, East District:

Purpose:

The applicant is seeking approval to erect a fence along her property's rear lot line to a height of 2.3 metres (7.5 feet).

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit the construction of a board on board fence at a height of 2.3 metres (7.5 feet) along the rear property line.

Background/History:

In early February 1999, the District received a request from the owner of 62 Cornell Avenue to construct a fence at a height of 2.3 metres (7.5 feet) along the rear lot line. The applicant indicated that two new houses had been constructed to the rear of her property and owing to the height of the new houses, a certain degree of privacy has been lost. In addition, a problem has arisen respecting a porch light which is shining into the applicant's living room.

By-law 24945 as amended provides for a maximum fence height of 2 metres (6 feet 8 inches) and the variance request of .254 metres (10 inches) is considered minor.

Justification:

Section 14 of By-law 24945, as amended, provides that any person may apply for an exemption to any provision of the By-law.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, East District Manager

Tel: (416) 396-7731

Fax: (416) 396-4266

byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Community Council received written submissions respecting this matter from:

- Dr. and Mrs. Prucha, area residents; and

- Ms. Gail Bolubash, the applicant,

A copy of which was provided to all Members of Community Council, and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 7, 1999) from the Manager of Municipal Licensing and Standards, East District:

Purpose:

The applicants are seeking an exemption to the by-law to allow an existing 1.8 metre (6 foot) solid board fence to remain in the street yard on the west side of the property.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit the existing solid board fence to remain at a height of 1.8 metres (6 feet) located in the street yard on the west side of the property and further, that as a condition of approval, the fence be lowered to a height of 1.2 metres for a distance of 1.8 metres from the sidewalk when it is replaced.

Background/History:

Acting upon a complaint, an inspection of a fence was conducted at property municipally known as 95 Merkley Square. The inspection revealed a solid board fence approximately 1.8 metres (6 feet) in height located along the westerly lot line abutting the driveway and extending to within 39 centimetres of the sidewalk.

The owners subsequently contacted the Division and advised that the fence was constructed approximately twenty years ago so as to provide protection from the neighbour's dogs. The owners indicated that two Rottweilers and a Border Collie are currently owned by their neighbour and that the board fence discourages the dogs from rushing the fence and startling visitors to their property.

The subject property is located on the south side of Merkley Square which is an interior residential street accommodating predominantly local, as opposed to through traffic. The existence of a boulevard provides ample setback and thus sight visibility for drivers of vehicles backing from the driveway into the street. Visibility of oncoming pedestrian traffic is somewhat restricted given the location of the fence in proximity to the sidewalk. This observation respecting visibility is tempered by the fact that the fence has been in existence for twenty years without any apparent problems arising.

Comments:

Given the age of the fence, it is likely that replacement will be required in the foreseeable future. Also of note is the fact that no problems have arisen respecting pedestrians and vehicles exiting the property for the last twenty years. In consideration of these factors, it seems reasonable to address the fence height in relation to the sidewalk when it is replaced. When that happens, it would be appropriate to restrict the first 1.8 metre section of fence closest to the sidewalk to a height of 1.2 metres.

Justification:

Section 14 of By-law 24945, as amended, provides that any person may apply for an exemption to any provision of the by-law.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, East District Manager

Tel: (416) 396-7731

Fax: (416) 396-4266

byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 26, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report recommends a position to be taken by Council at the May 31, 1999 Ontario Municipal Board hearing on the University of Toronto proposed modifications to the City-initiated Official Plan Amendment 988 for the Highland Creek Community Secondary Plan.

