Front Yard Parking

(All Wards in the Former City of Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council recommends that:

(1)former City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, be amended to permit front yard parking:

(a)on the side of the street where permit parking is not authorized; and

(b)where on-site, off-street parking is neither available nor feasible, as the Code presently states; and

(c)subject to the applicant submitting, with the application, a landscape plan satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, such plan to include a permeable surface pad; and

(d)subject to the applicant making every reasonable effort to plant a tree on the City boulevard or on private property, in the front yard, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Economic Development, Tourism and Culture, and if that is not feasible, then the applicant fund the planting of a tree on City property in the general area, preferably on the same street;

(2)former City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 90 be amended by deleting the requirement that a poll be conducted for each front yard parking application, and inserting the requirement that when a poll has been conducted for the block, the results be used in connection with each subsequent application for front yard parking on that block for a period of 2 years from the date of the poll;

(3)a one-time only application fee of $255.04 be instituted;

(4)a special exemption from the prohibition against front yard parking be provided for citizens who face unusual circumstances caused by the City, such as mid-block installation of traffic signals or speed humps;

(5)front yard parking not be permitted in the Don River Ward, and residents of that Ward be excluded from the appeal process;

(6)(a)an appeal process for front yard parking requests be established as outlined below:

(i)The applicant submit in writing to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services a request for special exemption to the by-law, detailing the reasons for the appeal;

(ii)Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services conduct a poll in a polling area consisting of residential properties located on both sides of the street within 100 metres of the subject property, or to the nearest intersection, whichever is the shorter distance;

(iii)Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services prepare a report on the appeal and results of the poll for consideration by the Toronto Community Council and for the hearing of deputations, and the Ward Councillors= position(s) on the request;

(iv)Residents within the polling area be notified of the hearing date;

(v)Introduce a non-refundable appeal fee of $200.00;

(vi)Residents from the Downtown Ward be excluded from the appeal process; and

(b)if the owner of a property wishes to relinquish the front yard parking licence, the City would agree, at its own expense to:

(i)plant a City tree in the boulevard in front of the house;

(ii)re-sod the area;

(iii)remove the curb cut;

(iv)provide free downspout disconnection service;

(v)offer a free water conservation audit to the property owner; and

(vi)provide one year=s free permit parking, for one vehicle in the household;

(c)if the City has removed the front yard parking and restored the City boulevard at its expense, the owner and subsequent owners may not apply to reinstall front yard parking for 5 years;

(7)the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services report on the results of the amendments set out in Recommendation Nos. (1) to (6) in the fall of 2001;

(8)(a)the restoration of paved areas to green areas be introduced for those applicants who have previously been refused a parking pad, as a pilot project for the year 1999;

(b)applicants that were identified as being refused for a parking pad be notified of the proposed pilot project and advised that the restoration of the paved areas to green areas would only be on a voluntary and first come first served basis;

(c)no more than five (5) locations be restored to green areas in 1999;

(d)funding in the amount of $15,000.00 be reserved for this purpose in the year 1999 from the Permit Parking Account Code # 4023-30155-76000-5002;

(9)the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be required to report to the first Toronto Community Council meeting in the year 2000 on:

(i)the results of the pilot project set out in Recommendation No. 7;

(ii)the number of requests from residents to restore the paved areas to green areas; and

(iii)the number of unauthorized paved parking pads in the former City of Toronto; and

(10)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of all necessary bills.

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having taken the following action:

(1)deferred Recommendation No. (3) of the report (September 8, 19980 from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report to the Toronto Community Council on the implications of permitting front yard parking where there are more permit parking spaces available than permits issued, on the side of the street where permit parking is authorized; and

(2)requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report to the Corporate Services Committee on a program of public lane acquisition.

