TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 12

1Vital Services in Rental Residential Properties in the City of Toronto

2School Facility Review City-Wide.

3Processing of Requests and Criteria for "Intervenor Funding"

4Cash Payment-in-Lieu of Parking Related to Development Applications

5Bill 25 (Red Tape Act) and Amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act

6Flexlink Advanced Auto Network (FAAN)- Smart Mobility for the Millennium.

7Thirty Kilometre Per Hour Speed Limits Applied In Conjunction with Substantive Traffic-Calming Projects- Renewal and Extension of Enabling Legislation.

8Contract No. T-38-98:Road and Track Allowance Reconstruction at Four Locations.

9Proposed Installation of Pedestrian Crossover: McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard

10Installation of Traffic Control Signals: Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue

11Proposed Extension of the Southbound Left-Turn Prohibition at Old Weston Road and Rockwel Avenue

12Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals: Westclair Centre Site Driveway- Weston Road North of St. Clair Avenue West.

13Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals: McNicoll Avenue and Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court.

14Proposed Adjustment to the Northbound Through Prohibition on Eglinton Avenue West at Glen Cedar Road/Old Park Road.

15Other Items Considered by the Committee

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 12

OF THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on October 5, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Joe Pantalone, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

1

Vital Services in Rental Residential Properties

in the City of Toronto.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, amended this Clause by:

(1)adding to Recommendation (A) of the Urban Environment and Development Committee the words "representatives of the Federation of Metro Tenants Associations and the Advocacy Group for the Legal Clinics" after the word "necessary", so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(A)establish a working group comprised of representatives of Municipal Standards, Public Health, other staff members as necessary, representatives of the Federation of Metro Tenants Associations and the Advocacy Group for the Legal Clinics, and relevant utility/fuel suppliers, to establish policies with respect to discontinuing service/supply;";

(2)striking out the draft by-law attached as Appendix "A" to the report dated October 20, 1998, from the City Solicitor, and substituting therefor the following draft by-law:

CITY OF TORONTO

Draft By-law

BY-LAW

"To prohibit vital service suppliers from ceasing to provide vital services without providing thirty days notice to the City Clerk

WHEREAS property standards by-laws in force in the City of Toronto require landlords to provide vital services to rented premises; and

WHEREAS the Tenant Protection Act, 1997, provides that a municipality may pass a by-law requiring a vital service supplier to give the municipality thirty days notice of the intention to discontinue provision of the vital service where the landlord has breached a contract with a supplier for the supply of the vital service;

WHEREAS, during the thirty day notice period, the City may use other methods to avoid discontinuation of a vital service, including the enforcement of property standards by-laws where appropriate;

WHEREAS the property standards by-law in force in the City of Toronto, (including the Housing Standards provisions of the Municipal Code of the former City of Toronto) require landlords to provide vital services to rented premises;

AND WHEREAS the provisions of the Building Code Act, as amended, provide that the officer may issue an emergency order with respect to a non-conformity that may pose an immediate danger to the health or safety of any person and further, take any measures necessary to terminate the danger;

AND WHEREAS the provisions of the City of Toronto Act, as amended, provide that the inspector may issue an order with respect to a violation that constitutes an urgent hazard to the health or safety of any person and further, take whatever measures necessary to correct the violation;

AND WHEREAS it is in the best interests of the City to have advance notice of the intention of any vital service provider to discontinue the provision of a vital service and in order that any interruption to a vital service may be averted; and

WHEREAS the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 provides that a municipality may pass a by-law requiring a vital service provider to give the municipality thirty days notice of the intention to discontinue provision of the vital service where the landlord has breached a contract with a supplier for the supply of the vital service;

The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1.In this by-law the following definitions apply:

(a)'City' means the City of Toronto.

(b)'Commissioner' means the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services.

(c)'Landlord' includes,

(i)the owner or other person permitting occupancy of a rental unit;

(ii)the heirs, assigns, personal representatives and successors in title of a person referred to in clause (i); and

(iii)a person, other than a tenant occupying a rental unit in a residential complex, who is entitled to possession of the residential complex and who attempts to enforce any of the rights of a landlord under the tenancy agreement or the Tenant Protection Act, including the right to collect rent.

(d)'Rental Unit' means any living accommodation used or intended for use as rented residential premises, and includes,

(i)a room in a boarding house, rooming house or lodging house and a unit in a care home; and

(ii)a site for a mobile home or a site on which there is a land lease home used or intended for use as rented residential premises.

(e)'Tenant' includes a person who pays rent in return for the right to occupy a rental unit and includes a tenant's heirs, assigns and personal representatives, but 'tenant' does not include a person who has the right to occupy a rental unit by virtue of being,

(i)a co-owner of the residential complex in which the rental unit is located, or

(ii)a shareholder of a corporation that owns the residential complex.

(f)'Vital Service' means fuel, hydro, gas, or hot or cold water.

2.No supplier of a vital service shall cease to provide the vital service to a rental unit unless notice of the intended discontinuance of the vital service has been given in writing to the City Clerk at least thirty (30) days before the supplier ceases to provide the vital service.

3.Despite section 2, the notice of intended discontinuance shall be given only if the vital service is to be discontinued for a rental unit because the landlord has breached a contract with the supplier for the supply of the vital service.

4.The supplier of a vital service shall immediately restore the vital service when directed to do so by the Commissioner. The Commissioner shall issue such a direction when the vital service has been discontinued in a manner that is contrary to section 2 of this by-law.

5.Every person who contravenes or fails to comply with sections 2 or 4 of this by-law is guilty of an offence for each day or part of a day on which the offence occurs or continues.

6.Every director or officer of a corporation that is convicted of an offence who knowingly concurs in the commission of the offence is guilty of an offence.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of October, A.D. 1998."; and

(3)adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(a)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on an appropriate way to designate or include elevators as a vital service, as well as the powers of the City to ensure that tenants have access to their apartments; and

(b)the following motion be referred to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services for a report thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee:

Moved by Councillor Mammoliti:

'That the foregoing motion by Councillor McConnell be amended to provide that elevators be included in the definition of "Vital Service" under section(1)(f) of the by-law.' ")

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that Council:

(A)establish a working group comprised of representatives of Municipal Standards, Public Health, other staff members as necessary, and relevant utility/fuel suppliers, to establish policies with respect to discontinuing service/supply;

(B)request the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to:

(1)monitor these policies in action, and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the success of the working group at the end of the current heating season (September 1998 to June 1999);

(2)report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee incidents where the working group was unable to resolve an issue and, as a result, a vital service was discontinued; and

(3)prepare an information sheet with respect to the new vital services process which will provide pertinent information, staff contacts, and emergency telephone numbers for distribution to staff and Members of Council;

(C)request the Energy Efficiency Office of the City of Toronto to assist staff and provide input with regard to vital services issues; and

(D)request Toronto Hydro to consider adoption of a program of debt recovery such that tenants are not put at risk.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:

(1)requested the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to draft a Vital Services By-law which:

(a)references the mechanisms to ensure continuing vital services, and full cost recovery of municipal expenses incurred in so doing; and

(b)includes a requirement that utility service providers give 30 days' notice to the City prior to service discontinuation for non-payment of account;

(2)requested the City Solicitor to submit such draft Vital Services By-law, together with a report thereon, to Council for consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on October 28, 1998;

(3)requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to submit a report directly to Council for consideration with this matter on October 28, 1998, on whether the provision of vital services by the City would be fully cost-recoverable;

(4)requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the City Solicitor to discuss this matter with representatives of the Metropolitan Federation of Tenants, and to submit a report thereon, if necessary, directly to Council for consideration with this matter on October 28, 1998.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (August24, 1998) from Dr. Sheela V. Basrur, Medical Officer of Health:

Purpose:

To address the possible health impacts to Toronto's residents should vital services be discontinued.

Recommendations:

(1)That this report be received for information; and

(2)that the City Solicitor be requested to review the feasibility and conditions under which the Health Protection and Promotion Act, c.H.7, R.S.O. 1990 could be applied in situations involving the discontinuation of vital services.

Background:

At the July 13, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, the Medical Officer of Health was requested to consult with agencies that serve tenants and persons living in poverty and to submit a report on the potential health impacts of refusing to intervene in the cut-off of vital services to the September 8, 1998 meeting of the committee.

Discussion:

Public Health staff invited representatives from agencies and organizations that serve tenants and persons living in poverty to a meeting on August 13, 1998 to discuss possible health impacts to residents should the city not intervene to restore cut-off vital services. Representatives from eight of the twelve agencies invited attended the meeting (see Appendix A for list of agencies).

The representatives expressed grave concerns for the health of tenants should the city not intervene when vital services are turned off. They identified health impacts to tenants, particularly "at risk" groups of individuals such as the immune compromised, newborn and the elderly. They discussed not only physical health impacts but also threats to the emotional and psychological health of the tenants that could put severe pressure on their ability to cope with daily demands and stresses. The group had further concerns that the loss of some vital services could impact on the ability of individuals to arrive at work on time or in an unacceptable hygienic state, which has lead in some cases to dismissal. This loss of work can have far reaching impacts on the individual or family setting.

The representatives felt the process as described through the Tenant Protection Act was insufficient to protect tenants during an emergency. It was their understanding the Provincial Tribunal that was being set up to respond to tenants complaints was not going to respond to emergency situations and issue immediate orders. Instead they are going to set up a hearing to hear both sides of a complaint and this process could take up to seven days before decision was reached. It was their position this was far too long for tenants to be without vital services. It was their opinion that the money necessary for the City to set up a process similar to the former City of Toronto's Urgent Hazard By-law was minimal compared to the taxes received from these same tenants. These representatives were advised to direct their concerns to this committee through letters and deputations.

When electricity is discontinued, lack of refrigeration can lead to food spoilage and food contamination with an increase in food poisonings. It could impact on the safety of baby foods and medicines also requiring refrigeration. Concerns were raised by the group that the poor would loose food due to spoilage in freezers and refrigerators and their all ready low nutritional status would be further compromised. Many individuals live week to week and the loss of all their food could be devastating. Loss of electric air-conditioning during extreme heat waves can lead to dehydration, heat stroke or death especially for the elderly, the young, those with pre-existing chronic illness, and those on certain medications, e.g. for mental illness. Concerns were also raised for the elderly and physically disabled should elevator services be unavailable.

With the loss of water and sewage disposal, there is an increased risk for person-to-person transmission of gastro-enteritis. Lack of drinking water can also lead to dehydration, a condition that can have serious negative impacts to the elderly, the young and those with chronic illnesses. Many would not have the funds to purchase bottled water.

When gas or oil is turned off the loss of heat, in extreme conditions, can lead to hypothermia, which places infants, seniors and those who are ill or on certain medications at the greatest health risk. Concern was raised also to the threat of carbon monoxide poisoning and fires as individuals attempt to heat their rooms through any means available. Deaths have occurred when propane barbecues and other outdoor heating appliances have been used indoors without proper ventilation or fires have been set in unsafe and improper locations.

It should be added that opinions vary as to the feasibility of using the Health Protection and Promotion Act, c.H.7, R.S.O. 1990 to reduce the potential health hazards associated with loss of vital services. The feasibility of using the Act in these circumstances, the conditions under which it would be applied and the actions that could be taken under the Act to reduce the potential health hazards described above, should be reviewed by the City Solicitor before a decision is made to proceed in this direction.

Conclusion:

The health of the residents of Toronto could be compromised if vital services are turned off. I have reviewed the August 24, 1998 report of the Commissioner, Urban Planning and Development Services to this Committee and support the idea of a working group to review anticipated service cut-offs before they occur. I also have concerns about the feasibility of using the Health Protection and Promotion Act as a remedy in these circumstances and recommend that its applicability be reviewed by the City Solicitor.

Contact Name:

Mr. Dave Harrison, Manager , Environmental Health Services, 392-7685, Fax: 392-1482.

____________

Appendix A

Agencies Notified of Focus Group Meeting

East Toronto Community Legal Services *

Shout Clinic *

Toronto Shelter, Housing and Support *

FMTA *

Kensington Bellwoods Community Legal Services *

West Scarborough Community Legal Services *

Parkdale Activity and Recreation Centre *

SA Max Meighen Centre *

Woodgreen

Dixon Hall

Federation of Metro Tenants

Fred Victor Mission

Centre for Equality

COTA

Alternative Housing Subcommittee

Coalition of Metro Housing Centres

* Agencies that attended the group meeting

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (September 3, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To provide assistance to the Committee with respect to the feasibility of relying on the Health Protection and Promotion Act to regulate vital services.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendation:

That this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting held on September 8, 1998, the Urban Environment and Development Committee requested the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to submit a report on Recommendation (2) embodied in the report dated August 24, 1998, from the Medical Officer of Health which recommended that the City Solicitor review the feasibility and conditions under which the Health Protection and Promotion Act, (theAct) could be applied in situations involving the discontinuation of vital services. The Committee also requested the City Solicitor to submit a report on the timing implications for tenants who use the provincial Tribunal process for prosecution/enforcement of vital services issues.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The purpose of the Health Protection and Promotion Act is to "provide for the organization and delivery of public health programs and services, the prevention of the spread of disease and the promotion and protection of the health of the people of Ontario". Mandatory Guidelines published by the Ministry of Health pursuant to the Act establish standards and set out the minimum requirements for fundamental public health programs and services targeted at the prevention of disease, health promotion and health protection. Like the Act, the Guidelines have a community focus. For instance, one of the stated goals of the Health Hazard Investigation standard is "to ensure community health protection and continued public health services delivery in the event of a health hazard".

In her report the Medical Officer of Health stated that "opinions vary as to the feasibility of using the Act to reduce the potential health hazards associated with loss of vital services". The term "health hazard" is defined in the Act as follows:

"health hazard" means,

(a)a condition of a premises,

(b)a substance, thing, plant or animal other than man, or

(c)a solid, liquid, gas or combination of any of them,

that has or that is likely to have an adverse effect on the health of any person".