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1) direct the City Solicitor to adopt the following positions at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing on the University's proposed modification to the City-initiated Official Plan Amendment 988, scheduled to commence on May 31, 1999:

(a) support modification of OPA 988 to restore any development rights which the amendment would have removed from the University's lands, such as semi-detached housing within the area presently designated for Low Density Residential Uses;

(b) support the addition of the following uses to the Institutional - Scarborough Campus designation, to facilitate partnerships by the University with other educational institutions and with the private sector, i.e.,

- training and educational facilities;

- scientific, technical research and development uses which have no noxious characteristics;

(c) oppose any further modifications of OPA 988 to implement the densities of development currently being proposed as being not supportable in the absence of adequate planning justification;

(2) request that the University of Toronto provide a municipally acceptable planning rationale and supporting studies to justify the land uses and densities being proposed so that Council and staff can properly evaluate the University's proposals with respect to impact on the Highland Creek and Morningside communities, parks and schools, piped services, traffic, environmental issues and other issues.

(3) direct the Director of Community Planning, East District:

(a) to continue to meet with representatives of the University of Toronto to obtain the information described in (2);

(b) to report to the Scarborough Community Council at its meeting of May 26, 1999, on the progress of these discussions and on the community information meeting scheduled for May 10, 1999, at the Highland Creek Elementary School; and

(c) to initiate a secondary planning process for the University of Toronto lands, similar to that successfully undertaken for the York University main campus, such process to include the University of Toronto, Ward Councillors and representatives of community associations.

Background:

City Council, at its meeting of April 13,14 and 15, 1999, directed that staff report to Scarborough Community Council at its meeting of April 28, 1999, with recommendations for a City position to be taken at the OMB hearing scheduled for May 31, 1999, to deal with the proposed modifications to the City-initiated OPA 988 for the Highland Creek community.

The University of Toronto, without a formal application, proposes to significantly expand the uses presently provided for by the Highland Creek Secondary Plan for almost 60 hectares (150 acres) of its lands (Figure 1). (No change is being sought for the valleylands of the Highland Creek.)

Comments:

The University is seeking a density of 3 x site area for almost two thirds of this area, and 2 x and 1 x density over the balance of the lands. This could potentially result in 700,000 square metres (7.5 million square feet) of residential, commercial and other floorspace, even if the theoretically achievable maximums are discounted by 50 percent to allow for existing campus buildings, local roads, parks and environmentally unusable lands.

For perspective, the potential buildout exceeds the total built retail, office and residential floor space in the City Centre. The range of densities proposed for the University lands is similar to the density range planned for the City Centre, which is served by the SRT and a bus terminal.

Further, the U of T proposals are substantially more intense than the "pre-subway" densities provided for in the Agincourt Centre, which now has a GO station and a high order of bus service.

The Scarborough Official Plan contains policy statements regarding the form and density of dwelling unit types. The Ontario Municipal Board decision of March 29, 1999, confirmed the following policy statement, part of amendments resulting from a two-year planning process undertaken by planning staff with extensive community involvement. (Although the University lands are excluded from the effect of this policy at this time, it will apply to the immediately abutting lands.)

"The residential areas of the Highland Creek Community are characterized by detached dwellings on spacious treed lots. The preservation of this character within the established residential areas of the Community shall be the principal criterion in evaluating development proposals. Residential infill and redevelopment shall be compatible with the existing residential character consistent with the provisions of Section 2.4.1.3."

Section 2.4.1.3 of the Scarborough plan states that:

"Council shall maintain the stable residential character of existing neighbourhoods and communities. New development proposals shall have regard for compatibility with adjacent land uses and designations, particularly with regard to dwelling units type, density and height."

Section 2.4.2.3 of the Scarborough plan says, in part, that:

"The establishment of dwelling unity types may be based, among other things, on:

- type and condition of existing housing;

- the compatibility of new development to existing residential areas in terms of form, density and scale of development; ...

- the proximity of City-wide services and facilities such as rapid transit...."

The University's proposals constitute a fundamental restructuring of the Highland Creek Secondary Plan. The University has not provided a planning rationale for the proposed land uses or densities, particularly in regard to the planning policies noted above. No studies of traffic, community facility, or servicing impact have been submitted. The only adjustments to community concerns proposal are height limits of 3 storeys in the immediate proximity of existing residential areas, increasing to the west. A limit on retail shopping, to a maximum of 4 hectares (10 acres) has also been added.

