September 30, 1998

To:Toronto Community Council

From:Angie Antoniou, Acting Assistant Director, By-law Administration and Enforcement, City Works Services

Subject:Maintenance of a Fence - Lascelles Boulevard Flankage of 70 Chaplin Crescent (North Toronto)

Purpose:

To report on the homeowner's request to maintain a fence within the City street allowance which does not provide vision splays adjacent to two existing driveways and exceeds the maximum height permitted under Municipal Code Chapter 313, Streets and Sidewalks, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code. As this is a request for a variance from the by-law, it is scheduled as a deputation item.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendation:

That City Council approve the maintenance of a wooden closed board fence within the City street allowance on the Lascelles Boulevard flankage of 70 Chaplin Crescent, subject to the fence being modified to provide a 1.8 m vision splay adjacent to the existing driveway servicing the property to the north and the driveway which services this property and subject to the owner entering into an agreement with the City of Toronto, as prescribed under Chapter 313 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

Comments:

Ms. Clare Cowan, owner of 70 Chaplin Crescent, Toronto, Ontario M5P 1A3, has requested permission to maintain a wooden closed board fence within the City street allowance on the Lascelles Boulevard flankage of 70 Chaplin Crescent.

The fence has been constructed to a height of 1.9 m and has a wooden arch extension over the gate area, for a total height of 2.6 m rather than the maximum height of 1.9 m allowed in Chapter 313 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code. In addition, the fence is set back only 0.2 m from the sidewalk rather than 0.46 m as required. The fence is situated immediately adjacent to an existing driveway servicing the property to the north as well as the existing driveway which services this property. To provide visibility of approaching pedestrian traffic, the fence should be modified to provide a 1.8 m vision splay adjacent to each driveway.

In a letter dated August 12, 1998 addressed to Councillor Michael Walker, the property owner has requested an exemption to this by-law, noting that the newly constructed fence was constructed in the exact location of the previous fence and that there have been no occurrences with regard to the fence creating a vision hazard over the past 10 years.

We have also received a letter dated August 26, 1998 from an area resident who objects to the fence because it does not provide the required setback from the sidewalk and it creates a blind spot for the adjacent driveway. The area resident is requesting the fence be modified so as to comply with the by-law requirements.

With respect to the setback, as the fence is existing and does not negatively affect the public right-of-way, I have no objection to the reduced setback. However, with regard to the vision splays, as noted above, without the provision of splays, vehicles using the driveways abutting the fence do not have adequate visibility of oncoming pedestrian traffic which creates a potential hazard for the public. In view of this, the fence should be modified to provide the required vision splays.

I note that staff have inspected the area in the immediate vicinity of this property and have determined that this fence is similar to other fences in the area.

Details of this fence and the letters from the owner and area resident are on file with this department.

Conclusions:

The construction of the fence is similar to other fences in the area. If the property owner modifies the fence to provide a 1.8 m vision splay adjacent to the driveway servicing the property to the north and the driveway which services this property, it would not impact negatively on the public right-of-way and can be approved.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Fani Lauzon, 392-7894

Acting Assistant Director

RK/

(p:\1998\ug\cws\bae\to981139.bae) - gp