4.295 BOON AVENUE - REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL OF PROPERTY CLEANUP CHARGES IMPOSED BY THE CITY,

WARD 28, YORK-EGLINTON.

 Commissioner of Community Services, York Civic Service Centre

(May 13, 1998)

Purpose:

To provide an opportunity for the citizen to address his concerns regarding enforcement of our Cleaning and Clearing by-law relative to his property.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Any refund of costs would be debited to the Department=s revenue account to a maximum of $461.00. Any rebate provided would indicate to the owners that the City is not serious in its enforcement intent for the Cleaning and Clearing by-law.

Recommendations:

That a rebate for costs incurred to clean up the property not be granted.

Background:

 Cleaning and Clearing By-law No. 1179-97 provides that an owner or occupant of any grounds, after receiving instructions in writing from the manager or an inspector, shall clean and clear the grounds of and from any garbage, tin cans, old or decayed lumber, inoperative motor vehicles and any parts thereof, discarded machines, waste materials, and junk and refuse of any kind. The by-law also provides that where the owner or occupant is in default of doing that which is required, the Manager, or the City Solicitor, may do what is required or cause the same to be done. The City shall recover the expense incurred in doing the matter or thing required by action or in like manner as municipal taxes.

Comment: On November 7, 1996, a warning letter was sent to the owners of 295 Boon Avenue regarding a large quantity of junk and rubbish on the property. November 14,1996, the owner phoned the inspector requesting an extension of time as he had retained someone to clean the property. An extension was granted to November 22, 1996. The inspector phoned the owner and advised that the junk and debris was to be removed and it was the owner=s responsibility to do so. He left a message on the answering machine that an inspection would be done on November 26, 1996. On May 6, 1997, the inspector attended and observed a large quantity of junk and debris at the rear near the garage and he sent a warning letter to owners on June 26, 1997 by prepaid registered mail. The letter was returned to us July 8, 1997 as refused by addressee. Another inspection dated July 18,1997 revealed some materials had been removed but a large quantity still remained. As a result of a Councillor=s complaint, the supervisor attended the property and observed a large quantity of junk and refuse and the grass and weeds in yard areas were long and uncut. Written warnings were issued personally by the supervisor providing a compliance date of August 11, 1997.

The owner=s brother was also contacted and provided with a full explanation of what was required. On August 11, 1997, Mr. Romano contacted Dr. Dar and informed him that if the work was not completed by Friday, August 15, 1997, the City would clean up the area and charges would be billed on taxes.

On August 15, 1996, a child=s wading pool and a skid were placed out for garbage collection on Rogers Road but the vast majority of the junk remained. On August 19, 1997, on instructions from the City, the property was cleared of all junk, rubbish and debris by a private contractor. An invoice in the amount of $461.00 was received from Better Home Service for labour and dumping costs (two truckloads) to clear the property. Photographs were taken before and after the cleanup indicating the type and quantity of materials involved.

The provisions of the by-law clearly indicate that an Owner is ultimately responsible for maintaining his or her property. Enforcement of the Cleaning and Clearing by-law by having the work done and billing the owner is a more expeditious and beneficial method of enforcement than the laying of charges and waiting for a trial. Additional time would be required for the trial and the yard areas would still not be cleared. More than ample time was allowed for the owners to comply prior to the clean up taking place and circumstances in this instance were not extraordinary and they do not warrant an exception being made.

City Wide Issues:

None.

Conclusions:

The request to rebate costs of cleaning up the property are not reasonable or justified.

Contact Name:

Douglas Jack

Director of Municipal Standards

York Civic Service Centre

Telephone: 394-2533

Fax: 394-2904

Inam Dar, 295 Boon Avenue

(March 28, 1998)

 I am writing in regards to the clean up charge on 295 Boon Avenue. Firstly, the section of the property in question is NOT a backyard, it is an extension of the garage area. The contents of this area is no threat to the safety of the public, or to any vehicle within the vicinity. This is due to the fact that an eight foot high fence was put up to protect the contents of that area. Secondly, the materials in that area were NOT put there by us, but my unknown public, possibly neighbours or people living in the neighbourhood. Thirdly, we responded to the clean up instructions given by the City of York. We began cleanup every Thursday and were planning to be finished within a given period of time. However, City of York cleaned up the property before we were able to complete the task. Finally, we were billed for the clean up which we had initially started and were in the midst of finishing. We ask that you recognize our intentions and our efforts to clean up materials that DID NOT belong to us in a NON THREATENING area, and the clean up charge be withdrawn.