The University has proposed a process whereby it would undertake detailed plans prior to rezoning for "new development". These plans would be based on a review of transportation, infrastructure, urban design, environment and other factors normally considered by a municipality prior to approving development. The City could review these plans and studies. There would not, however, be a requirement that the plans and studies be done to the satisfaction of City staff or Council.

Council could refuse to approve the zoning applications but would then be put in the disadvantageous position before the Ontario Municipal Board of defending its refusal of rezonings implementing policies already established in the Official Plan.

Expansion of the University, or partnership with a community college facility on the campus lands, can be done now within existing zoning. The addition of private scientific, technical research and development uses in the Institutional designation, as long as these have no noxious characteristics, would constitute a relatively minor amendment to the plan which staff could support.

Staff could support restoration of any development rights which OPA 988 may have removed from the University's lands, in particular the addition of semi-detached housing as a permitted Low Density Residential use. (It should be noted, however, that the University is not requesting this.)

However, based on the material submitted to date and the lack of planning justification, planning staff cannot recommend that Council support the balance of the University of Toronto proposals in their present form.

Staff recommend that an alternative, potentially far more productive, approach be adopted. The former City of North York, faced with proposals for extensive development on the main campus of York University, entered into a process of consultation involving the Ward Councillors, the affected ratepayer groups, school trustees and York University. The process, which took approximately two years, led to a consensus and approval of a Secondary Plan and rezoning, which was approved by North York Council in 1991 without appeal.

This would require that the University agree that the OMB hearing on May 31 deal only with the limited matters set out above and join with the City and the community in working towards a concensus on a future amendment to the Plan to deal with the University's other objectives.

Conclusion:

Staff are prepared to recommend continuation of the dialogue with the University on both the content and process proposed in their amendment modifications and to provide for private sector partnerships in research and development. Staff cannot, however, recommend the balance of the University of Toronto proposals in their current form.

Contact Name:

David Beasley, MCIP, RPP

Principal Planner

Scarborough Civic Centre

Tel: (416) 396-7026

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: beasley@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1) appeal the April 21, 1999, decision of the Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough) respecting Variance Application SA100/99, Midov Developments Ltd., 325 Morrish Road; and

(2) authorize the City Solicitor to retain outside planning expertise to defend the City position, at a cost not to exceed $10,000.00.

The Scarborough Community Council reports, for the information of City Council, having requested that the Director of Community Planning, East District, report to the next meeting of Scarborough Community Council respecting the Consent application by Midov Developments Ltd.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following communication (April 26, 1999) from Councillor Ron Moeser:

On behalf of the residents of the Highland Creek Community, I would hereby request Council to support an appeal of the April 21, 1999 decision of the Committee of Adjustment.

The lot frontage is not in keeping with the character of the area. The zoning by-law permits a lot frontage of 15.2 feet whereas the application proposal was to permit a frontage of 12.27 metres.

I would also request Council to hire outside planning expertise to defend its position.

(A copy of the aforementioned Decision of the Committee of Adjustment - Scarborough is attached for the information of Council.)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 14, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

To provide a preliminary review of an application to amend the Wexford Employment District Secondary Plan to delete that portion of Crouse Road between Underwriters Road and the former CP Rail line.

Financial Implications:

Unknown at this time.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Scarborough Community Council recommend to City Council:

(1) that submission of the application by Underwriters Laboratories of Canada pertaining to lands owned by the City of Toronto be authorized;

(2) that the application by Underwriters Laboratories of Canada be amended to provide for the deletion of the remaining westerly portion of Crouse Road between Crockford Boulevard and the subject lands from the Official Plan, and to also introduce a new road link to extend Underwriters Road southerly to Bertrand Avenue into the Official Plan;

(3) that Real Estate Services staff be directed, in consultation with appropriate staff, to report to the Corporate Services Committee on the status of discussions with all owners of lands abutting the portions of Crouse Road proposed for closure and a southerly extension of Underwriters Road, as set out in the above recommendations, regarding possible conveyances of land to or by the City of Toronto; and

(4) the Public Meeting for this application be scheduled subsequent to City Council's consideration of the report to Corporate Services Committee under Recommendation No. (3) above, with Notice to be provided within the standard 120 metre (400 foot) circulation area of all lands affected by the proposals.