The Medical Officer of Health has a duty, prescribed by the Act, to inspect or cause the inspection of a health unit under his or her jurisdiction for the purpose of preventing, eliminating and decreasing the effects of health hazards in the health unit. The City of Toronto is designated as a health unit in the regulations made under the Act and is comprised of the geographic area of the former Borough of East York and the Cities of Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, Toronto and York. If the Medical Officer of Health is of the opinion that a health hazard exists, he or she may issue an Order to decrease the effect of or to eliminate the health hazard. An Order issued under the Act may include such actions as:

(a)requiring the vacating of premises;

(b)requiring the removal of the health hazard;

(c)requiring the doing of work specified in the Order in, on or about the premises specified in the Order; or

(d)requiring the destruction of the matter or thing specified in the Order.

The expenses incurred by a board of health in respect of a health hazard may be recovered by the board by way of court action. Alternatively, the amount owing to the board may be entered in the collector's roll and collected in the same manner as municipal real property taxes. The amount collected shall then be paid over to the board of health.

In 1994 an application was made to the Ontario Divisional Court seeking judicial review of the term "health hazard". In that case the Court dismissed the application and held that "... the purpose and intent of the Act is to ensure community health protection of the people of Ontario".

As previously advised by the Commissioner, Urban Planning and Development Services, specific provincial legislation has been enacted which clearly enables municipalities to regulate matters relating to municipal maintenance standards and vital services. In the face of express provincial legislation delegating authority to municipalities to regulate these two areas, and looking at the general tendency of the courts, it is unlikely that the City could rely on the health hazard provisions of the Health Protection and Promotion Act as a mechanism to regulate the discontinuation of vital services.

I was also asked to report on the "timing implications for tenants who use the Provincial Tribunal process for prosecution/enforcement of vital services issues". The Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal (the "Tribunal") has provided me with its Scheduling Hearing Standards from its policy manual. This document indicates that there is no fee for a hearing regarding the landlord's having withheld or interfered with the supply of vital services, and that the tribunal hearing should take place approximately 11 days from the date the tenant applies to the tribunal for relief.

Conclusions:

The Province has delegated extensive authority to municipalities to regulate municipal maintenance standards and vital services; however this authority does not exist in the Health Protection and Promotion Act. Therefore it is unlikely that the Act can be used to regulate municipal maintenance standards or vital services. The Health Protection and Promotion Act has, as its focus, community health protection and promotion. Any attempt to rely on the "health hazard" provisions of that Act should be made on a case by case basis after consideration has been given to both the context of the situation and the scope and intent of the Act.

Contact Name:

Ms. Jane Speakman, Legal Services, 392-1563.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (August 24, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

Report submitted in response to a request from Council for information on the anticipated actual financial loss from the provision of vital services when necessary under the current legislation; and the ability of Toronto Hydro and other essential services to provide the continuation of services under the same conditions as were previously applied to the "Urgent Hazard Program" by the former City of Toronto (under the former City of Toronto Act).

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Enacting a Vital Service By-law would require reinstating funding of $120,000.00 per year. An amount of $60,000.00 was cut from the 1998 budget to reflect mid-year cancellation of the program as approved in the budget process. In addition, funds up to $900,000.00 per year in the peak years could be required for payment of utility bills, with no assurance that these funds would be recovered by the City.

The projected funding of $120,000.00 per year for administration of a Vital Services By-law for the entire city is the same amount as expended for the former City of Toronto. It is anticipated that should a Vital Services By-law be deemed necessary, it could be written with associated operational processes and policies that would reduce administrative costs, by having some of the administration carried out by the utility companies, or having them cover a portion of the costs.

It should be noted that the new legislation would continue to allow a municipality to have rents directed to the City until the debt is repaid. This rent collection process would likely be costly to administer.

Recommendation:

That this report be received as information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The former City of Toronto had an "Urgent Hazards Program" (established under the authority of the City of Toronto Act, 1936) , under which Utility bills which were in arrears to the point where the Utility company planned to cut supply would be paid by the City, and a lien registered against the property. This lien allowed for recovery of the funds as municipal taxes. In the 1998 budget process, funds for administration of this program were not provided. None of the other former municipalities had such programs. While the intent of the program was to protect persons at risk, there is a belief that it had evolved towards acting as a tool of the utility providers for bill collection, or a lever in landlord tenant disputes, rather than its specific intended function.

Following submission of a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee and considered by Council at its meeting of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, I was asked to provide information as to the financial impact on the City if a Vital Services By-law were enacted City wide, as a replacement for the Urgent Hazards Program, and on the ability of Toronto Hydro and other essential services to provide continuation of services.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

As a Public Utility, Toronto Hydro has by way of Section 31 of the Public Utilities Act the power to establish a lien on a property with outstanding bills. Recovery of the funds by Toronto Hydro under that legislation has the same priority as municipal taxes. Consequently, Toronto Hydro has in that regard for the entire present City of Toronto, power equivalent to that available to the former City of Toronto. Toronto Hydro could establish a bill collection process for themselves which would virtually guarantee recovery of funds, and would not require outlay of funds by the City. This would, of course, require that Toronto Hydro establish a policy that they would use this process as an alternative to cutting of power in those cases where cutting the power would put vulnerable persons at risk.

Only the former City of Toronto had an urgent hazards program. While circumstance may have arisen regarding cutting of utilities in other former municipalities, appropriate mechanisms to deal with these circumstances were generally applied. As previously reported, measures exist in the current (and draft harmonized) Property Standards By-laws to deal with emergency situations. Public Health has, through the Health Protection and Promotion Act, power to require or cause work to be done to alleviate situations where there is a health hazard.

Under current legislation, while it is feasible to pass a Vital Services By-law with similar provisions, the priority for recovery of the outlay would not be with the same priority as municipal taxes. Consequently, there could be no guarantee that the funds would be recovered. In extreme circumstances, this could amount to over $500,000.00 per year. For 1995, 1996 and 1997 the funds expended within the former City of Toronto were $891,481.08, $246,761.07 and $323,823.38. The City Solicitor has reported earlier on what would be required to establish a priority equivalent to taxes.

A review of the peak year of 1995 indicates that funds were expended relating to 376 situations. A number of these were multiple situations at the same property; i.e., in some cases, utility bills were paid several times. About 70 percent. of the situations related to Hydro, 22 percent. to Consumers Gas, and the balance to non-utility items. One payment related to a specific problem property, and was $191,000.00. In subsequent years, one factor in the reduction of funds expended related to agreements regarding administration of the program in that claims from Utilities would not be made in relation to relatively small amounts.

In addition to these amounts, there are administrative costs to the City. These were estimated at $120,000.00 per year. In the 1998 budget process, there was a budget reduction of $60,000.00 (half-year impact) to reflect the approved cancellation of the Urgent Hazards Program.

By provision of early notice of potential problem situations, and through administrative changes by Consumers Gas and Toronto Hydro, the number of urgent, or hazardous situations could be minimized. While discussions with Consumers Gas indicate that they would have some concerns about administrative changes which would provide somewhat earlier notice of problem situations to the City, this could be required under a Vital Services By-law. Consumers Gas has indicated some willingness to take over a portion of any administrative process carried out by the City.

This principal concern in this matter is provision of heat in the winter. In that regard, the Director of Municipal Standards has reviewed the policies of Consumers Gas. That company advises that they do visit each problem property to determine if cutting of the gas supply would put any vulnerable persons at risk.

Initial discussions have also taken place with Toronto Hydro and they did indicate willingness to work together to develop processes to ensure protection of vulnerable persons. They have also advised that processes have been developed in the balance of former municipalities which have worked effectively.

Conclusions:

Staff are of the opinion that a Vital Services By-law should not be enacted. Other mechanisms are available to address the risk to vulnerable persons without incurring the administrative costs and uncertainty of recovery of funds advanced. With respect to Toronto Hydro, legislation exists to allow them essentially the same power of recovery of outstanding bills as under the Urgent Hazards Program. It would be appropriate if they were requested to adopt a program to recover debts in a manner which does not either put vulnerable persons at risk, or require the City to act as guarantor/ bill collector.

The policy of Consumers Gas referenced above does note that "gas service may be discontinued only as a last resort", and the company advises that they would generally not cut service in the winter where vulnerable persons would be at risk.

Prior to considering enacting a Vital Services By-law, should such be deemed necessary, it would be appropriate for a working group comprised of representatives from Municipal Standards, Public Health, and the relevant Utilities or fuel providers to establish policies in respect to discontinuing service/supply, and to monitor these policies in action for at least one year. It is possible to minimize the number of situations under which Emergency Orders either under a Property Standards By-law, or the Health Protection and Promotion Act, would have to be used by ensuring that the Utility companies provide sufficient notice of planned cutoff to allow for proper evaluation of specific situations and provide the opportunity to apply alternative solutions.

Establishing a Vital Services By-law under current legislation could put the City in the position of having significant and potentially non-recoverable funds owing. The former City of Toronto had between 1995 and 1997 paid between $300,000.00 and $900,000.00 per year to cover utility bills. Should the program be extended to cover the new city, this amount would increase. These funds were not included in departmental budgets, but were requested from general revenue to cover emergency situations. In addition, funds of up to $120,000.00 would have to be reinstated in an annual budget to cover administrative costs for the program.

Contact Name:

Mr. Harold Bratten, Director, Municipal Standards, Metro Hall, 22nd Floor, 392-8768.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (August 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:

I am enclosing for your information and any attention deemed necessary, Clause No. 3 contained in Report No. 9 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee, headed "Vital Services in Rental Residential Properties in the City of Toronto", which was adopted, without amendment, by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998.

(Clause No. 3 of Report No. 9 of

The Urban Environment and Development Committee, headed

"Vital Services in Rental Residential Properties in the City of Toronto.")

(City Council on July 29, 30and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having requested the CitySolicitor to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on July 29, 1998, on the legislative amendments that would be required should Council decide to request the Province of Ontario to enact legislation which would permit the new City of Toronto to adopt a Vital Services Program similar to that conducted by the former City of Toronto under its special legislation.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:

(1)deferred consideration of the following reports and communication to its next meeting, scheduled to be held on September8, 1998, for the hearing of deputations;

(2)requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the Executive Director and Chief Building Official, to submit a report to the September8, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee regarding:

(a)the anticipated actual financial loss resulting from the provision of vital services when necessary under the current legislation; and

(b)the ability of Toronto Hydro and other essential services to provide the continuation of services under the same conditions as were previously applied to the "Urgent Hazard Program" by the former City of Toronto (under the former City of Toronto Act);

(3)requested the Medical Officer of Health to consult with agencies which serve tenants and persons living in poverty, and submit a report to the September 8, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the probable health impacts of refusing to intervene in the cut-off of vital services;

(4)directed that a copy of the following reports and communication be referred to the Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes, with a request that the Committee submit its comments thereon to the September 8, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (June10, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

Report submitted for information, to address issues of enforcement regarding vital services where a landlord who is responsible for the payment of utility bills in a rental residential property defaults on that obligation.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

In the event that Council chooses not to adopt the recommendation below, and instead chooses to enact a vital services by-law, then that action would require the reversal of Council's previous budgetary decision in order now to commit funds to the staffing and administration of a vital services program in the amount of $60,000.00 for 1998 and $120,000.00 annualized thereafter.

In addition, historically the former City of Toronto has committed funds ranging from $500,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 annualized to the restoration of utilities in rental residential properties. These funds were recoverable as being collectible through the municipal realty tax process, as provided for by the City of Toronto Act. Any future funds to be expended by the City to restore such utilities under a Vital Services By-law would be at great risk of being unrecoverable, given that the enabling legislation does not provide for such funds to be placed on the tax rolls. The current legislation provides for a lien to be placed against the property and/or the City to have tenants pay rents directly to the City.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City of Toronto not enact a vital services by-law under authority of the Tenant Protection Act, given the expected high cost of its administration and the potential for financial risk to the City.

Background/History:

Existing municipal standards regulations throughout the new City provide for a range of options in addressing the issue of a landlord's obligation to maintain vital services in rental residential properties.

Current regulations which exist under authority of the Planning Act set out an owner's responsibility to ensure that vital services such as utilities are maintained for residential tenants. A breach of that obligation is an enforceable offence. All City of Toronto districts, with the exception of the former City of Toronto, have municipal standards regulations enforced under the authority of the Planning Act.

Current regulations within the former City of Toronto, under authority of the City of Toronto Act, set out owner obligations similar to the above but also provide authority for the City to restore utility services where an "urgent hazard" is considered to exist and to re-coup such monies by placing expended amounts directly on the tax roll to be collected in a like manner as municipal taxes. This program has been administratively costly to run and has been targeted to be discontinued as part of the budget process.

At the present time a staff group is working toward drafting harmonized municipal maintenance standards that will be applicable to the entire new City. The enabling legislation for such new regulations will come under the authority of the Building Code Act. On November 28, 1997, Royal Assent was given to the Tenant Protection Act which serves to consolidate, replace and supersede numerous existing acts which deal with tenant issues, including the enactment of municipal maintenance standards and by-laws regarding vital services. The Tenant Protection Act is proclaimed as effective and in force June 17, 1998.

Comments:

The Tenant Protection Act amends the Building Code Act which becomes the new enabling legislation for municipal maintenance standards. The Tenant Protection Act also incorporates the former provisions of the Municipal Amendment Act (Vital Services) that allows a municipality to choose to enact a by-law to authorize the restoration of utilities where a landlord defaults on payment of utility bills to rental residential properties. This authority requires that a lien be placed on the title of the property, and allows the municipality to have tenants direct rents to the City until the debt is repaid. This process effectively would appear to make the municipality a quasi-landlord in ensuring that outstanding rents are paid. In addition, there is no reasonable guarantee that monies expended by the municipality to restore utilities would, in fact, ever be recouped. This process would likely serve to be very labour intensive and costly to run, which may be the reason that to date only three Ontario municipalities have previously chosen to enact a municipal vital services by-law.

Information obtained from the City of Ottawa, which currently administers a vital services by-law, indicates that such a program is very time-consuming, administrative and costly in terms of staff time and resources. It is uncertain whether, once the amalgamation of Ottawa-area municipalities occurs, a vital services program will be maintained given that the municipalities around the existing City of Ottawa do not administer such a program. As is the case in most Ontario cities, the municipalities surrounding Ottawa have not chosen to pursue a local vital services by-law.