Recommendation No. 3 was carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas:Councillors Rae, Adams, Bossons, Chow, Layton, McConnell and Pantalone - 7

Nays:Councillors Bussin, Disero, Fotinos, Jakobek, Silva and Walker - 6

Recommendation No. 5 was carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas:Councillors Rae, Adams, Bossons, Bussin, Chow, Layton, McConnell and Pantalone - 8

Nays:Councillors Disero, Fotinos, Jakobek and Walker - 5

Recommendation No. 6(a)(v) was carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas:Councillors Rae, Adams, Bossons, Bussin, Chow, Layton, McConnell and Pantalone - 8

Nays:Councillors Disero, Fotinos, Jakobek, Silva and Walker - 5

The remaining recommendations were carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas:Councillors Rae, Adams, Bossons, Bussin, Fotinos, Jakobek, Pantalone, Silva and Walker - 9

Nays:Councillors Chow, Disero, McConnell and Layton - 4

A motion, by Councillor Chow, that a one-time only application fee of $300.00 be instituted, was lost on the following division of votes:

Yeas:Councillors Rae, Chow and Layton - 3

Nays:Adams, Bossons, Bussin, Disero, Fotinos, Jakobek, McConnel, Pantalone, Silva and Walker - 10

The Toronto Community Council submits the following report (October 6, 1998) from the Acting Assistant Director, By-Law Administration and Enforcement, City Works Services:

Purpose:

To report on the number of paved areas that could be restored to green areas in a year and the budget which would cover the cost of the removal of a parking pad to applicants who have previously been refused.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funding in the amount of $15,000.00 has been reserved for the year 1999 from the Permit Parking Account Code # 4023-30155-76000-5002 for the restoration of maximum five (5) paved pads. Given that we are unable to determine the number of paved areas and the number of requests from residents to restore the green areas, we cannot comment at this time on the long term financial implications and impact statement.

Recommendations:

That, should the Toronto Community Council wish to pursue the restoration of paved areas to green areas for those applicants who have previously been refused a parking pad, it is recommended that:

1.(a)the restoration of paved areas to green areas be introduced as a pilot project for the year 1999;

(b)applicants that were identified as being refused for a parking pad be notified of the proposed pilot project and advised that the restoration of the paved areas to green areas would only be on a voluntary and first come first served basis;

(c)no more than five (5) locations be restored to green areas in 1999;

(d)funding in the amount of $15,000.00 be reserved in the year 1999 from the Permit Parking Account Code # 4023-30155-76000-5002; and

2.The Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be required to report to the first Toronto Community Council meeting in the year 2000 on:

(i)the results of the pilot project;

(ii)the number of requests from residents to restore the paved areas to green areas; and

(iii)the number of unauthorized paved parking pads in the former City of Toronto.

Background:

The Toronto Community Council, at its meeting of September 16, 1998, deferred consideration of a report (September 8, 1998) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services until its meeting of October 14, 1998, for deputations, and requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report on the number of paved areas that could be restored to green area in a year and the budget which would cover the physical costs of the removal of a parking pad to applicants who have previously been refused.

Comments:

To date, 1108 locations have been identified as locations which have applied for front yard parking and have been refused. However, since there are no computer records identifying the paved parking pads, it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the number of locations where the front yard parking has been paved, without a site inspection.

The September 8, 1998 report indicated that the cost for the City to restore paved boulevards could range from $1,500 to $2,600 for each location. These costs entail:

- the removal of paving of 2.6 m x 6.0 m of concrete/asphalt/interlocking pavers;

-the placing of top soil;

-the re-sodding of the area.

These costs, however, did not include any other expenses associated with the removal of these parking pads which could include, but not be limited to, damages to the landscape area within the City boulevard and on private property during the removal of the parking pad, or excess concrete/asphalt/interlocking pavers, required removal etc.

However, should your Committee wish to pursue the request to restore paved areas to green areas, it is recommended that:

(a)this be introduced as a pilot project for the year 1999;

(b)applicants that were identified as being refused for a parking pad be notified of the proposed pilot project and advised that the restoration of the paved areas would only be on a voluntary and first come first served basis;

(c)no more than five (5) locations be restored to green areas in 1999; and

(d)that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be required to report to the first Toronto Community Council meeting in the year 2000 on:

(i)the results of the pilot project;

(ii)the number of requests from residents to restore the paved area to green areas; and

(iii)the number of unauthorized paved parking pads in the former City of Toronto.

Conclusion:

As indicated earlier, it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the number of locations where the front yard has been paved, without the benefit of a site inspection. The cost for the removal of a parking pad measuring 2.6 m x 6.0 m is in the range of $1,500 to $2,600 which could escalate depending on the site conditions.