Background:

Underwriters Laboratories of Canada (U.L.C.) operate offices, testing and storage facilities at 7 and 10 Crouse Road. The nature of its business involves frequent staff and vehicle movements between these various facilities on the north and south sides of Crouse Road. The company also requires fibre optic, cable and similar connections across the road allowance. In recent years the company has made various inquiries with Planning and Real Estate staff about the possibility of closing this portion of Crouse Road between the former CP Rail line and Underwriters Road for conveyance to U.L.C., however no formal actions in this regard were ever initiated.

The Wexford Employment Secondary Plan identifies a Crouse Road connection between Crockford Boulevard and Underwriters Road. Schedule "C", the "Roads Plan" of the Official Plan identifies this as a 20 metre (66 foot) road allowance. The portion of Crouse Road serving U.L.C. is constructed as, and appears to be, a public road, however it is not continuous through to Crockford Boulevard due to the former CP Rail line and a watercourse. The westerly portion of Crouse operates more as a driveway access serving the sides of the two flanking industrial operations. There are currently no approved plans for the City to complete Crouse Road as a through street.

Comments:

There have been no recent discussions between U.L.C. and City staff regarding the possible sale of this portion of Crouse Road. The subject Official Plan Amendment application, which was submitted unilaterally by U.L.C., will be necessary for the City to complete any road closure and conveyance. Should Council feel that there is some merit in considering the application, it would be appropriate to also authorize and direct Real Estate Services staff to initiate concurrent negotiations with U.L.C.

If this application is approved, it would be appropriate for the amendment to also delete the remaining portion of Crouse Road between Crockford Boulevard and the former CP Rail line from the Official Plan. This would enable possible conveyance of those lands to the abutting industrial operations as well, although staff are not aware of any such interest by those owners at this time. Any direction to Real Estate Services staff should also include instructions in this regard.

Accepted transportation planning principles typically endeavour to achieve new road linkages where opportunities arise to provide for greater driver choice and a better, more efficient distribution of traffic. Past discussions in this regard, however, have identified only marginal traffic benefits from completing Crouse Road as a through street. Current and anticipated traffic volumes do not appear justify the link.

It is important that potential future benefits not be precluded by deleting roads from the Official Plan unduly, however other opportunities may exist to realize even greater net benefits. In this regard, Transportation staff have previously identified that greater traffic improvements for this Employment District could be realized by extending Underwriters Road southerly across the Ontario Hydro Gatineau Transmission Right-of-Way, to connect to Bertrand Avenue. Such a road extension may require a portion of U.L.C.'s lands and/or the abutting lands on the south side of Crouse Road to the east, which are presently vacant and used only for parking. The current application to delete the Crouse Road extension represents an opportunity to now identify such a new road link in the Official Plan, and to provide appropriate direction to staff for further discussion and negotiation with U.L.C.

Discussions between Real Estate Services staff with all affected property owners can and should occur concurrently with the technical review and consideration of the proposed Official Plan amendment. The Public Meeting and passage of an Official Plan amendment in this regard should not occur, however, until suitable business arrangements for the closure and sale of a public road have been reached with the affected property owners that are acceptable to City Council. Accordingly, a report by Real Estate Services staff to the Corporate Services Committee, for consideration by Council, is recommended prior to issuance of the Notice for the Public Meeting. It would be reasonable to anticipate, however, that the necessary elements might be in place to conduct the Public Meeting following Council's summer recess.