The Tenant Protection Act sets up a Provincial Tribunal process to address tenant concerns where a municipality has no maintenance standards by-law, and also to enforce vital services provisions that are directly contained in the Act requiring a landlord to ensure that vital services such as utilities are provided. Ministry staff have confirmed that, while a fee is chargeable under the Tenant Protection Act to municipalities where the Provincial Tribunal enforces maintenance standards, no fee is chargeable to a municipality where the Provincial Tribunal enforces vital services. The Act includes Provincial responsibility to directly receive tenant complaints regarding vital services matters and enforce resulting Provincial orders through the courts. This new Act places the onus of evidence collection and complaint reporting directly into the hands of affected tenants, who would then bring their vital services issues forward to the Provincial Tribunal for prosecution/enforcement.

Conclusions:

Given that the current City of Toronto budget process is seeking to discontinue the former City of Toronto's "urgent hazard" program due to the cost of administering it, City Council may similarly want to consider not undertaking an even more bureaucratic and financially risky process in the restoration of utility services under a vital services by-law. It is suggested that City Council seek to rely instead on general enforcement of municipal standards regulations through prosecution by the City as necessary, as well as procedures which are currently being put into place under the Tenant Protection Act for tenants to seek prosecution activity through the Provincial Tribunal specifically regarding vital services.

Contact Name:

Ms. Judi McBurney, Technical Advisor, Buildings Division, Toronto City Hall, 392-7963, Fax:392-0677.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (June9, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to review the potential implications of the motion set out below, to provide information with respect to the authority of City Council to enact a vital services by-law, and to explain the limitations on that authority.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There will be costs associated with the implementation of programs pursuant to a "vital services by-law", should Council choose to enact such a by-law. In the former City of Toronto, a similar program was in place pursuant to the former City's special legislation. The Budget Committee has recommended discontinuing that program.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of May 13 and 14, 1998, City Council referred the following motion to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its consideration:

WHEREAS the Budget Committee accepted the proposal of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to discontinue the program previously delivered only in the former City of Toronto, which paid on behalf of property owners and collected utility payments in like manner as realty property taxes when such utilities had been discontinued to tenanted properties, under the authority of Section6 of the City of Toronto Act, 1936 (which applied only in the former City of Toronto); and

WHEREAS it is anticipated that the legislative authority for this program will be repealed or superseded by the Provincial Government in the spring of 1998; and

WHEREAS it is desirable to ensure regulations are in place that are applicable to the whole of the new City of Toronto; and

WHEREAS Bill 104, The Vital Services Act, authorizes Municipalities to pass By-laws requiring Vital Services Utilities to adopt a similar program;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Solicitor be requested to draft a By-law in accordance with Bill 104 to be presented to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for consideration;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT City Council communicate with the City's vital services utility providers requesting their co-operation in continuing this service under the authority of and as would be required by the By-law proposed in resolution No.(1);

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the appropriate staff initiate discussions with the City's vital services utility providers to share information regarding the operational aspects of the former City of Toronto's utility restoration program.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The motion set out above, proposes that the City enact a by-law requiring providers of vital services to adopt a program whereby the service providers would continue to provide services to tenanted properties despite the landlord's failure to make utility payments. City Council, however, lacks the authority to enact such a by-law. Council may require utility companies to give 30 days notice of the intention to discontinue service for non-payment; however, after the 30-day period has elapsed, Council cannot require continuation of the service without payment to the utility company.

The motion refers to "Bill 104, The Vital Services Act", which appears to be a reference to the City's power, under s. 210.2 of the Municipal Act, to enact a vital services by-law. There is not actually a statute entitled "The Vital Services Act". Section 210.2 of the Municipal Act was added to the Municipal Act in 1994 when the Legislature passed the Municipal Amendment Act (Vital Services), 1994, which was Bill 104 when it was introduced. Section 210.2 will be replaced on June 17, 1998, when the Tenant Protection Act (the "TPA"), comes into force. Sections 145 to 153 of the Tenant Protection Act provide authority that is essentially the same as that currently provided ins.210.2 of the Municipal Act. City Council's authority to enact a vital services by-law will not be changed by the TPA.

The TPA defines "vital service" as "fuel, hydro, gas or hot or cold water", and provides that a "vital services by-law" is a by-law passed pursuant to s.146 of the TPA. Section 146 of the TPA provides that a vital services by-law may require landlords to provide adequate and suitable vital services to the rental units. A vital services by-law may require the supplier of a vital service to notify the municipality if the vital service is to be discontinued for the reason that the landlord has breached a contract with the supplier (i.e., failure to make utility payments). At least 30 days' notice is required.

The municipality may then arrange for the service to be provided. The municipality would do this by paying for the service and then attempting to recover the amount paid plus administrative costs. Accordingly, the municipality is authorized to register a lien against the property for the amount, and to direct the tenant to pay any or all of the rent for the unit to the municipality. The payment by the tenant is not to be treated as a default of the obligation to pay rent to the landlord. Naturally, such provisions do not apply where the tenant has agreed to maintain the vital services.

There will be administrative costs to the City of administering a program pursuant to a vital services by-law, and there may also be some difficulty in recovering all of the money paid by the City to the utility companies. It is my understanding that funds have not been budgeted for the administration of a vital services program by the City.

Pursuant to special legislation, the former City of Toronto had a program somewhat similar to that which would be permitted pursuant to a vital services by-law. The Budget Committee has recommended discontinuation of the program. The other former municipalities within the urban area that is currently the City of Toronto had the ability to enact such a by-law, but none of them enacted one.

Should Council choose not to enact a vital services by-law, tenants will still have some recourse against landlords who fail to provide an adequate supply of a vital service. The TPA will prohibit landlords from withholding a "reasonable supply of any vital service ... that it is the landlord's obligation to supply under the tenancy agreement". Tenants may apply to the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal should the landlord breach this provision. The Tribunal can provide a range of relief including an abatement of rent. In addition, I am informed by staff of the Municipal Standards Division that existing municipal standards by-laws address the provision of vital services.

Conclusions:

While City Council can enact a vital services by-law, it cannot require suppliers of a vital service to provide the service beyond the 30-day notice period or to adopt a program similar to that which was in place in the former City of Toronto.

Contact Name:

Ms. Wendy Walberg , 392-8078.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (July13, 1998) from Councillor Anne Johnston, North Toronto:

Recommendations:

(1)That your Committee defer this item until your September 8, 1998 meeting for deputations. My reading of the reports before you today will leave tenants at great risk should we eliminate the Urgent Hazards Program. It therefore seems only fair to give tenants across the new City of Toronto time to review the Urgent Hazard Program and the replacement proposed by Councillor Jakobek's motion before you today;

(2)that your Committee ask the City Solicitor to report to the next meeting of your Committee on what legislation would be required to reinstate the former City of Toronto's Urgent Hazard Program to serve the new City of Toronto; and

(3)that the relevant officials report on the ability of Toronto Hydro and other essential services to provide the continuation of services under the same conditions as formerly applied to the Urgent Hazard Program by the old City of Toronto (under the former City of Toronto Act).

Background:

On July 2, 1998, I received the attached communication from the Urban Planning and Development Services Department informing me that the Urgent Hazard Program, formerly operating in the old City of Toronto, has been discontinued due to "budgetary changes".

On checking the Urban Planning and Development budget line (attached) applicable to the cancellation of the Urgent Hazard Program, I was surprised to see the notation that the then-proposed "Vital Services Act" would allow the utilities to continue with the former Urgent Hazard Program. This statement was misleading, to say the least, as far as tenants and their essential services are concerned.

(Communication dated June 26, 1998, from the

Urban Planning and Development Services Department,

referred to in the foregoing report.)

Urgent Hazard Program Change - Former City of Toronto:

Attached is a communique being circulated in order to provide advice of an upcoming program change which is effective July 1, 1998, regarding utility service cuts to rental residential properties within the former City of Toronto. Budgetary changes have resulted in the subject program adjustment.

Please review the attachment and advise relevant parties affiliated with your office or organization.

Thank you.

(Communique dated June 26, 1998, from the

Urban Planning and Development Services Department,

referred to in the foregoing communication.)

Changes in the City of Toronto's Urban Planning and Development Services' budget, as approved by City Council, will result in adjustments to certain of the Department's programs, effective July1, 1998.

The Urgent Hazard Program, which provided only for the former City of Toronto to directly authorize payments to utility companies in cases where hydro or gas services were cut to residential rental properties due to a landlord's defaulting on payments, will be discontinued. The City will continue to handle complaints, and any necessary enforcement action will be undertaken.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (May 25, 1998) from the City Clerk:

City Council, at its meeting held on May 13 and 14, 1998, referred the following Motion to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for consideration:

Moved by:Councillor Jakobek

Seconded by:Councillor Ootes

"WHEREAS the Budget Committee accepted the proposal of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to discontinue the program previously delivered, only in the former City of Toronto, which paid on behalf of property owners and collected utility payments in like manner as realty property taxes when such utilities had been discontinued to tenanted properties, under the authority of Section 6 of the City of Toronto Act, 1936 (which applied only in the former City of Toronto); and

WHEREAS it is anticipated that the legislative authority for this program will be repealed or superseded by the Provincial Government in the spring of 1998; and

WHEREAS it is desirable to ensure regulations are in place that are applicable to the whole of the new City of Toronto; and

WHEREAS Bill 104, The Vital Services Act, authorizes Municipalities to pass By-laws requiring Vital Services Utilities to adopt a similar program;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Solicitor be requested to draft a By-law in accordance with Bill 104 to be presented to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for consideration;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT City Council communicate with the City's vital services utility providers requesting their co-operation in continuing this service under the authority of and as would be required by the By-law proposed in resolution No. (1);

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the appropriate staff initiate discussions with the City's vital services utility providers to share information regarding the operational aspects of the former City of Toronto's utility restoration program."

(A copy of the relevant pages of the Urban Planning and Development budget, referred to in the foregoing report dated July 13, 1998, from Councillor Anne Johnston, North Toronto, is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (July 15, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

The Urban Environment and Development Committee has requested that I report directly to Council on the legislative amendments that would be required to permit the City to adopt a vital services program similar to that conducted in the former City of Toronto under its special legislation.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Should the City request special legislation, there will likely be a cost of more than $6,000.00 to make the request. Should the City's request be granted, there will be a cost of operating a vital services program. The Committee deferred consideration of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development's report of June 10, 1998 which outlined some of those costs. The Commissioner has been requested to prepare an additional report for the Committee's September 8, 1998, meeting.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

On July 13, 1998, the Urban Environment and Development Committee considered two reports on the subject of vital services by-laws.

A report from me explained that the City lacked the authority to require providers of vital services to adopt a program whereby the suppliers would continue to provide services to rental properties despite the landlord's failure to make utility payments.

The report also explained that the Tenant Protection Act gives Council the power to enact a vital services by-law. Under a vital services by-law the City can pay the cost of providing a vital service when the landlord has failed to do so and the service provider intends to discontinue the service. The City would have some power to collect the money spent. It could place a lien on the premises and require the tenant to pay any or all rent directly to the City.

The former City of Toronto had a similar program under its special legislation. The special legislation applies only to the urban area that was formerly the City of Toronto. The main difference between the former City's program and one which the new City could adopt is that special legislation permitted the former City to collect the money paid out as realty taxes. Realty taxes have the first priority above all other claims. For this reason, the money was much easier to collect under that program. Even so, the program was considered costly to administer and has been discontinued.

The Commissioner's report recommends that "the City of Toronto NOT enact a vital services by-law under authority of the Tenant Protection Act, given the expected high cost of its administration and potential for financial risk to the City."

The Urban Environment and Development Committee requested that I report directly to Council on the legislative amendments that would be required to permit the City to adopt a program similar to the one that was in place in the former City.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The program that was in place in the former City of Toronto was authorized by the City of Toronto Act, 1936. That special legislation provides authority for property standards by-laws and enforcement of the by-laws. Under the legislation the former City could enact a by-law like a vital services by-law and adopt a program similar to that which can currently be established by the City under the Tenant Protection Act. Like the Tenant Protection Act, the special legislation provided that the City had a lien for the amount expended; however, the special legislation also provided that the amount was deemed to be municipal real property taxes and could be collected in the same manner as real property taxes.

The Tenant Protection Act does not authorize the municipality to collect the amount owed to it as real property taxes. I have been asked to report on the legislative amendments that would be required to give the City this authority. There are three possible approaches.

First, the City could request that the City of Toronto Act, 1936 be amended to provide that the relevant provisions apply the new City of Toronto. I do not recommend this course of action. Only a small part of a very lengthy section of that legislation is relevant, and there is a standing order that special legislation will not be amended unless the entire section is put forward for amendment.

Second, the City could request new special legislation which would include provisions similar to the relevant portions of the City of Toronto Act, 1936 and any portions of the relevant Tenant Protection Act provisions that might assist.

In order to expedite the processing of an application for special legislation and as encouraged by guidelines of the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills, the usual practice is to consult ahead of time with the Legislative Counsel on the form of the Private Bill and with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs' staff on both the form and content of the Private Bill before giving notice and filing an application for a Private Bill with the Clerk of the House.

Third, the City could request an amendment to the Tenant Protection Act. The amendment could add to the current provision that permits a municipality to put a lien on the property. It could provide that the amount of the lien is deemed to be real property taxes.

I am informed by staff of the Municipal Standards Division that they have met with Consumers Gas and Toronto Hydro about the discontinuation of the vital services program in the former City of Toronto. They have been informed that the utilities will institute their normal collection process which includes a policy of not cutting in winter if vulnerable people are at risk.

Conclusions:

Should City Council wish to request legislation that would enable the City to adopt a program similar to the vital services program that was in place in the former City of Toronto, Council could instruct staff to make that request. Should City Council wish to request private legislation, Council could instruct the City Solicitor to consult with the Legislative Counsel and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

Contact Name:

Ms. Wendy E. Walberg, Solicitor, 392-8078.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (October 1, 1998) from Councillor Joe Pantalone, Chair, Urban Environment and Development Committee:

The issue of vital services has been the subject of a number of reports to this Committee as well as to the Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes.

There now is general agreement among the staff of Urban and Development Services, Health, and Community and Neighbourhood Services, as well as this Committee and the Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes as to an approach to be taken to address this issue.