Should your Committee wish to pursue the request to restore the paved areas to green areas, the program should be introduced as a pilot project with a specific number of locations to be restored. The process outlined in this report will provide a basis for establishing the number of locations that would qualify, public interest in the program, as well as costs involved.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Angie Antoniou, 392-1525

The Toronto Community Council also submits the following report (September 8, 1998) from the Acting Assistant Director, By-Law Administration and Enforcement, City Works Services:

Purpose:

To provide the members of the Toronto Community Council with a synopsis of their views on possible changes to the front yard parking system and a process for dealing with requests for site specific exemptions to the by-law; and to address other related requests made by Councillors at the April 1, 1998 meeting of the Toronto Community Council and a further communication dated August 17, 1998 from Councillor Tom Jakobek.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The cost to the City for each request to remove the front yard parking pad and re-sod the front yard could vary from $1,500 to $2,600 based on a 2.6 m x 5.9 m parking pad. Given that we are unable to determine the number of request from residents, we are unable to determine the financial impact on recommendation (2) of this report, at this time. Currently there are 3,104 front yard parking licences issued to residents of the former City of Toronto.

Recommendations:

The Toronto Community Council may recommend that:

(1)An appeal process for front yard parking requests be established as outlined below:

(a)The applicant submit in writing to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services a request for special exemption to the by-law, detailing the reasons of the appeal;

(b)Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services conduct a poll and the polling area to consist of residential properties located on both sides of the street within 100 metres of the subject property, or to the nearest intersection, whichever is the shorter distance;

(c)Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services prepare a report on the appeal and results of the poll for consideration by the Toronto Community Council and for the hearing of deputations, and the Ward Councillors= position(s) on the request;

(d)Residents within the polling area be notified of the hearing date;

(e)Introduce a non-refundable appeal fee of $400.00; and

(f)Ward 24 residents be excluded from the appeal process;

(2)(a)If the owner of a property wishes to relinquish the front yard parking licence, the City would agree, at its own expense to:

1.plant a City tree in the boulevard in front of the house;

2.re-sod the area;

3.remove the curb cut;

4.provide free downspout disconnection service;

5.offer a free water conservation audit to the property owner; and

6.provide one year=s free permit parking, for one vehicle in the household;

(b)If the City has removed the front yard parking and restored the City boulevard at its expense, the owner and subsequent owners may not apply to reinstall front yard parking for 5 years;

(3) Municipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code be amended by deleting Section 400-9D(1.1)(b); and

(4)The appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of all necessary bills.

Background:

At its meeting of April 1, 1998, the Toronto Community Council considered my report on Regulations Governing Front Yard Parking (All Wards in the former City of Toronto), and other background material and communications on the topic. The Toronto Community Council asked the Commissioner to report on ward-by-ward local options for front yard parking, as a general principle, and to consult with all the local councillors on how such principles Acan best be addressed in their own wards@.

The Community Council also asked for advice on ways and means to Aassist and encourage owners to landscape their properties where front yard parking has been eliminated@.

Councillor Tom Jakobek, in his communication of August 17, 1998, also requested that I report on removing the waiting list condition for shared ramps.

Comments:

Current Criteria for Front Yard Parking

Front yard parking is regulated under the provisions of Municipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code. These provisions require that:

(a)the property is not within a permit parking area or on a street where permit parking is permitted, or within Ward 24 (former Wards 5 and 6);

(b)there is no access to the rear of the property by a laneway, driveway or on a corner property;

(c)a parking space can not be constructed on the property behind the main front wall of the building;

(d)the property is not within an area that was previously polled or posted where the result was negative;

(e)applications can not be submitted for 2 years from the last day of any appeals;

(f)polling is to be done for each application;

(g)joint applications can be submitted where a waiting list has continuously existed for more than 6 months; and

(h)not more than one licence be issued to the property.

Meeting with Toronto Community Council Councillors

Last May, staff from Works and Emergency Services and Urban Planning and Development met with all the Ward Councillors of the Toronto Community Council. At these meetings Councillors were briefed on the principles behind the current by-law, and the relationship between the zoning by-law and changes to the front yard parking by-law which were adopted by the former Toronto City Council in July 1996, to preserve neighbourhood streetscape.

When presented with material on the front yard parking regime, there was almost unanimous agreement among the 16 members of the Toronto Community Council that it is worth preserving the existing streetscape throughout the City.