Contact Name:

Rod Hines, MCIP, RPP

Scarborough Civic Centre

Tel: (416) 396-7020

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: hines@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

(a) Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals Kingston Road and St. Augustine Seminary/Resthaven Cemetery Driveways Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) deferred the following report, at the request of the Ward Councillors, to the meeting scheduled to be held on Wednesday, May 26, 1999, to permit a community information meeting to take place; and

(2) directed that the Parents' Council in its entirety be notified of the date of such meeting:

(April 8, 1999) from the City Clerk advising that the Urban Environment and Development Committee, at its meeting held on March 31, 1999, referred a report (March 3, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services, respecting the proposed installation of traffic control signals at Kingston Road and the St. Augustine Seminary/Resthaven Cemetery Driveways, to the Scarborough Community Council for comments thereon and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

(b) Proposed Modifications to Traffic Control Signals Lawrence Avenue East at Crockford Boulevard and Ellington Drive Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received a memorandum (April 22, 1999) from Councillor Kelly, requesting deferral of the following report to permit community consultation;

(2) deferred this matter to the next meeting to be held on May 26, 1998; and

(3) requested that both Ward Councillors be included in the consultation process and report back to the Community Council meeting:

(March 11, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4, advising Community Council of the feasibility of incorporating the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and Ellington Drive within the existing traffic control signals at Crockford Boulevard, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(c) Preliminary Evaluation Report Official Plan Amendment Application SP1999002 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ1999004 Metron Developments Ltd., Kingston Road and Brinloor Boulevard Scarborough Village Community Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report:

(April 7, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommending that Scarborough Community Council convene a Public Meeting to consider these applications, targeted for the third quarter of 1999, subject to:

(1) staff convening a Community Information Meeting, in consultation with the Ward Councillors;

(2) staff providing Notice of said meeting to all properties within 120 metres (400 feet) of the subject property and those attending the Community Information Meeting; and

(3) the applicant revising his proposal to provide for a mixture of single-family and semi-detached dwellings on the Brinloor Boulevard frontage.

(d) Preliminary Evaluation Report Official Plan Amendment Application SP1999004 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ1999007 Douglas and Betty Woodall, 447 Birchmount Road Birchmount Park Employment District Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report:

(April 9, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommending that Scarborough Community Council:

(1) direct staff to process these applications in the normal manner;

(2) direct staff to undertake a study encompassing all properties fronting on Birchmount Road (between Raleigh Avenue and Parnell Avenue on the east side and between Mack Avenue and Danforth Road on the west side) to determine whether additional land uses to complement the existing uses would be appropriate in this area; and

(3) convene a Public Meeting to consider the subject applications, together with the City-initiated study, targeted for the fall of 1999, with Notice to be given to all properties within 120 metres (400 feet) of the study area.

(e) Preliminary Evaluation Report Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ1999005 Dr. Jarmila Filipko, 3717 Sheppard Avenue East Tam O'Shanter Community Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report, subject to:

(1) adding the following words to Recommendation No. (1):

"... and reporting to Scarborough Community Council the results of the meeting"; and

(2) tabling Recommendation No. (2) for consideration in conjunction with that report:

(March 16, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommending that Scarborough Community Council convene a Public Meeting to consider this application, targeted for the second quarter of 1999, subject to:

(1) staff convening a meeting with the applicant and the owners of the five adjacent single family properties to review the proposal and discuss future land assembly and redevelopment opportunities for this area; and

(2) the applicant submitting a Site Plan Control Application for the proposal.

(f) Status of Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough)

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 9, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, responding to Community Council's request, at its last meeting, that the Director report on the matter of the composition and mandate of the Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough), and recommending that this report be received for information.

(g) Delegation of Consent Approval Authority to the Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough)

The Scarborough Community Council reports having directed that the Urban Environment and Development Committee be advised that the Scarborough Community Council recommends the status quo in regard to Consent approvals, i.e., that the Director of Community Planning, East District, retain approval authority, until Council has dealt with the "New Practices" report:

(April 9, 1999) from the City Clerk, referring a report (March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, respecting the delegation of Consent approval authority under Section 54 of The Planning Act to the Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough) in order to achieve harmonization of this practice City-wide, with the request that Community Council comment thereon and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

(h) New Applications - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 13, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the new applications received during the four-week period ending April 7, 1999, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(i) Site Plan Control Approvals - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 14, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the Site Plan Control Approvals granted by the Director, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(j) Consent Applications - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 14, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the Consent Decisions granted by the Director, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(k) Ontario Municipal Board Hearings - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 14, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the status of current appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(l) Ontario Municipal Board Decision 21 Dobbin Road Sullivan Community Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 9, 1999) from the City Solicitor, advising of the outcome of the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing respecting No. 21 Dobbin Road and recommending that this report be received for information.