The following recommendations reflect that consensus and should be adopted:

(1)that the City of Toronto not enact a Vital Services By-law under the authority of the Tenan tProtection Act, 1997;

(2)that Council establish a working group comprised of representatives of Municipal Standards, Public Health, other staff members as necessary, and relevant utility/fuel suppliers to establish policies in respect to discontinuing service/supply;

(3)that staff monitor these policies in action, and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the success of the working group at the end of the current heating season (September 1998 to June 1999);

(4)that staff report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee incidents where the working group was unable to resolve an issue and, as a result, a vital service was discontinued;

(5)that staff prepare an information sheet with respect to the new vital services process which will provide pertinent information, staff contacts, and emergency telephone numbers for distribution to staff and Members of Council; and

(6)that the Energy Efficiency Office of the City of Toronto assist staff and provide input with regard to vital services issues.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following Motion from Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River:

WHEREAS the City of Toronto needs a mechanism to ensure that tenants are not unduly affected by the refusal of landlords to pay for vital services;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Urban Environment and Development Committee direct

(1) the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services in consultation with the City Solicitor, to draft a Vital Services By-law which:

(a)references the mechanisms to ensure continuing vital services, and full cost recovery of municipal expense incurred in so doing; and

(b)includes a requirement that utility service providers give 30 days' notice to the City prior to service discontinuation for non-payment of account; and

(2)that the City Solicitor submit this By-law to City Council at its October 28, 1998 meeting.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (October 3, 1998) from Councillor Jack Layton, Don River:

Recommendations:

(1)That the City enact a Vital Services By-law that would include the following provisions:

(a)a requirement that utility service providers give 30 days' notice to the City prior to service discontinuation for non-payment of account; and

(b)mechanisms for municipal payment of delinquent utility accounts for residential landlords and full cost recovery for municipal expenses incurred in the administration of the by-law; and

(2)that the necessary staff, including the City Solicitor, report on this by-law and provide a draft by-law to City Council at its October 28, 1998 meeting.

Background:

At its September 24, 1998 meeting, the Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes had before it a report from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services regarding the City's role in vital services. The report recommended that the City not enact a Vital Services By-law. The Council Strategy Committee affirmed this recommendation, although it made four additional recommendations regarding monitoring, reporting and input from the City's Energy Efficiency Office (see Council Strategy Committee report).

My support for the recommendation was based on the staff proposal that a working group be established comprised of representatives from Municipal Standards, Public Health, and relevant utility/fuel providers. Staff had already met with Hydro and Consumers Gas and indicated that we could reasonably expect that an effective working group could be established and that the following key objectives could be met:

-providing the City reasonable notice (30 days) of impending service discontinuation to facilitate early municipal intervention; and

-helping to develop utility -run programs and policies that would ensure most incidences of service discontinuation be avoided.

Subsequent to the September 24, 1998 Council Strategy Committee meeting, my office was contacted by a representative of Consumers Gas and was informed that it was unlikely that the objectives of the working committee could be met. Specifically, Consumers indicated that without municipal payment of utility bills, it would be reluctant to provide 30 days' notice of service discontinuation to the City. Further, the representative of Consumers Gas indicated that they could not provide reasonable assurance that service discontinuation in rental buildings could be avoided this winter.

Because of the position outlined by Consumers Gas, I am no longer confident that staff's recommendation for a working group will be an effective strategy for preventing service discontinuations this winter. I now believe that it is necessary to establish a by-law that would include a requirement that utility service providers give 30-days' notice to the City prior to service discontinuation for non-payment of account. Further, that mechanisms be established for municipal payment of delinquent utility accounts by residential landlords and for cost recovery for all municipal expenses incurred in the administration of the by-law.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (September 28, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendations:

The Council Strategy Committee for People without Homes recommends to the Urban Environment and Development Committee the adoption of the recommendations, as contained in the report (September 22, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services, subject to adding thereto the following new Recommendations Nos. (2) to (5):

(2)that staff participating on the proposed Working Group, which will establish and monitor policies prior to considering the enactment of a Vital Services By-law, report to the Council Strategy Committee for People without Homes, after one year;

(3)that staff bring forward any occurrences of an emergency nature, which could not be resolved in discussions between staff, the utilities, landlords and/or tenants, with regard to the lack of provision of vital services, to the Council Strategy Committee for People without Homes;

(4)staff prepare an information sheet for distribution to other staff and all Members of Council, which will provide pertinent information on the City's new process, staff contacts and emergency phone numbers with regard to Vital Services; and

(5)the Energy Efficiency Office of the City of Toronto also assist staff and provide input with regard to the Vital Services issue.

Background:

The Council Strategy Committee for People without Homes had before it a report (September 22, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services, providing an overview of the issues regarding the discontinuation of vital services in rental residential properties where the landlord who is obligated to pay the supplier of vital services fails to do so.

The Council Strategy Committee for People without Homes also had before it, for information purposes, the following noted reports:

(1)Vital Services in Rental Residential Properties in the City of Toronto (report from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and the City Solicitor);

(2)Information Regarding Vital Services in Rental Residential Properties in the City of Toronto (report from the Commissioner, Urban Planning); and

(3)Health Impacts Related to the Cut-off of Vital Services (report from the Medical Officer of Health).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (October 5, 1998) from the Rooming House Working Group:

The Rooming House Working Group (RHWG) is a committee of City staff (Urban Development Services, Community and Neighbourhood Services), service providers, landlords and tenants which meets regularly to discuss issues and propose solutions to particular problems affecting the rooming house sector. The RHWG also reports to Council and Committees of Council on community concerns and emerging issues in the sector.

At a recent meeting of the RHWG, members of the community raised concern over the issue of vital services. It was felt that tenants, particularly vulnerable rooming house tenants, would be at risk without the existence of a Vital Services By-law. Follow-up meetings of community members and staff were scheduled to review this item and propose recommendations to ensure the interests of tenants are protected with respect to the provision of vital services.

Reports from Urban Development Services and Community and Neighbourhood Services recommend that the City not pass a Vital Services By-law but rather establish a working group and monitor the issue for one year. The Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes supports this recommendation. The community has, however, asked the Rooming House Working Group to bring forward its concerns with this approach. They are: that it appears that a Vital Services By-law could be passed without requiring the City to pay for utility bills where landlords default on payment. Instead, a Vital Services By-law would be beneficial in the following three respects:

(1)it would make it an offence for landlords to discontinue a vital service;

(2)it would give the City the opportunity to enter into a meaningful dialogue with Toronto Hydro and Consumers Gas; and

(3)it would ensure that service cut-offs not be permitted without 30 days' advance notice to the City.

The community urges the city to pass a Vital Services By-law and establish a working group which includes tenant or consumer representation to assess its first year in effect and propose any required amendments; and that the working group determine under what circumstances the City needs to step in to reinstate discontinued services. Further, passing a Vital Services By-law does not necessarily require the City to step in and pay utility bills but gives it the authority to do so.

The Rooming House Working Group recommends that the City re-examine the issue of passing a Vital Services By-law in light of community concerns.

--------

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, also having had before it the following communications:

(i)(October 5, 1998) from Ms. Dianne Urquhart, Community Legal Worker, Scarborough Community Legal Services, in support of the passage of a vital services by-law for the City of Toronto.

(ii)(September 25, 1998) from Dixon Hall Neighbourhood Centre, providing comments with respect to the proposal to replace the "Urgent Hazard Program" with a vital services program and outlining potential impacts such a change would have on the Centre's clients.

The following persons appeared in the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Mr. Howard Tessler, Executive Director, Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations; and filed a written brief with respect thereto;

-Ms. Elinor Mahoney, Parkdale Community Legal Services; and filed a written brief with respect thereto;

-Mr. Matthew Akman, Manager of Municipal Relations; Mr. Dave Morton, Director of Collections; and Mr. Mark Boyce, Legal Counsel, Consumers Gas;

-Mr. Bryan Tutte, Vice-President, Customer Service Toronto Hydro;

-Ms. Virginia Loescher, on behalf of Ms. Barbara Lidster, Toronto; and filed Ms. Lidster's written brief with respect thereto;

-Mr. Steve Cruickshank, East Toronto Community Legal Services Inc.; and filed a written brief with respect thereto;

-Mr. Timothy Maxwell, Community Development Officer, Kensington-Bellwoods Community Legal Services; and filed a written brief with respect thereto;

-Ms. Lavinia Inbar, HIV and AIDS Legal Clinic; and

-Mr. Jim Neff, South Riverdale Community Health Centre; and filed a written brief with respect thereto.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (October 20, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

This report responds to a request from the Urban Environment and Development Committee for a report to accompany a draft vital services by-law which would contain the provisions recommended by the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

It is intended that the vital services by-law will have no financial implications. The Treasurer is preparing a separate report regarding this aspect of the proposed by-law.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of October 5, 1998, the Urban Environment and Development Committee (the "Committee"), requested that I draft a vital services by-law to require the suppliers of vital services to provide the City of Toronto with 30 days notice of a proposed discontinuance of service to a rental unit where a landlord has failed to pay the supplier for the vital service . The Committee requested that I submit the by-law and a report on the content of the by-law directly to Council.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The draft by-law is appended as Appendix "A" to this report. The Tenant Protection Act (the "TPA"), provides the City with the authority to pass a vital services by-law. The TPA defines "vital service" as "fuel, hydro, gas, or hot or cold water". There are cases many where a landlord, rather than a tenant, is required to pay the vital service supplier for a vital service. In those cases, should the landlord fail to pay the supplier's bill, the supply of the vital service to the rented premises could be discontinued. A vital services by-law may prohibit the supplier from discontinuing a vital service unless notice has been given to the City at least 30 days before the vital service is discontinued. The TPA provides that the notice be in writing to the City Clerk. The draft vital services by-law in Appendix "A" would, if enacted, impose this notice obligation on the suppliers of vital services.

The proposed by-law is intended to be combined with several other initiatives. When it requested this report and the draft by-law attached, the Committee also recommended that "Council establish a working group comprised of representatives of Municipal Standards, Public Health, other staff members as necessary, and relevant utility/fuel suppliers to establish policies in respect to discontinuing service/supply." In addition the Committee has recommended that staff monitor the effectiveness of these policies and report back to the Committee at the end of the current heating season. As well, the Committee requested that staff report to the Committee any incidents where the working group was unable to resolve an issue and a vital service was discontinued.

Municipal Standards staff have informed me that existing property standards by-laws (including the former City of Toronto's housing standards provisions in its Municipal Code) require landlords to provide utilities to rental units. It is these by-laws that have been and are currently used to enforce the landlord's obligation to pay utility bills in certain emergency situations.

For example, the Building Code Act provides that, if upon inspection of a property, a property standards officer is satisfied that there is non-conformity with the property standards by-law "to such extent as to pose an immediate danger to the health or safety of any person", the property standards officer can issue an order requiring compliance with the by-law. In addition, the property standards officer may "take any measures necessary to terminate the danger". The order is referred to as an "emergency order" and must be confirmed by a judge, but this can be done after the fact. The judge must also determine whether the amount spent to "terminate the danger" may be recovered. The amount that may be recovered is a lien on the land and is deemed to be municipal real property taxes. This gives the lien priority over every other claim except that of the Crown. The former City of Toronto's "urgent hazards" provisions are in different legislation, but the statutory powers are similar.

Violation of property standards by-laws is also an offence for which individuals and corporations may be prosecuted and fined.

During the 30 day notice period provided for in the draft by-law attached, the working group can review the situation, and assist in resolving it. If necessary, and in the appropriate circumstances, property standards by-laws will be enforced.

Conclusions:

The draft by-law in Appendix "A" is intended to be used in conjunction with the other initiatives described above on a trial basis for the current heating season.

Contact Name:

Wendy Walberg, 392-8078.

APPENDIX "A"

Authority:Urban Environment and Development Committee Report 13(1), October 5, 1998

Intended for first presentation to Council: October 28, 1998

Adopted by Council:

CITY OF TORONTO

Bill No.

DRAFT BY-LAW

To prohibit vital service suppliers from ceasing to provide vital services

without providing thirty days notice to the City Clerk

WHEREAS property standards by-laws in force in the City of Toronto require landlords to provide vital services to rented premises; and

WHEREAS the Tenant Protection Act, 1997, provides that a municipality may pass a by-law requiring a vital service supplier to give the municipality thirty days notice of the intention to discontinue provision of the vital service where the landlord has breached a contract with a supplier for the supply of the vital service; and

WHEREAS, during the thirty day notice period, the City may use other methods to avoid discontinuation of a vital service, including the enforcement of property standards by-laws where appropriate;

The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1.In this by-law the following definitions apply:

(a)"City" means the City of Toronto.

(b)"Commissioner" means the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services.

(c) "Landlord" includes,

(i)the owner or other person permitting occupancy of a rental unit;

(ii)the heirs, assigns, personal representatives and successors in title of a person referred to in clause (i); and

(iii)a person, other than a tenant occupying a rental unit in a residential complex, who is entitled to possession of the residential complex and who attempts to enforce any of the rights of a landlord under the tenancy agreement or the Tenant Protection Act, including the right to collect rent.

(d)"Rental Unit" means any living accommodation used or intended for use as rented residential premises, and includes,

(i)a room in a boarding house, rooming house or lodging house and a unit in a care home; and

(ii)a site for a mobile home or a site on which there is a land lease home used or intended for use as rented residential premises.

(e)"Tenant" includes a person who pays rent in return for the right to occupy a rental unit and includes a tenant's heirs, assigns and personal representatives, but "tenant" does not include a person who has the right to occupy a rental unit by virtue of being,

(i)a co-owner of the residential complex in which the rental unit is located, or

(ii)a shareholder of a corporation that owns the residential complex.

(f)"Vital Service" means fuel, hydro, gas, or hot or cold water.

2.No supplier of a vital service shall cease to provide the vital service to a rental unit unless notice of the intended discontinuance of the vital service has been given in writing to the City Clerk at least thirty (30) days before the supplier ceases to provide the vital service.

3.Despite section 2, the notice of intended discontinuance shall be given only if the vital service is to be discontinued for a rental unit because the landlord has breached a contract with the supplier for the supply of the vital service.

4.The supplier of a vital service shall immediately restore the vital service when directed to do so by the Commissioner. The Commissioner shall issue such a direction when the vital service has been discontinued in a manner that is contrary to section 2 of this by-law.

