Tree Obstruction of Driveway Access at

144 Humbercrest Boulevard - Ward 27, York Humber

 The York Community Council recommends that:

 (1)the following report (June 23, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services be adopted;

 (2)any fees applicable to this parking permit be waived;

 (3)the parking permit be revoked should the obstruction to the driveway no longer exist; and

 (4)in addition to the issuance of a parking permit, that the City provide the owner(s) of 144 Humbercrest Boulevard with a letter confirming the circumstances by which the permit has been issued, and the granting of authority to park a vehicle on a non-designated permit street; and that the appropriate police division be so notified.

 Purpose:

 Councillor Bill Saundercook is requesting staff to review and report on alternative options available to the City, other than removing an existing oak tree belonging to the City located at 144 Humbercrest Boulevard, that is currently obstructing Mr. Albert Deavitt's right of access to his residence.

 Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

 None required.

 Recommendations:

 It is recommended that the City Solicitor prepare a by-law, which authorizes the issuance of an on-street parking permit to facilitate parking on a non-designated permit street to a residential property owner, for the purposes of parking, due to a mature healthy tree obstructing a residential property owner's right of access to their residence.

 Council Reference/Background History:

 Councillor Bill Saundercook is requesting staff to review and report on alternative options available to the City other than removing an existing oak tree, belonging to the City located at 144 Humbercrest Boulevard, that is currently obstructing Mr. Albert Deavitt's driveway.

 Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

 Mr. Albert Deavitt's residence is located on the west side of Humbercrest Boulevard between St. Johns Road and Dundas Street, within Ward 27, York Humber.

 Currently on-street parking on Humbercrest Boulevard between St. Johns Road and Dundas Street is legally permitted on the east side, exclusively. The parking duration is an unsigned maximum three (3) hour limit, anytime.

 Through the years the oak tree has grown in size. As a result, the base of the tree has expanded to currently occupy half of Mr. Albert Deavitt's driveway. Presently the only recourse A. Deavitt has available to negotiate around the tree is to drive onto the neighbour's front yard to park his vehicle.

 Obviously, the City is responsible for the obstruction realizing the tree is located on the municipal road allowance. Staff have investigated the age and condition of the tree and reported it is healthy. Appreciating the species, age, and condition of the tree, staff are reluctant to recommend its removal, and therefore have requested that we review and report on alternative options available. Outlined below are three viable alternatives and their implications to resolving this issue:

 Scenario 1

 A. Deavitt could apply for front yard parking to establish a parking space on the south side of their property line.

 The implications would result in the Deavitt's incurring an expenditure of between $2,000.00 and $3,000.00 to licence and provide a legal parking space on the south side of their property line.

 In a recent telephone conversation with A. Deavitt, front yard parking is not an alternative option he is prepared to pursue.

 Scenario 2

 On-street permit parking provides those residents, without adequate off-street parking facilities to legally park their vehicles on the streets on which they reside for extended periods of time, with impunity from the signed and unsigned parking regulations.

 However, on-street permit parking is only considered by Council, after conducting a poll where the results verify the majority of resident responses received support the introduction of on-street permit parking.

 The implications, therefore, may be the majority of resident responses received do not support the introduction of on-street permit parking, resulting in A. Deavitt being unable to park for extended durations of time. Should, however, the majority of resident responses received support the introduction of on-street permit parking the Deavitts would incur an expenditure of $64.20 per year.

 Scenario 3

 Appreciating the unique circumstances, on-street permit parking is a viable alternative to resolving this matter, as it relates to a single property owner for the remainder of the City tree's life span.

 The current implementation policy process for on-street permit parking requires a public process, with no guarantees for its acceptance by the majority of resident responses.

We would, therefore, recommend that the Solicitor prepare an on-street permit parking by-law authorizing the issuance of an on-street parking permit on a non-designated street to a residential property owner where extenuating circumstances, being a municipal tree, circumvent a residential property owner's right of access to their residence.

 We would also suggest that a nominal fee of $1.00 per month or $12.00 per year, plus G.S.T., be charged to cover the administration cost of processing the permit.

 The implications would require the Deavitts to purchase an on-street parking permit.

 Conclusions:

 On-street permit parking is a viable alternative where extenuating circumstances, being a municipal tree, circumvent residential property owners' right of access to their residence. We, therefore, recommend and support the Solicitor preparing a by-law authorizing the issuance of an on-street parking permit to any residential property owner where right of access to their residence is obstructed, by a healthy mature municipal tree, on non-designated streets within the York District.

 Contact Person:

 Stephen C. Brown

York Manager Traffic/Parking

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2888