This report summarizes what we heard from the Ward Councillors at these meetings, and addresses the issues of local options to implement front yard parking as well as incentives to remove front yard parking.

The following are some of the comments made:

*preserving neighbourhood streetscape is a sound and fundamental principle which should not be lost in pursuit of a more liberal front yard parking by-law;

*front yard parking should not be permitted if there is existing on-site parking such as a garage, or laneway access to parking at the rear of the property;

*having different rules on how or when front yard parking is permitted from ward to ward creates inequities between residents in different wards which is hard to justify, and extremely difficult to administer fairly;

*the current regulations for front yard parking could be even stronger (more stringent);

*front yard parking requests should be subject to a poll of neighbourhood residents and only be allowed if a majority of those polled are in favour. This is the current requirement on streets without permit parking, where front yard parking applications may be considered under the current by-law;

*do not compromise green space for front yard parking;

*trees should not be removed or damaged to facilitate front yard parking;

*although the current system of refusing an application for front yard parking is clear and equitable across the City, it does not provide an appeal mechanism for anomalous situations;

*there appears to be no way to deal with requests for front yard parking which do not meet the by-law requirements, but which may have merit because of their unique or unusual circumstances;

*the Councillors need a fair >relief valve= to deal with anomalous situations in their wards presented by individual constituents;

*there should be a uniform appeal mechanism which would be clearly understood and followed so that the merits of such cases could be discussed in a public format;

*remove the 6 months waiting list provision for shared ramps.

To address the Ward Councillors= comments, the following criteria is recommended to provide a fair and equitable way of dealing with applications for front yard parking.

Standardized appeal process to allow the Community Council to consider site specific requests for exemptions from the by-law

As indicated earlier, one thing that was consistently heard from the Councillors was a need for a fair >relief valve= to deal with anomalous situations in their wards as a result of specific needs by individual constituents.

An example was the case where an entire street had been granted permission for front yard parking before the passage of amendments to the Front Yard Parking By-law in 1996. Unfortunately one property owner missed the deadline for making an application and could not get a licence under the new rules. Since the streetscape had already been altered irretrievably, there was no real environmental advantage in insisting that the last property owner be denied the same privilege. This situation is well-suited to an appeal for a site specific exemption.

There is a general right of appeal for all applicants whose request is denied by staff based on current criteria, except for those residents of Ward 24, Downtown (former Wards 5 and 6). The current appeal mechanism available to an applicant is based on a subjective opinion that the applicant in his/her mind meets the criteria as opposed to the department=s opinion that the applicant does not meet the criteria. This appeal mechanism simply states that AWhere the Commissioner refuses to approve the issuance of a licence (for front yard parking) an applicant may appeal to the Committee in writing setting out the reasons why the applicant believes the applicant complies with the provision of this section and request to be heard by the Committee.@ The costs for such an appeal are borne by the City.

The current fee for a front yard parking application is $55.04. As a result, owners who are not eligible for front yard parking under the by-law, routinely make front yard parking applications as a means to forward their request for appeal, as there is no financial disincentive to using the application process in this matter. It costs Works and Emergency Services $400.000 on average, to conduct a poll. While substantially higher than the current application fee, Aan appeal fee@ of $400.00 is proposed. However, this does not cover the costs of a site visit, preparation of a sketch and the necessary report to the Community Council.

Based on the discussions with Councillors and to establish a consistent and equitable public consideration of each request for an exemption based on its own merits, the following appeal process is recommended :

(a)a special request from the applicant for exemption to the by-law be submitted in writing to the Department;

(b)the Department conduct a poll and the poll shall include the residential properties located on both sides of the street within 100 metres of the subject property, or the nearest intersection, whichever is the shorter distance;

(c)the Department report on the validity of the request and the results of the poll for consideration by the Toronto Community Council and the hearing of deputations;

(d)neighbourhood residents within the polling area be notified in writing of the hearing; and

(e)to discourage frivolous appeals, a fee be established in the amount of $400.00 to cover the cost of the poll.

Councillors Kyle Rae and Olivia Chow have indicated that they do not want the by-law amended in their Wards, to permit appeals for front yard parking.

Incentives for restoration of front yard parking pads

Councillors with congested parking problems in their Wards still did not want to compromise green space for front yard parking.