5.Every person who contravenes or fails to comply with sections 2 or 4 of this by-law is guilty of an offence for each day or part of a day on which the offence occurs or continues.

6.Every director or officer of a corporation that is convicted of an offence who knowingly concurs in the commission of the offence is guilty of an offence.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of October, A.D. 1998.

Mayor City Clerk)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (October 26, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

Purpose:

To respond to a request from the Urban Environment and Development Committee with additional information regarding the cost recovery implications of implementing a vital services by-law for rental residential properties.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no direct funding implications associated with this report.

Recommendation:

That this report be received for information.

Background/History:

At its meeting of October 5, 1998 the Urban Environment and Development Committee requested the "Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to submit a report directly to Council for consideration with this matter on October 28, 1998, on whether the provision of vital services by the City would be fully cost-recoverable".

Comments:

In the City Solicitor's report dated October 20, 1998 (also before Council), a draft vital services by-law is included which would prohibit any supplier of a vital service (fuel, gas, hydro, water) from ceasing to provide that service to a rental residential unit without providing the City Clerk with at least thirty days notice that the service will be terminated. The by-law would ensure that tenants would be protected while at the same time permitting sufficient time for the City to review the specific situation as to whether it represents a real emergency and whether the City should intervene.

The City's intervention could be that of assisting to resolve the situation whereby the vital service continue to be provided or failing that, obtaining an emergency order under the provisions of the Building Code Act. The Building Code Act provides, where inspection of a property reveals an immediate danger to the health and safety of a person, that the municipality can obtain an emergency order to take any measures to terminate the danger. The order must be confirmed by a judge, who will also determine whether the amount spent to terminate the danger may be recovered. The amount is recovered as a lien on the land and is deemed to be municipal real property taxes. These amounts are added as charges to the Collector's Roll. The City then holds priority status over all other claims except that of the Crown.

Municipal Standards staff of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department have informed me that there would be no additional staffing requirements to carry out the proposed by-law. In instances where the City determined that the utility must be paid for the vital service to be continued, the costs would be recovered through the charge being added to the tax account for the property and be collected as municipal property taxes.

Conclusion:

The implementation of a vital services by-law for rental residential properties in Toronto would not result in increased staffing levels in the Municipal Standards Division of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department. It would not result in a financial impact to the City as any cost incurred to continue a vital service for a residential unit would be deemed as municipal property tax against the property for which the City has first priority for collection.

Contact Name:

Paul Wealleans

Phone: 397-4708; Fax: 392-3649.)

2

School Facility Review City-Wide.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, amended this Clause:

(A)in accordance with the recommendations of the Economic Development Committee embodied in the communication dated October 21, 1998, from the City Clerk, wherein it is recommended that the recommendations of the Urban Environment and Development Committee be amended as follows:

(1)Recommendation (C) be amended to include the Toronto French School Boards in the joint meeting, so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(C)direct that an emergency joint meeting be convened between City Council, the Toronto District School Board, the Toronto Catholic District School Board and the French School Boards with respect to this matter;"; and

(2)Recommendation (D)(a) be amended by adding thereto the words "or those that could be converted to much needed community uses", so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(D)request the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(a)in developing the plan for school facilities referred to in Recommendation No.(1), embodied in the report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to consider a system of incentives for retaining lands and space that deliver important community programs and amenities or those that could be converted to much needed community uses;"; and

(B)by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(1)the Mayor and Members of Council express to the Province of Ontario deep concern and dismay with respect to the Provincial government's education funding policy and its impact on our community;

(2)City Council condemn the wanton and reckless attack on the City of Toronto's precious educational resources unleashed by the Provincial educational funding policies;

(3)City Council call on all citizens and organizations in the City of Toronto to inform themselves fully on the magnitude of the school closing crisis and to join with the City in defending the school system in whatever ways they can;

(4)the City of Toronto request the assistance of the federal government to document the funds that have been spent on schools through their infrastructure program;

(5)the Federal government be requested to join with the City of Toronto in order to recover, through the Court system, the funds spent by the City, the Federal government and the public;

(6)'WHEREAS the Progressive Conservative party pledged during the last Provincial election campaign that, if elected, their government would make no cuts to education funding; and

WHEREAS the new Provincial school funding formula, based on square feet per student, includes hallways, gymnasiums, washrooms, libraries and boiler rooms in the square footage calculations, has, in fact, resulted in cuts to education funding that will force the closure of 130 schools by the Toronto District School Board and at least 30 schools by the Toronto Catholic District School Board, and will have a negative impact on the quality of education in the schools that remain open; and

WHEREAS this square footage formula of 100 square feet for elementary students and 130 square feet for secondary students, has no educational rationale and is an unacceptable method for determining educational funding to communities in the Province; and

WHEREAS the allocation of office space for MPPs is, on average, 900 square feet, but has no relation to the funding provided to the MPP to operate their legislative office;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT City Council request that the Toronto Board of Education declare that it cannot facilitate the closings of schools for the Harris government, and rejects any educational funding formula based on square footage which will result in the closing of schools throughout the City;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT City Council develop a joint strategy with the School Tax Sub-Committee to co-ordinate opposition to the new Provincial funding formula and explore alternative funding mechanisms;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to all Toronto area MPPs.';

(7)'WHEREAS the City of Toronto faces crippling school closures that will damage community services as well as education; and

WHEREAS the GTA municipalities also face school closures that undermine the fabric of their community services; and

WHEREAS the Province's rigid funding formula is responsible for forcing boards to close schools; and

WHEREAS the Provincial Government has shown itself to be deaf to the pleading of the City of Toronto, when it acts alone;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT City Council, in tandem with the School Boards, conduct an organized effort to reach out to the School Boards and municipalities in the 905 area to initiate a co-ordinated effort to lobby the Province of Ontario for changes to the funding formula;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Mayor take the lead in this effort;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be directed to take the necessary action to give effect to the foregoing.';

(8)the City of Toronto refuse to participate with the Provincial operation review of child care centres until such time as the Province of Ontario agrees to:

(a)fund the impact of relocation of children as a result of school closures; and

(b)ensure the City of Toronto that no children would lose their child care service as a result of school closures;

(9)the Minister of Community and Social Services be requested to develop an immediate plan to ensure that the same quality and level of child care service is provided for each child who is displaced by the closing of any school in the City of Toronto prior to finalization of the school closure plan;

(10)the Minister of Education be requested to develop a plan that:

(a)guarantees that any student who is displaced by the closing of a City of Toronto school will be provided with the same quality and level of educational learning, including any special education classes, that he or she received in the former school; and

(b)ensures that any immigrant child will receive the same level and continuity of instruction in English as a Second Language (ESL) that he or she would have received in the former school;

(11)the Mayor be requested to convene a summit of all key leaders in the City of Toronto, from all sectors -- including business, the media, social and community organizations, educational sectors (including universities), the labour movement, religious leadership, and all other organizations, and that this summit provide information about the extent of the crisis of school funding and proposed facility closures and solicit the full involvement of the community in developing the City's strategy to oppose the proposals;

(12)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the Mayor's Office, be requested to expeditiously develop a strong and consistent communications campaign to rally public opposition against the mass closings of schools, in an effort to convince the Provincial government to take action to avoid these school closings, and the resulting communications campaign material and information be circulated to Members of Council to assist them in their own proactive efforts in their respective Wards to ensure a consistent and effective communications strategy;

(13)the City of Toronto provide support to the School Board's review by:

(a)notifying all ratepayers/homeowners/Tenant Associations, B.I.A.s, Child Care and Resource Centres and Community Centres of the facts, figures and impact of school closures;

(b)assisting in bringing interested people from the above organizations to the Area Review Committee; and

(c)assisting local Councillors in bringing interested people to public meetings to discuss school closures;

(14)as part of Council's communications campaign to raise awareness of the school closing issue, City Councillors be authorized to use funds from their office budgets and:

(a)erect signs on the City-owned boulevards in front of schools and on private property where the property owner consents, in order to publicize the school closures; and/or

(b)undertake other communications campaigns in order to raise the awareness;

(15)interested Councillors be provided with up to 100 signs each with the words:

'MIKE HARRIS, PLEASE DON'T CLOSE OUR SCHOOL',

and four signs per school designated to close, funds therefor to be provided from the respective Councillor's office budget;

(16)in future, if Councillors have additional strategies related to school closures and its impact, such strategies be forwarded to the School Tax Sub-Committee for the development of a joint strategy with the School Boards, and to the Children and Youth Action Committee for action and information;

(17)the Fire Chief be instructed to meet with the Ontario Fire Marshall in order to provide Council, the School Boards and the Ministry of Education with the maximum person capacity for each school in the City of Toronto;

(18)the Fire Chief be instructed to inform the Ministry of Education and the School Boards that the Fire Code will be strictly enforced and over-crowding in schools will not be permitted;

(19)the City of Toronto Buildings and Inspections Department be instructed to enforce the Building Code with respect to prohibiting over-crowding in schools in the City of Toronto;

(20)every Department, Agency, Board and Commission be requested to:

(a)analyze the impact of the school closures; and

(b)make proposals on how the school closures can be opposed from their jurisdictional perspective;

(21)the City Solicitor, in consultation with the senior management of the City, be requested to assemble a legal team to develop and analyze options to take legal action against the provincial government so as to prevent the proposed dramatic school closures, and the Mayor be requested to call an emergency meeting of Council, if necessary, when this strategy analysis is complete;

(22)the City Solicitor and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to jointly analyze the statements of the Minister of Education concerning his contention that school space need not be closed because space reductions can be achieved through reduction of administrative space, in order to determine the validity of the Minister's statements, and report thereon to Council, through the Urban Environment and Development Committee, such report to include full background information;

(23)the City Solicitor be requested to submit a report to the School Tax Sub-Committee for its meeting to be held on November16, 1998, on any legal avenues open to the City of Toronto to prevent the closing of schools, including:

(a)injunctions against the disposal of facilities in which we have invested;

(b)constitutional challenges on the ability of the Province to usurp the will of taxpayers who funded and built these schools; and

(c)any other avenues deemed to be potentially productive;

(24)the City Solicitor, in consultation with the appropriate City officials, be requested to submit a report to the School Tax Sub-Committee on:

(a)the possibility of the City seeking an injunction in view of the adverse effect on the municipal programs in the schools;

(b)whether the parents of Allenby School and John Wanless School would have cause to seek an injunction because of the domino effect of these closings on the child care programs in which they have invested money;

(c)when it would be appropriate to designate schools in the City of Toronto under the Ontario Heritage Act; and

(d)any other legal tools that may be available to the City of Toronto;

(25)the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be requested to submit a report to the School Tax Sub-Committee for its meeting to be held on November16, 1998, on the financial resources necessary to combat the Province of Ontario's attack on the schools in the City of Toronto and the appropriate source of funds;

(26)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the City Solicitor, be requested to submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on any legal penalties should the School Board Trustees not proceed with the school closings;

(27)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to:

(a)submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee in late November or early December, 1998, on immediate steps that could be taken to protect our neighbourhoods from the impact of school closings and preserve these valuable community resources by restricting, where appropriate, the alternate uses for closed schools to those which are supportive of the local communities; and

(b)submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the impact of the school closures on Community School programs in the former City of Etobicoke area of the City of Toronto;

(28)the following motions be referred to the School Tax Sub-Committee for report thereon:

Moved by Councillor Filion:

'It is further recommended that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be instructed to immediately begin the process to designate publicly-owned school properties as public open space, wherever feasible, or to initiate any other measures needed to preserve community use of school properties and protect neighbourhoods from in appropriate use of closed schools.'

Moved by Councillor Moscoe:

'It is further recommended that:

(1)City Council approach the School Boards to form a joint "Strategy Team" with respect to the proposed school closings;

(2)the City component be chaired by the Mayor or his designate and be comprised of five Members of Council who have previous experience in education administration or were former School Trustees;

(3)the School Boards be requested to name a joint Chair and appoint an equivalent number of School Trustees;

(4)the Strategy Team begin meeting as soon as possible and be given the responsibility of steering the political strategies for dealing with this issue; and

(5)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the displacement that might have to occur at any of the parochial and other schools that are currently leasing space, as a result of the Minister of Education's decision.'

Moved by Councillor Nunziata:

'AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Members of Council who are interested be added to the membership of the School Tax Sub-Committee and that they be identified today and so approved.'; and

(29)the following motion be referred to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services for report thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee:

Moved by Councillor Saundercook:

'It is further recommended that City Council request the School Boards to develop:

(1)a space formula on student population to be applied to the outdoor space of a school yard; and

(2)another formula to determine the appropriate number of students living outside the community school who should be accepted into that school and will have to be bussed in.' ")

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that Council:

(A)adopt the report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, subject to:

(1)amending Recommendation No. (1) by striking out the words "strategic planning initiative" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "plan"; so that the Recommendation now reads as follows:

"(1)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and appropriate City staff be requested to participate in the development of a plan for school facilities with representatives of the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board. The objective of this strategy would be to identify ways to maximize the use of public resources, minimize the impact on local communities and, ultimately, to ensure that the present and future needs of the City's residents are adequately addressed;

(2)adding thereto the following new Recommendation No. (5):

"(5)a copy of this report be forwarded to the Children's Action Committee and the School Tax Sub-Committee; and the School Tax Sub-Committee be requested to submit its recommendations thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee as soon as possible.";

(B)pledge full co-operation with the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board;

(C)direct that an emergency joint meeting be convened between City Council, the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board with respect to this matter;

(D)request the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(a)in developing the plan for school facilities referred to in Recommendation No.(1), embodied in the report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to consider a system of incentives for retaining lands and space that deliver important community programs and amenities;

(b)to ensure that any public meetings held with respect to this matter include the local Councillors; and

(c)to submit to the Urban Environment and Development Committee a list of all school sites located within the City of Toronto, and the zoning designation for each site; and

(E)request the Commissioner of Urban Environment and Development Services, in co-ordination with the Commissioners of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, to catalogue the City's capital investment in all schools and school-related properties throughout Toronto.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:

(1)requested that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(a)distribute to all Members of Council the Toronto District School Board's School Review Area report as soon as it is available in order to permit Members to alert their communities of the specific nature of the problem on a timely basis; and

(b)provide a briefing package to all Members of Council on a Ward-by-Ward basis; and

(2)directed that a copy of the report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be forwarded to the Economic Development Committee for information; and requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to direct the Manager of Policy and Programs, City Planning Division, to make a presentation thereon to the Economic Development Committee:

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

To update members of City Council on the status of the School Boards' review of their existing school facilities and revisions to school closure policies in response to provincial regulation and funding changes.

