Driveway Widening - 315 Forman Avenue (North Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council recommends that City Council approve the parking space at 315 Forman Avenue, notwithstanding that the property is not eligible for a second parking space, conditional upon the landscaping proposal being altered to meet the minimum requirements of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

The Toronto Community Council submits the following report (September 3, 1998) from the Acting Assistant Director, By-law Administration and Enforcement, City Works Services:

Purpose:

To comment on the applicant's landscaping plans in connection with a request for an exemption from Municipal Code Chapter 248, Parking Licences, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, to permit driveway widening for a second parking space which does not meet the requirements of the Municipal Code. As this is an appeal, it is scheduled as a deputation item.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that, should Council approve the second parking space, notwithstanding that the property is not eligible for a second parking space, the landscaping proposal be altered to meet the minimum requirements of the Code.

Background:

At its meeting on July 22, 1998, Toronto Community Council deferred consideration of a request for an exemption from the by-law from Mr. Allan Fleisher, co-owner of 315 Forman Avenue, and requested that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism comment on the applicant's landscaping plans.

Comments:

Mr. Allan Fleisher and Ms. Judy Fleisher, owners of 315 Forman Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M4S2S6, submitted landscaping plans (see Appendix 'A'), in connection with their application for two (2) parking spaces adjacent to the mutual driveway.

Chapter 248 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code limits the size of the parking space, to 5.2 metres in width and 5.9 metres in length, for two (2) vehicles. Zoning By-law No. 438-86 of the former City of Toronto requires that 50% landscaped open space be maintained within portions of the front yard on private property and 15% must be constructed as soft landscape, ie. grass or an area to be used for planting of shrubs or flowers.

The landscaping plans were reviewed by staff of Works and Emergency Services and Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and they confirmed that the proposal did not meet the requirements for landscaped open space and soft landscaping, including the planting of a tree.

Discussions with Mr. Fleisher on the landscape proposal resulted in further modifications, the results of which are as follows:

As can be seen, the revised landscape proposal has met most of the requirements, including the planting of a tree, with the exception of the total landscaped open space. Mr. Fleisher was informed of this, however, he is reluctant to increase this area due to maintenance of the area and more importantly due to safety concerns for Ms. Fleisher.

The requirement of the landscaped open space can be met, if Mr. Fleisher was to further revise his proposal by situating the parking area of the vehicles to within 5.9 m back of the sidewalk.

Conclusions:

Mr. Fleisher's proposal has met most of the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 248 and Zoning By-law No. 438-86, with the exception of the landscaped open space.

On hearing of deputations, the Toronto Community Council must decide whether or not to recommend to City Council to grant permission for the parking of two vehicles.

Contact Names and Telephone Numbers:

Nino Pellegrini, 392-7778

Works and Emergency Services

Warren Quan, 392-1940

Economic Development, Culture & Tourism

The Toronto Community Council also submits the following report (July 17, 1998) from the Acting Assistant Director, By-law Administration and Enforcement, City Works Services:

Purpose:

To report on a request for an exemption from Municipal Code Chapter 248, Parking Licences, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, to permit driveway widening for a second parking space which does not meet the requirements of the Municipal Code. As this is an appeal, it is scheduled as a deputation item.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)an application for a second parking space at 315 Forman Avenue be denied by City Council, as such request does not comply with Municipal Code Chapter 248, Parking Licences, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code; and

(2)the excessive paving is removed, as requested by City staff.

Background:

Mr. Allan Fleisher, co-owner of 315 Forman Avenue, has requested an appeal to staff's decision to refuse the application for a second parking space at this location.

Comments:

Mr. Allan Fleisher and Ms. Judy Fleisher, owners of 315 Forman Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M4S2S6, submitted an application on February 20, 1998 for a second space adjacent to the mutual driveway (see Appendix 'A').

We opened a file on this location in September 1997 because the owners had paved the entire front yard in asphalt prior to approval and vehicles were parking without authorization.

Driveway widening is governed by the criteria set out in § 248-3 of Municipal Code Chapter 248 and Zoning By-law No. 438-86. The location met the requirements of the legislation for the parking of one vehicle and a permit was issued on April 24, 1998.

Zoning By-law No. 438-86 of the former City of Toronto, requires that 50% landscape open space be maintained within portions of the front yard on private property and 30 % of the 50% landscaped open-space must be constructed as soft landscape.

If Council were to approve the second parking space, the landscaping requirements could be met, provided the parking spaces are situated within 5.9 m from the back of the sidewalk and all of the excess paving is removed.

For the Committee's information, the department has received complaints about the unauthorized parking of the second vehicle and we have asked the owners to cease the parking and remove the excess asphalt.

Conclusions:

Given that the owners had paved the entire front yard with asphalt and that the property is not eligible for a second parking space adjacent to the mutual driveway under the criteria set out in Chapter 248, Parking Licences, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, this request should be denied by Council.

In addition, the excessive paving should be removed, as previously requested.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Nino Pellegrini, 392-7778

The Toronto Community Council also submits the following communication (July 9, 1998) from Councillor Johnston:

Recommendation: That the request for two (2) front yard parking spaces at 315 Forman Avenue be approved, subject to the applicant entering into the agreements and paying the fees prescribed by the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

Comments: I have received a request from Mr. and Mrs. Fleisher, owners of 315 Forman Avenue, that they be permitted to install a second front yard parking space at their home.

Mr. and Mrs. Fleisher bought their home in February of 1996, and the two front yard parking spaces were a major selling point. The by-law which prohibited front yard parking on their property came into effect in July 1996, and as they did not close on the property until June 1996, they were unable to process their application before the new by-law came into effect. Since that time, they have made, at considerable expense, great improvements to their property, and now they wish to continue the improvements in the fall by repaving their driveway.

In addition, Mrs. Fleisher's job requires that she work various shifts and concerns have been expressed about her safety in returning home from work in the early hours of the morning and being unable to park.

The Fleishers in February 1998, made an application for two parking spaces and were granted approval for one parking space. They did not know that they could appeal the decision of the Commissioner to deny the second parking space or they would have done so earlier.

As they wish to upgrade the driveway in the fall, and Council will not be meeting until October, I am requesting that this appeal be considered at the meeting to be held on July 22nd, 1998, and that their request be granted.

--------

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it during consideration of the foregoing matter, the following communications, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk:

-(July 20, 1998) from seven residents of Forman Avenue;

-(July 21, 19980 from Ms. Judy and Mr. Allan Fleisher;

-(July 21, 1998) from Mr. Ron Baker.

Ms. Judy Fleisher, Toronto, Ontario, appeared before the Toronto Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

Appendices A - Front Porch and Forman

Insert Table/Map No. 2

Appendices A - Front Porch and Forman