Councillor Pantalone suggested that the current requirements for front yard parking as outlined earlier could be made even stronger by including a requirement that a tree be planted as a condition of approval for a front yard parking pad. Councillors Olivia Chow and Jack Layton suggested a more comprehensive package of incentives which, if actively promoted, might better encourage owners to relinquish front yard parking licences.

To encourage homeowners to relinquish their front yard parking licences, the following proposal is being recommended:

The City at its own expense:

(a)Plant a tree in the boulevard in front of the house;

(b)Re-sod the area;

(c)Remove the curb cut;

(d)Provide free downspout disconnection service;

(e)Offer a free water conservation audit to the property owner;

(f)Provide one year=s free permit parking, for one vehicle in the household; and

If the City has removed the front yard parking and restored the City boulevard at its expense, the owner and subsequent owners may not apply to reinstall front yard parking for 5 years.

The cost to the City for each request could range from $1,500 to $2,600 for each location. This recommendation would have a financial impact on the City, however, at this time we are unable to determine the financial impact, since we have no way of knowing the number of requests from residents. Currently there are 3,104 front yard parking licences issued to residents of the former City of Toronto.

Conclusion:

Councillors are generally satisfied with the current Front Yard Parking By-law and support its policy intent, which is to preserve neighbourhood streetscape and rely on the existing supply of on-street parking as the preferred option for residential parking. However, some fair, consistent means of dealing with unusual situations would be helpful. Based on discussions with Councillors, staff are recommending that a new, clearly defined appeal process for site specific exemptions be incorporated in Municipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, as outlined in this report.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Angie Antoniou, 392-1525

________

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

-Clause 1, contained in Report No. 8 of the former City of Toronto City Services Committee, titled ASolutions for Front Yard Parking and Boulevard Parking to Preserve Neighbourhood Streetscapes (All Wards)@ which was amended and adopted by City Council at its Regular Meeting on July 2 and 5, 1996;

-Clause 20, contained in Report No. 10 of the former City of Toronto Land Use Committee, titled ADraft Zoning By-law - Regulation of Below Grade and at Grade Integral Garages and Front Yard Landscaping in Residential Districts@ which was amended and adopted by City Council at its Regular Meeting on July 2, 1996; and

-Clause 26, contained in Report No. 16 of the former City of Toronto City Services Committee titled AReview of Front Yard and Boulevard Parking Regulations to Reinforce Neighbourhood Streetscapes@, which was amended and adopted by City Council at its Regular Meeting on December 18 and 19, 1995.

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

-(September 14, 1998) from the President, Greater Toronto Home Builders Association;

-(September 16, 1998) from Ms. Lisa Ben;

-(September 15, 1998) from Mr. Paul Strain;

-(September 15, 1998) from Ms. N. Jane Pepino, Aird & Berlis;

-(undated) from Ms. Toba Bryant and Mr. Dennis Raphael;

-(October 5, 1998) from G. Pigdon;

-(October 8, 1998) from Mr. David Vallance;

-(October 6, 1998) from Mr. Luis and Ms. Elizabeth Candido forwarding Petition with 39 Signatures in Favour of Front Yard Parking at 305 Westmoreland Avenue;

-(October 13, 1998) from Ms. Margaret Blair, on behalf of Lakeside Area Neighbourhoods Association;

-(October 13, 1998) from Mr. Ted Ross;

-(October 6, 1998) from Mr. Vince Abate;

-(undated) from Mr. Pete Lawson;

-(October 14, 1998) from Ms. Alison Bidwell; and

-(October 14, 1998) from Ms. Joan Doiron.

The following persons appeared before the Toronto Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Ms. Alison Bidwell, Toronto, Ontario;

-Ms. Jane Pepino, Greater Toronto Home Builders Association;

-Mr. Peter Lawson, Toronto, Ontario;

-Ms. Maria Lopes, Toronto, Ontario;

-Ms. Carol Jamieson, Toronto, Ontario;

-Mr. Shazack Ali, Toronto, Ontario;

-Ms. Joan Doiron, Toronto, Ontario;

-Mr. Manoj Ravindran, Toronto, Ontario;

-Mr. Peter Smith, Toronto, Ontario;

-Ms. Lisa Gelb, CHC Analyst;

-Mr. Tiwana S. Singh, Toronto, Ontario; and

-Mr. Lawrence Kerry, Toronto, Ontario.