To seek Council authority to participate in a strategic planning initiative for school facilities with the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board that ensures the best use of public facilities and amenities.

Source of Funds:

There are no funding implications at this time.

Recommendations:

(1)That the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and appropriate City staff be requested to participate in the development of a strategic planning initiative for school facilities with representatives of the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board. The objective of this strategy would be to identify ways to maximize the use of public resources, minimize the impact on local communities and ultimately to ensure that the present and future needs of the City's residents are adequately addressed;

(2)that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and senior staff from the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board request a meeting with representatives of the Ministry of Education and Training to be held as soon as possible, in order to apprise them of the proposed school strategic planning initiative and obtain their support;

(3)that appropriate City staff be instructed to give effect thereto; and

(4)that a copy of this report be forwarded to the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board, for their consideration.

Background:

At its meeting held on May 19, 1998, the Urban Environment and Development Committee adopted a report regarding school planning matters. At that time, I was instructed to prepare a further report on plans to close and/or dispose of school sites declared surplus by the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) and the Toronto Catholic District School Board (TCDSB).

The passage of Bill 160 (the Education Quality Improvement Act) by the provincial legislature set the framework for wide-sweeping changes to educational practices, funding and facility management, to be implemented by local school boards across the Province. Provincial revisions to school capacities and the funding formulae for the operation and maintenance of school facilities leave a considerable amount of school facility space within the City unfunded and designated surplus to requirements. As a result of these anticipated budget shortfalls, school boards are faced with the prospect of consolidating a number of school facilities in order to reflect these new provincial standards and funding levels.

In the spring of this year, the TDSB indicated that approximately 11 million square feet may be divested in order to bring expenditures in line with anticipated levels of provincial funding. The TCDSB has approximately 600,000 square feet of unfunded facility space across the system. The loss of these important community resources will have a significant impact on residents' access to community service programs and open space, as well as the future role of schools as neighbourhood hubs.

Many aspects of the facility review process and its impacts are still unknown; however, a preliminary overview of the general implications and City interests have been prepared in co-operation with staff from the Children's Services, Public Health and Recreation Divisions.

Discussion:

(1)Ministry of Education and Training Requirements for School Consolidations:

As part of the new responsibilities for education conferred to the Province through Bill 160, the Ministry of Education and Training (MET) has reviewed the capacities for each school facility within the City. The new provincially determined capacities are not yet available, but in the interim the MET has developed square footage entitlements for each Board so that preliminary estimates of surplus space can be determined. These interim figures are based on a gross space requirement of 130 square feet per secondary student and 100 square feet per elementary student.

School Board officials are advocating for provincial recognition of specific facility elements typical in more recently constructed schools, such as libraries, lunchrooms, gymnasiums, science labs, etc. within the more detailed capacities yet to be released. Capacities also need to reflect the small sites where many urban schools are situated, resulting in inadequate playing fields and playgrounds within many of the City's schools. The City's aging school infrastructure, coupled with the realities of securing school sites within urban settings, has resulted in inequitable access to these important facility components (and the learning opportunities they offer) that are available to students in newer communities throughout the Province.

The MET has established implementation time lines with respect to the consolidation of surplus capital assets which local boards must comply with. School Boards must have:

-adopted a pupil accommodation review policy by September 30, 1998;

-completed the review and the public consultation process by December 31, 1998; and

-closed surplus schools by June 30, 1999.

Once these time lines have expired, system-wide capacities will be set. School Boards with excess capacity anywhere within their jurisdiction will not be eligible to receive funding for new school construction in the future, either through the allocation of provincial grants or through the passage of Education Development Charges by-laws. The legislation appears to apply this penalty in perpetuity, thereby creating a strong incentive for local boards to comply.

(2)Pupil Accommodation Review Policies:

The School Boards within the City have taken somewhat different approaches to the issue of school closures due mainly to the amalgamation process the public board is undergoing and the difference in the estimated amount of surplus space each has to divest. Each of the City's boards of education have adopted pupil accommodation review policies (formerly referred to as school closure policies), which establish criteria for determining if a facility warrants review and a community consultation process. They are summarized below.

(a)Toronto Catholic District School Board:

The TCDSB has comparatively less surplus space to rationalize, and has therefore been able to develop its review policies and identify 29 elementary schools throughout the City which meet two out of the three criteria approved by the Board of Trustees. The map appended to this report shows the location of each site and Appendix B provides five-year pupil projections for each of the review schools. A school will be reviewed if:

-it had fewer than 200 students enrolled on March 31, 1998;

-the average daily enrolment was 50 percent or less than the Ministry approved capacities for each facility as of March 1, 1998; and/or

-the facility is leased and there are under-utilized facilities nearby.

The public consultation set out in the TCDSB report requires each individual school to undertake its own assessment process and report its findings to Board staff by November 15, 1998. At the same time, Board staff are attempting to undertake a strategic review of their facilities, with a view to submitting a report to the Board of Trustees' meeting in December 1998 regarding the results of both processes and final recommendations regarding the consolidation and ultimate disposition of its surplus assets. This ambitious time line meets the Ministry's implementation framework.

However, the provincial funding formula allows for additional secondary school space within the TCDSB, which the Board will be seeking in order to redress this shortage.

(b)Toronto District School Board:

The TDSB must undertake a much more comprehensive review process in light of the number of potential school closures and the anticipated impact on the communities affected. The review policy reiterates a commitment to providing educational programs as close as possible to where pupils live, wherever feasible. In order to achieve this objective, review areas which reflect existing geographic communities will be defined and all schools falling within these areas will be reviewed. The ability of each facility to meet pupil accommodation requirements will be evaluated on the basis of student enrolment patterns and projections, transportation issues, the age and condition of the building, operating costs and community usage.

Board staff are preparing a report for late October that will highlight "priority" service review areas. Staff anticipate that the community consultation process and the need to develop a major strategic response will result in their reports on potential closures coming forward in the spring of 1999.

(3)Implications for City Services:

In an effort to maximize public resources, a number of the former municipalities delivered programs within local school facilities, and funded capital improvements to these facilities for the use of the broader community. The closure of school facilities will have a significant impact on the ability to access locally delivered services and public amenities for many City residents.

(a)Municipally Funded and Delivered Services:

School closures will undoubtedly affect the delivery of municipal recreation and public health programs, as well as parent-child drop-in and licensed daycare programs operated by community agencies. All of these community uses have been factored into each Boards' review policy as one of the matters that must be considered. A preliminary examination of the extent of existing municipal interests in the sites identified for review by the TCDSB has been provided in Appendix A.

In many instances, programs are offered after school hours and would not require exclusive use of space or capital improvements if the programs were forced to re-locate to another school within the neighbourhood. In other cases, such as licensed daycare, extensive capital improvements were required to locate the program within the host school, and would require additional expenditures if the program were to be re-located. Many of the current program delivery issues are being dealt with in the context of the Mutual Services Master Agreement process being undertaken by the Chief Financial Officer and representatives of the service-related Departments. All efforts are being made to ensure that the school review process and the development of appropriate space use agreements between the City and the Boards proceed in a collaborative fashion.

(b)Parks and Open Space:

School yards are an important component of open space systems within mature urban environments where available land for these purposes is scarce and costly. A number of the former municipalities encouraged the co-location of schools and parks within Official Plans and other municipal policies in order to maximize the use of school sites and increase children's access to high quality, multi-functional outdoor play space. Conversely, boards of education have been issued long-term permits allowing them daytime usage of a number of local parks as a means of enlarging school playgrounds and providing more varied outdoor activities. The natural linkage of these public amenities occurs throughout the new City, and requires decision-makers to take a more holistic view of the changes being brought about by Bill 160.

(c)Land Use:

The Official Plan and zoning designations for each of the Catholic school sites identified for review are outlined in the land use descriptions contained within Appendix C of this report. If the other public bodies identified for first right of refusal do not exercise their option to purchase surplus sites, the Ontario Realty Corporation will be authorized to sell them to private sector interests. In instances where the approved land use permissions contemplate uses beyond school facilities, the majority of sites permit low density residential development, in keeping with the surrounding neighbourhoods.

As a means of gaining an understanding of future population growth, information about development applications in the vicinity of the review schools has also been compiled. There is the potential for an additional 3,878 residential units in the areas surrounding these sites. These new developments, along with any residential intensification which may occur as a result of the redevelopment of surplus school sites, must be factored into any consideration of future school facility needs.

(4)Joint Strategic Planning Initiative:

The magnitude of the amount of unfunded school facility space, the important role that schools play in the delivery of local services and the difficulty of acquiring appropriate sites in mature urban settings for future educational needs, requires a broader planning initiative. In discussions with staff from the respective school boards, it has become clear that the public interest in these sites extends well beyond traditional areas of education services, to encompass a number of local community objectives.

Staff from Urban Planning and Development Services (UPDS) have met with School Board staff regarding a number of issues in the past that have resulted in information-sharing, collaboration and issue resolution. City staff can play a critical role in the current process. Staff from UPDS can make a strategic contribution to understanding the present and future characteristics of the communities across the City that may be impacted by school closures. The work being undertaken within the Department on development charges, the Official Plan and the identification of vulnerable communities across the City will be useful in assisting School Trustees to develop a strategic planning initiative for school facilities.

In order to ensure that the public assets recommended for retention best meet the needs of the City's residents, staff from the City, TDSB and TCDSB have identified a need to undertake:

-a comprehensive assessment of facility requirements and existing assets;

-an inventory of cross-jurisdictional investment within the school facilities under review;

-identification of appropriate geographic areas of study and the preparation of community profiles for each;

-an estimation of the impact on residents' access to programs and local amenities in the context of school closures;

-identification of areas likely to experience residential intensification and the estimated facility requirements to meet residential growth; and

-the preparation of recommendations to City Council and the Boards of Trustees for both School Boards, for their consideration.

A planning initiative of this scope will require the agreement of the Ministry of Education and Training to revise the implementation time lines, in order for the results of the strategic plan to be used to their fullest extent. I am therefore proposing that a meeting be convened between appropriate senior staff to discuss the nature of the proposal and the associated time lines.

Conclusions:

The implications of Bill 160 for City of Toronto residents are significant in their magnitude and scope, and it is critical that decision-makers at all levels of government understand and respect the unique relationships between social infrastructure and the broader community in which it is located.

City staff can make a valuable contribution toward strengthening the case for City residents' access to the kinds of educational facilities that exist in other parts of the Province. The strategic planning initiative being proposed is an important first step.

Contact Name:

Ms. Ann-Marie Nasr, City Hall Office, 392-0402.

________

Ms. Ann-Marie Nasr, Manager, Policy and Programs, City Planning Division, Urban Planning and Development Services Department, made an overhead presentation to the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(A copy of the map, which was appended to the foregoing report, has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following transmittal letter (October 21, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendations:

The Economic Development Committee, at its meeting on October 19, 1998, recommended the adoption of Recommendations (A)(3) and (A)(4)(a) of the Urban Environment and Development Committee as contained in the report (October 8, 1998) from the City Clerk, subject to:

(1)Recommendation (A)(3) being amended to include the Toronto French School Boards in the emergency joint meeting, so as to read:

"(A)(3)direct that an emergency joint meeting be convened between City Council, the Toronto District School Board, the Toronto Catholic District School Board and the French School Boards with respect to this matter;"

(2)adding to the end of Recommendation (A)(4)(a) the words:

"or those that could be converted to much needed community uses."

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the appropriate City officials to report to the School Tax Sub-Committee:

(1)with a view of the portfolio of the school sites declared surplus to determine the impact of purchasing such sites for community use;

(2)on the potential costs of enhanced transportation services as the result of these school closures.

Background:

The Economic Development Committee had before it a report (October 8, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding to the Economic Development Committee the action taken by the Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, during consideration of a report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, entitled "School Facility Reviews, City-Wide", which:

(1)directed that a copy of the aforementioned report be forwarded to the Economic Development Committee for information; and

(2)requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to direct the Manager of Policy and Programs, City Planning Division, to make a presentation thereon to the Economic Development Committee.

The Committee also had before it a further report (October 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism recommending that it be received for information.

Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River, appeared before the Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

This report relates to Clause No. 2 of Report No. 12 of the Urban Environment and Development Committee which is being considered by Council on October 28, 1998.

(Transmittal letter dated October 8, 1998 addressed

to the Economic Development Committee

from the City Clerk)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, during consideration of a report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, entitled "School Facility Reviews, City-Wide":

(1)directed that a copy of the aforementioned report be forwarded to the Economic Development Committee for information; and

(2)requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to direct the Manager of Policy and Programs, City Planning Division, to make a presentation thereon to the Economic Development Committee.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of the EconomicDevelopment Committee, having:

(A)recommended that Council:

(1)adopt the aforementioned report, subject to:

(a)amending Recommendation No. (1) by striking out the words "strategic planning initiative" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "plan"; so that the Recommendation now reads as follows:

"(1)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and appropriate City staff be requested to participate in the development of a plan for school facilities with representatives of the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board. The objective of this strategy would be to identify ways to maximize the use of public resources, minimize the impact on local communities and, ultimately, to ensure that the present and future needs of the City's residents are adequately addressed;

(b)adding thereto the following new Recommendation No. (5):

"(5)a copy of this report be forwarded to the Children's Action Committee and the Schools Tax Sub-Committee; and the School Tax Sub-Committee be requested to submit its recommendations thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee as soon as possible.";

(2)pledge full co-operation with the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board;

(3)direct that an emergency joint meeting be convened between City Council, the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board with respect to this matter;

(4)request the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(a)in developing the plan for school facilities referred to in Recommendation No. (1), embodied in the report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to consider a system of incentives for retaining lands and space that deliver important community programs and amenities;

(b)to ensure that any public meetings held with respect to this matter include the local Councillors; and

(c)to submit to the Urban Environment and Development Committee a list of all school sites located within the City of Toronto, and the zoning designation for each site; and

(5)request the Commissioner of Urban Environment and Development Services, in co-ordination with the Commissioners of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, to catalogue the City's capital investment in all schools and school-related properties throughout Toronto;

(B)requested that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(1)distribute to all Members of Council the Toronto District School Board's School Review Area report as soon as it is available in order to permit Members to alert their communities of the specific nature of the problem on a timely basis; and

(2)provide a briefing package to all Members of Council on a Ward-by-Ward basis;

Background:

The Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, had before it the attached report (September 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, entitled "School Facility Reviews, City-Wide".