(m) The Greek Community of Metropolitan Toronto Inc. Annual Festivals, 1385 Warden Avenue Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) approved the following report; and

(2) requested that an information meeting take place in the community, organized by the applicants, to allow the applicant to discuss this proposal with the local neighbours; Toronto Police Service, Fire Department and Municipal Standards staff, and the applicants' noise consultant to be invited to attend such meeting:

(April 20, 1999) from the District Manager, Municipal Licencing and Standards, recommending that the Scarborough Community Council schedule a public meeting for consideration of this application for an exemption from By-law No. 24389 at 10:00 a.m. on May 26, 1999.

Mr. Nick Liodakis and Mr. Costas Menegakis, representing The Greek Community of Metropolitan Toronto Inc., appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(n) Public Consultation Process Harmonized Environmental Tobacco Smoke By-law

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received the following report; and

(2) directed that the following Resolution be forwarded to the Board of Health:

"RESOLVED that the Scarborough Community Council request the Board of Health to conduct a Public Meeting in Scarborough to hear public deputations on A Harmonized Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) By-law for the City of Toronto.":

Recorded vote:

Upon the question of the adoption of the foregoing motion by Councillor Mahood:

Yeas: Councillors Altobello, Ashton, Balkissoon, Berardinetti, Cho, Faubert, Mahood, Moeser, Shaw, Tzekas - 10

Nays: Councillor Duguid - 1

(March 26, 1999) from the Medical Officer of Health proposing that Community Councils hear public deputations on the Harmonized Environmental Tobacco Smoke By-law at their meetings to be held on May 26 and May 27, 1999, and the recommendations emanating therefrom be referred to the Medical Officer of Health and the City Solicitor for consideration and recommendation to the Board of Health at its meeting to be held on June 28 and 29, 1999.

(o) Ontario Municipal Board Decision 2055-2069 Lawrence Avenue East Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(March 29, 1999) from the City Solicitor, advising the outcome of the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing respecting 2055-2069 Lawrence Avenue East, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(p) Status Report - 740 Kennedy Road Inc. Ionview Community Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received the following report; and

(2) directed that the applicant be reimbursed for the Part Lot Control Application fees and the difference be applied to the Plan of Subdivision application fees:

(April 21, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council on the status of the proposed changes to the existing townhouse development situated on the west side of Kennedy Road south of Eglinton Avenue East, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(q) Request for Direction Appeal of Consent Application No. SB31/98 51 and 53 MacDuff Crescent Cliffcrest Community Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having consented to the withdrawal of the following report from the agenda on the advice of the Director of Community Planning, East District, who indicated that the hearing on this matter had taken place on April 27, 1999:

(April 13, 1999) recommending that City Council direct the City Solicitor to attend the Ontario Municipal Board in support of the decision of the Director of Community Planning, East District, respecting Consent Application No. SB31/98.

(r) Request for Fence By-law Exemption Chris and Alexandra Frueh 726 Meadowvale Road (formerly 3864 Ellesmere Road) Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following report, at the request of Councillor Moeser, to the meeting scheduled to be held on Wednesday, May 26, 1999:

(April 14, 1999) recommending that City Council approve the application to erect a 1.8 metre (6 foot) board on board fence in the front yard portion of the street yard.

Ms. Alexandra Frueh appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(s) Albert Campbell Square - Use for Festivals and Significant Events

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved a request by Councillor Mike Tzekas that the Special Events Co-ordinator, East District, report to Community Council on the feasibility of festivals or other significant events being held on the Albert Campbell Square.

Respectfully submitted,

LORENZO BERARDINETTI

Chair

Toronto, April 28, 1999

(Report No. 5 of The Scarborough Community Council was adopted, without amendment, by City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999.)