Ms. Ann-Marie Nasr, Manager, Policy and Programs, City Planning Division, Urban Planning and Development Services Department, made an overhead presentation to the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(Report dated October 16, 1998 addressed

to the Economic Development Committee from

the Commissioner, Economic Development Culture and Tourism)

Purpose:

To provide members of the Economic Development Committee with a preliminary report on the potential impact on parks and recreation services brought about by possible school closures in the City of Toronto.

Source of Funds:

There are no funding implications at this time.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information purposes.

Background:

The Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, had before it a report from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services entitled "School Facility Reviews, City-Wide". That report contained input from the Parks and Recreation Division of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism on this matter. This report expands on that impact and outlines areas where further research and analysis is required.

The UEDC report of October 5, 1998 details the background and changes in funding for the operation and maintenance of school facilities and a subsequent summary has also been provided to all Members of Council.

Discussion of Impact:

Department Recreation Programming:

Toronto Catholic District School Board

Twenty-nine TCDSB schools have been identified for review. The Department currently operates recreation programs in eleven of these facilities. All of these schools and other preliminary findings are outlined in an expanded Appendix I. Although statistics are not available at this time, there will be a definite impact on the number of recreation opportunities available. It is evident that any closure would impact the Department in a number of ways including:

• the loss of indoor space requiring the termination of recreation programs;

• the loss of outdoor facilities including playgrounds and sports fields.

The Department intends to embark immediately on a detailed assessment of the programming impact at each of the eleven TCDSB sites and explore the opportunities for possible alternate locations within the immediate areas of the proposed closures.

Toronto District School Board

The TDSB, in light of some 11 million square feet of surplus space, must undertake a more comprehensive review in order the determine the location and number of potential school closures. Identification of "priority" review areas is not anticipated until mid November 1998 and specific closures until spring 1999.

Department staff have been involved in discussions with TDSB officials regarding current community and recreational use of their schools. The Department utilizes a significant number of TDSB facilities offering hundreds of programs to tens of thousands of residents annually. The Department envisions that the potential closure of TDSB facilities will have a very significant impact on recreation provision in the City.

Once specific TDSB school sites have been determined, the Department intends to embark on a detailed assessment of the recreational programming impact.

Capital Investments:

In a number of cases with both Boards, the Department has invested capital dollars to develop or enhance school sites for community use. In many cases, this has resulted in the development of shared use agreements or other arrangements which stipulate City and community access details.

As directed through the Urban Environment and Development Committee, the Department has begun to examine the details of all such capital investments for a subsequent report.

Schools As Open Space:

The potential closing of the schools and the loss of the associated open space will affect the level of parks and recreation facilities and opportunities in the City. The loss of these outdoor spaces will require assessment from a number of perspectives, such as:

(1)the increased demand placed on other parks and recreation facilities;

(2)the impact of the development of the sites as residential units;

(3)the loss of access points and gateways from the schools to other pedestrian linkage systems or park and open space networks;

(4)the capacity of the school properties to act as buffer and protective border to those environmentally sensitive areas which abut school sites; and

(5)the loss of school sites which may have been locations for school and community "greening" efforts.

To assist in this work, the respective Boards of Education will be requested to provide any relevant information they have on the subject properties. Specifically, we require information in an electronic format on the area of the site, the "footprint" of the building(s), indoor and outdoor recreation facilities, specifics of maintenance arrangements with the City, if any, and confirmation of any Capital expenditures by the City and what the funds were spent on. Mapping of this data in Geographic Information System (GIS) format along with existing recreation facilities and surrounding open space, will provide a visual and statistical reference to assist in the impact analysis.

Notwithstanding the technical assessments which are necessary as part of the evaluation process, the overall role each site plays in the different communities requires consideration. In some instances the school is a focal point for community activities, often as a result of the needs or perceptions of the varied community groups that comprise Toronto's many communities.

Another aspect of the review which may warrant consideration early in the process is an assessment of the actual fiscal value of the school assets under consideration. In light of what may potentially be changes of ownership in substantial land parcels, it is suggested that Real Estate Services be required to participate in this study.

Work will begin immediately on assembling and analyzing data on the identified TCDSB sites, with the analysis expanded to include the TDSB sites once they confirm their review areas.

Conclusions:

The impact of Bill 160 (Education Quality Improvement Act) on parks and recreation services to residents of the City of Toronto are envisioned to be very significant. Staff of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department will lend their full support to the planning initiatives concerning this matter led by the Urban Planning and Development Services Department.

Contact Name:

Gary W. Stoner

Director of Parks and Recreation - East District

Telephone: 396-4490 Fax: 396-5399

Frank Kershaw

Director of Policy & Development

Telephone: 392-8199Fax: 392-3355.)

(A copy of each of the following items is on file in the office of the City Clerk:

(1)report dated September 17, 1998 from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, entitled "School Facility Reviews, City-Wide," referred to in the foregoing transmittal letter dated October 8, 1998 from the City Clerk; and

(2)Appendix "A", referred to in the report dated October 16, 1998 from the Commissioner of Economic Development and Tourism, headed "Toronto Catholic District School Board Department Programs in Schools Identified for Review - A Preliminary Assessment.")

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a copy of the presentation made by the Commissioner, Urban Planning and Development Services, headed "Toronto District School Board's Candidates for School Closures," and background information from the Toronto District School Board, headed "School Closures--A Response to the Provincial Government's Student-Focused Funding Model", dated October 1998.)

(Councillor Moscoe, at the meeting of City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause, insofar as it pertains to the amendments put forward by Members of Council pertaining to signs, in that he is in the business of manufacturing and selling election signs to municipal candidates.)

3

Processing of Requests and Criteria

for "Intervenor Funding".

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends:

(A)the adoption of the following joint report (September 17, 1998) from the City Solicitor, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, viz:

"It is recommended that:

(1)any requests from community groups for funding to participate in Ontario Municipal Board hearings be forwarded to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services;

(2)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be directed to prepare a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on each request, recommending how Council should respond to the request for funding; and

(3)Council not adopt criteria for considering requests from community groups for participation in Ontario Municipal Board hearings.";

(B)that Council select Policy Option (1), viz:

"(1)Do not support intervenor funding but continue on a case-by-case basis."; and

(C)that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be directed to monitor any requests for intervenor funding over a one-year period, and to submit a report thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee:

Purpose:

This report responds to the Urban Environment and Development Committee's request for a joint report from the City Solicitor and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer on the criteria for extending "intervenor funding" to community groups. It also responds to the Committee's request for a report from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services on whether it is appropriate for applications by community groups for intervenor funding to be reviewed by a City Committee; and, if so, to identify the Committee to conduct the review.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

If Council adopts criteria for use in determining whether to provide funds to community groups to be used for participation in Ontario Municipal Board hearings, Council will essentially have established a new grant program. The program would require ongoing funding and an addition to the budget. Establishing such a program would be inconsistent with the Council decision that grants be sustained at 1997 levels and that there shall be no new grant programs in 1998, pending the development of the City's future grants policy. Once a program has been established, all community groups will have the same access to these grants. Even if Council does not adopt criteria, ongoing "intervenor funding" would have major unbudgeted implications.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)any requests from community groups for funding to participate in Ontario Municipal Board hearings be forwarded to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services;

(2)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be directed to prepare a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on each request, recommending how Council should respond to the request for funding; and

(3)Council not adopt criteria for considering requests from community groups for participation in Ontario Municipal Board hearings.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of July 13, 1998, the Urban Environment and Development Committee had before it a report from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services regarding "Intervenor Funding for Community Groups at Ontario Municipal Board Hearings". The report recommended that "Council not support intervenor funding but continue to make decisions on requests on a case-by-case basis, evaluating at the time of the request the availability of funds and whether other dispute resolution methods could be used to achieve the interests of the City of Toronto". The Committee referred the report to both the City Solicitor and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer requesting this joint report. The Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services was requested to provide a further report to address the question of whether it is appropriate for applications by community groups for intervenor funding to be considered by a City Committee; and, if so, to identify the Committee.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

(A)Circumstances in which Intervenor Funding would be Used:

This report discusses the use of criteria to determine whether to grant funds to community groups for participation in Ontario Municipal Board hearings. (It does not address either "participant funding" which generally relates to the earlier stages of a planning process or hearings before other tribunals.) Funding could be requested in a number of scenarios:

(a)to assist a community group in opposing the City at an OMB hearing (which was often the case when funds were provided under the Intervenor Funding Project Act);

(b)to assist a community group in participating in a hearing where the City's interest overlaps with that of the community group but where the City is not a party; or

(c)the same facts as (b), except that the City is a party.

In (a), City Council will have already instructed the City Solicitor to take a specified position at the Ontario Municipal Board on behalf of Council. Council will then be asked to provide the community group with money to use in opposing the City's position. It is difficult to envision circumstances in which Council will wish to do this.

In addition, Council's power to make grants, which is contained in the Municipal Act, is qualified by the requirement that the grant be "for any purpose that, in the opinion of the council, is in the interests of the municipality." It is presumed that a Council decision to pass a zoning by-law, adopt an official plan amendment or instruct the City Solicitor to participate in an Ontario Municipal Board hearing is "in the interests of the municipality". Before granting funds to a community group to oppose the City's position at the Ontario Municipal Board, Council would have to determine that the grant was also "in the interests of the municipality". Circumstances in which this determination could also be made may be rare.

In (b), instead of providing funds to the community group, Council could instruct the City Solicitor to request party or participant status for the City at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing. The City Solicitor could be instructed to participate in the hearing representing the City's interests. In most cases, the City's own planners could work with the City Solicitor. In some cases it might be necessary to provide funds for outside planners to be hired. While the City Solicitor would be representing the City and not the community group, the overlap between the City's interests and the group's interests would mean that, indirectly, Council would be providing support to the community group. This could be likened to a grant "inkind" and happens frequently, particularly with Committee of Adjustment matters. In these cases, the instructions to the City Solicitor are often triggered by a request from a community group.

In (c), the City would already be indirectly supporting the community group's position through the City's own participation.

It should be noted that the Ontario Municipal Board often schedules an evening hearing date for the purpose of receiving input from interested members of the public. The cases in which Council may wish to provide funding to community groups for participation in OMB hearings may be very rare.

(B)Policy Options Regarding Intervenor Funding:

The June 26, 1998 report of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services sets out the following three policy options for City Council:

(1)Do not support intervenor funding but continue on a case-by-case basis.

(2)Continue case-by-case but adopt a formal policy.

(3)Establish a formal policy and grants program.

In this report we recommend that you choose option (1) but not adopt criteria for assessing the funding requests. If option (1) is chosen, criteria may or may not be used; if option (2) is chosen, criteria would be useful; and if option (3) is chosen, criteria would be required.

If option (1) is chosen, as the Commissioner recommends, criteria could, but need not be, adopted. There would be some risk in adopting criteria because criteria could encourage applicants. If there are adopted criteria, any applications should be assessed against them. The use of criteria to assess applications for funding becomes a grants program which would require ongoing funding and an addition to the budget. Should Council adopt a policy of not funding community group participation in OMB hearings, Council may still decide to provide funding to community groups in exceptional cases. There is no need to adopt criteria for identifying the exceptional cases.

(C)The Criteria to be Used:

Section 7 of the Intervenor Funding Project Act (the "IFPA"), which has been repealed, sets out the criteria that were used under that statute to determine which applicants that had been granted intervenor status would receive funds. Section 7 is set out in Appendix "A" to this report. The same criteria were also set out in Appendix "A" to the Commissioner's report of June 26, 1998.

It should be understood that the criteria included in s. 7 to the IFPA were not applied to Ontario Municipal Board hearings. The IFPA applied only to hearings before the Ontario Energy Board, the Environmental Assessment Board or a joint board established under the Consolidated Hearings Act. While a joint board could include the Ontario Municipal Board, a joint board would be the only situation in which an OMB matter could have been covered by the IFPA.

In 1996 when the IFPA was repealed, the Environmental Assessment Act was amended to include a requirement for public participation in the process of preparing an Environmental Assessment. Unlike the Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act had not previously contained a public consultation requirement.

The Planning Act requires that at least one public meeting be held in respect of proposed official plans, zoning by-laws and amendments to these documents. It also requires that notice of the public meetings be given. In addition, it requires that any person who attends the meeting should be given the opportunity to make representations in respect of the proposed official plan or zoning by-law or amendment. For official plans and official plan amendments, an opportunity to make written submissions is also required by statute. In addition to the public participation required by statute, the City's Planning Division engages in extensive public consultation with respect to these proposed planning documents. The public, therefore, already has several opportunities to participate in the planning process.

A few additional points are worth noting about the IFPA criteria. First, the criteria were used to assess favourably requests from groups adverse in interest to the proponent of an undertaking. The legislation allowed the Board to impose a funding obligation on a proponent of an undertaking. It may be that City Council does not wish to impose a similar obligation upon itself, particularly since public input is already part of the planning process. Second, the funding application was assessed by a body without an interest in the proceedings, since the criteria were designed to apply equally to those whose interests were consistent with and those whose interests were adverse to the proponent's. Third, it would be rare for the criteria in s. 7(1) to be met without the City being involved in the hearing, unless the City had no interest in the subject matter. Where the City has no interest in the subject matter, it is unlikely that there could be a persuasive argument in favour of City Council providing funding to a community group, that could meet the Municipal Act test.

(D)Using Intervenor Funding Criteria.

The criteria set out in Appendix "A" from s. 7 of the IFPA represent valid considerations and include elements common to intervenor funding programs. In general, the considerations include whether the applicant has an ascertainable interest that should be represented at the hearing and requires separate representation; whether the applicant requires financial assistance to participate and has a proposal that demonstrates how the money will be used; and whether the applicant has a record of commitment to the issues. In addition, it is suggested that any grants should be to a community group that intends to take a position at the OMB which is consistent with the interests of the City.

To apply these criteria, Council would require an application form, an assessment of the application and a process for reporting that assessment. In addition, it would be wise to have an agreement with the recipient to ensure, among other things, that funds were spent for the stated purpose. Under the IFPA, funds were only awarded after the applicant had been granted intervenor status at the hearing.

Any system like the one described above would be an additional grant program. While the Urban Environment and Development Committee is the appropriate Committee to review and recommend the policy and the structure of the program, the Municipal Grants Review Committee would be the appropriate Committee to consider applications. This would require additional staff time to co-ordinate the process and to prepare reports about the applications. Establishing a grant program would be contrary to the Council decision to sustain grants at 1997 levels and not to adopt any new grant programs. Any new grant program for "intervenor funding" would require ongoing funding and an addition to the budget.

(E)The Process for Considering Funding Requests Should

Council Choose Not to Support "Intervenor Funding":

Should Council decide not to support "intervenor funding", there would be no grant program and no amount budgeted for such funding. Council could still consider requests on a case-by-case basis, and, in exceptional cases, may decide to provide some funding. Any requests granted would have to be funded by the Council Contingency fund.

Community groups will usually ask one or more City Councillor to champion their request for funding. In the absence of a formal grant program, any requests should be submitted to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services for the preparation of a report to the next Urban Environment and Development Committee meeting. The report would recommend the manner in which City Council should respond to the request. Council may attach suitable conditions to any grant of funds. This best ensures that Council makes each grant decision based on its merits and budget implications and can consider the alternative dispute resolution techniques available at the time.

The funding requests should be forwarded to Community Councils for information, but Community Councils should not consider these funding requests. The controversy prompting the request may be a local planning issue, but all "intervenor funding" requests are of "city-wide interest". The requests also relate to the development of consistent administrative and budgetary practices.

In the alternative, should Council decide to adopt criteria and create a grant program, all applications would have to be assessed against the criteria and considered by the Municipal Grants Review Committee rather than the Urban Environment and Development Committee. It is anticipated that this process would result in more applications and more funding granted. In addition, it would require that amounts be budgeted for the grants.

Conclusions:

Should Council wish to adopt criteria for assessing intervenor funding requests, Council will need to establish a grants program, and refer this matter to the Budget Committee for consideration. Should Council decide not to support "intervenor funding", requests may still be considered, and, in exceptional cases, Council may decide to provide funds. Criteria should not be adopted, as this would encourage applications and lead to the creation of a grant program. Any requests should be referred to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services for the preparation of a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee. The report should recommend the manner in which Council could respond to the request.

Contact Names:

Ms. Wendy Walberg, 392-8078.

Ms. Marie McCutcheon, 392-0437.

Ms. Gail Johnson, 392-1299.

--------

Appendix "A"

Intervenor Funding Project Act

(repealed in 1996; s. 7 set out below with bolding added to the text)

7. (1) Intervenor funding may be awarded in relation to issues,

(a) which, in the opinion of the funding panel, affect a significant segment of the public; and

(b) which, in the opinion of the funding panel, affect the public interest and not just private interests.

(2) In deciding whether to award intervenor funding to an intervenor, the funding panel shall consider whether,

(a) the intervenor represents a clearly ascertainable interest that should be represented at the hearing;

(b) separate and adequate representation of the interest would assist the board and contribute substantially to the hearing;

(c) the intervenor does not have sufficient financial resources to enable it to adequately represent the interest;

(d) the intervenor has made reasonable efforts to raise funding from other sources;

(e) the intervenor has an established record of concern for and commitment to the interest;

(f) the intervenor has attempted to bring related interests of which it was aware into an umbrella group to represent the related interests at the hearing;

(g) the intervenor has a clear proposal for the use of any funds which might be awarded; and

(h) the intervenor has appropriate financial controls to ensure that the funds, if awarded, are spent for the purposes of the award.

4

Cash Payment-in-Lieu of Parking

Related to Development Applications.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that, until such time as the joint report on consolidated policies and practices for the new City with respect to cash payment-in-lieu of parking related to development applications, has been received, the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to ensure that the current practices outlined in the joint report dated September 10, 1998, as embodied in the Clause, are being followed in the former Area Municipalities.")

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends:

(1)the adoption of the following joint report (September 10, 1998) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, subject to amending the Recommendation by adding the words "and the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission" after the words "Urban Planning and Development Services"; so that the Recommendation now reads as follows:

"That the Commissioners of Works and Emergency Services and Urban Planning and Development Services, and the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, be requested to report jointly, at the appropriate time, to the Urban Environment and Development Committee recommending consolidated policies and practices for the new City with respect to cash payment-in-lieu of parking related to development applications."; and

(2)that the Commissioners of Works and Emergency Services and Urban Planning and Development Services, and the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, in developing the aforementioned consolidated policies, be requested to recognize the relationship between parking deficiencies and transit:

Purpose:

To provide background information and a brief summary of the current policies and procedures in the former municipalities with respect to cash payment-in-lieu of parking related to development applications, prior to recommending consolidated policies and procedures for the new City.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

No funds are required in connection with this report.

Recommendation:

That the Commissioners of Works and Emergency Services and Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to report jointly, at the appropriate time, to the Urban Environment and Development Committee recommending consolidated policies and practices for the new City with respect to cash payment-in-lieu of parking related to development applications.

Background:

Currently, each of the former municipalities comprising the City of Toronto uses its own fee schedule or formulas to determine the amount of cash payment required, if appropriate, in lieu of providing parking for developments. As a result, the payment required from developers could vary significantly within the new City, even for developments which are similar in use and in scale. Consequently, staff of Works and Emergency Services and Urban Planning and Development Services have initiated a joint review of the current payment-in-lieu of parking policies and practices of the former municipalities in order to develop consolidated policies and practices to be implemented in the new City and eliminate any existing disparities.

Comments:

Introduction:

Section 40 of the Planning Act makes provision for a municipality, if it chooses to do so, to accept cash payments from the owners or occupants of buildings in lieu of providing parking which otherwise would be required by the applicable Zoning By-law. The intent of payment-in-lieu is to assist developers in satisfying their parking requirements in those cases where it is not physically possible or desirable to provide the parking on-site, and when there are no opportunities for the applicant to secure off-site parking within a reasonable distance of the project, but only if the municipality determines that the parking generated by the project can be adequately accommodated in the off-street public parking facilities located in the area. Section 40 reads, in part, as follows:

40(1)"Where an owner or occupant of a building is required under a by-law of a local municipality to provide and maintain parking facilities on land that is not part of a highway, the council of the municipality and such owner or occupant may enter into an agreement exempting the owner or occupant, from the requirement of providing or maintaining the parking facilities."

40(2)"An agreement entered into under sub-section (1) shall provide for the making of one or more payments of money to the municipality as consideration for the granting of the exemption and shall set forth the basis upon which such payment is calculated."

Current Payment-in-Lieu Policies:

Although there are considerable differences in the manner in which the former municipalities currently calculate cash payment-in-lieu of parking, the payment-in-lieu policies are generally consistent. To summarize, the current policies are as follows:

-payment-in-lieu of parking is not intended to be an automatic right of the proponent, rather it is applied at the discretion of the municipality only if planning and transportation objectives are not jeopardized;

-payment-in-lieu is only considered for non-residential developments or the non-residential components of mixed-use developments;

-payment-in-lieu is generally considered a last resort and, in most cases, it is preferable for the applicant to provide on-site or, in some circumstances, off-site leased parking to satisfy the Zoning By-law requirements of a project;

-the applicant must demonstrate why the existing parking provisions of the Zoning By-law cannot be accommodated on-site (site access constraints, size of development parcel, retention of an existing building, etc.);

-staff assess the existing parking situation in the area of the application and the impact of the proposed exemption on the surrounding neighbourhood;

-all applicants must enter into an agreement with the municipality for the payment-in-lieu; and

-all payments received by the municipality are placed in a Parking Reserve Fund for the acquisition, development and improvement of municipal parking facilities.

Current Calculation of Payment-in-Lieu Contributions:

While the general payment-in-lieu policies of each of the former municipalities are consistent, the fees and formulas used to calculate the required payments differ considerably. Some municipalities have established set payment-in-lieu fees based on the size and type of the development whereas other municipalities have adopted formulas, which are a function of the land values and construction costs in the area, to determine the payment.

Issues:

Several issues must be considered in the development of new policies and practices for payment-in-lieu of parking. Some of the key issues are summarized below:

-should payment-in-lieu of parking be retained as an option, to be applied at the discretion of the City, in cases where the provision of on-site or off-site parking is not feasible or desirable;

-should the existing fees and formulas be retained or should there be a uniform fee or formula across the new City for determining the required payment;

-should the fee or formula be based on the type or size of development, or as a function of the land values in the area for which the application has been made;

-should the funds from payment-in-lieu be earmarked for the area in which the funds are collected or placed in a general fund;

-who administers the funds and how should they be used; and

-who processes the payment-in-lieu applications, how should they be processed, and should there be any public consultation in dealing with these applications.

These issues, as well as others, will be addressed in the development of the proposed payment-in-lieu policies and practices for the new City and, as recommended above, will be the subject of a further joint report to your Committee.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. John Mende, Manager, Development and Transportation, Infrastructure Planning and Transportation Division, 392-7713.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (July29, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The East York Community Council reports having advised the Urban Environment and Development Committee to consider the following position put forth by the Community Council:

(i)that the City consider implementing a policy whereby cash-in-lieu of parking applications be circulated to all residents and businesses within a 60 metre radius of the property noted within the application; and

(ii)that a comprehensive review/analysis be undertaken throughout the City of Toronto with respect to the parking space costs for cash-in-lieu of parking.

The East York Community Council reports, for the information of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, that it received the report (July 7, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, and the communications (July 20, 1998) from Ms.CarolBurtinFripp, President, Leaside Property Owners' Association Incorporated, East York; (July 21, 1998) from Mr. Ian Cameron, East York; and (July 22, 1998) from Ms. Maryaleen Trafford, East York.

Background:

The East York Community Council had before it a report (July 7, 1998) from the Commissionerof Development Services, East York, respecting public notification for cash-in-lieu of parking applications.

The East York Community Council also had before it communications from the following in connection with cash-in-lieu of parking applications:

-(July 21, 1998) from Mr. Ian Cameron, East York;

-(July 20, 1998) from Ms. Carol Burtin Fripp, President, Leaside Property Owners' Association Incorporated; and

-(July 22, 1998) from Ms. Maryaleen Trafford, East York.

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

-Mr. Ian Cameron, East York; and

-Ms. Maryaleen Trafford, East York.

5

Bill 25 (Red Tape Act) and Amendments

to the Conservation Authorities Act.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that Council concur with the following action taken by the Urban Environment and Development Committee, having regard that the last date by which written submissions would be accepted by the Standing Committee on Administration of Justice was October 19, 1998:

"The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having:

(A)endorsed the recommendations embodied in the following report (October 1, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services; and

(B)advised the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, and the Standing Committee on Administration of Justice, that the amendments proposed by the Minister would add significantly to the "red tape" involved in development proposals located near conservation areas.":

Purpose:

(1)To advise Council of the implications for the City of amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act contained in Bill 25 (Red Tape Act); and

(2)to recommend that Council take a position with respect to these proposed amendments.

Source of Funds:

There are no immediate funding requirements arising from this report.

Recommendations:

(1)That the Urban Environment and Development Committee inform the Standing Committee on Administration of Justice of the City's concerns and position regarding Bill 25 and the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act by providing this report, and that the decision of the Committee be endorsed by Council;

(2)that, in order to clearly eliminate duplication and potential conflict between a municipality's planning authority under the Planning Act and a conservation authority's authority under the Conservation Authorities Act, the Province be urged to consider the following changes to Bill 25, Schedule I, section 12, concerning the Conservation Authorities Act:

(i)delete 28 (5) (e) to clearly avoid possible duplication of planning authority approval functions by a conservation authority outside of valley and watercourse areas;

(ii)delete 28 (20) (b) to clearly avoid unnecessary duplication of planning approval functions by a conservation authority concerning internal and other alterations to existing buildings in valley areas; and

(iii)eliminate remaining concerns for duplication arising from the use of the term "development" by specifically addressing these in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the Province and clarifying details of the appropriate regulatory powers of conservation authorities, either in a supporting generic regulation, a TRCA specific regulation, or through a memorandum of understanding between the City and the TRCA, as provided for under the Act; and

(3)that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be authorized to develop agreements with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to clarify our mutual interests and respective roles and functions in the areas of natural hazards, natural heritage areas and other related matters.

Background:

The Province has introduced Bill 25, "An Act to Reduce Red Tape by Amending or Repealing Certain Acts and by Enacting Two New Acts", which passed second reading as of June 23, 1998. Included within the Bill are changes to many Acts including several to the Conservation Authorities Act. Proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act include repealing Section 28 and the substitution of new wording.

The Province of Ontario has invited public response to Bill 25. The last date for verbal submissions to be made to the Standing Committee on Administration of Justice was September 19, 1998. Thelast date by which written submission will be accepted by the Standing Committee is October19, 1998 (at 5:00 p.m.).

Comments:

The proposed changes to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act include the complete deletion of the "old wording" and its replacement with "new wording". For the most part, the old and the new are essentially similar. However, some of the changes which were made in order to provide clarity and simplicity in one respect have inadvertently created the opposite in respect to other matters. This is of concern because of the potential consequence of duplication and conflict with municipal planning authority approval functions and conservation authority functions in respect to development.

Discussion between TRCA staff and City of Toronto staff reveals that the prime intent of the changes was reasonable and well-intentioned and that some changes will be of benefit to residents of Toronto, but that the secondary consequences of the same changes do not apply well to all areas, especially in the City of Toronto, and were not foreseen.

This report and its recommendations represents a co-operative approach to the problems by both the TRCA and City staff. It is hoped that the recommendations provide a pragmatic resolution that is appropriate for conservation authorities in general, and the TRCA in particular, as well as the City of Toronto's streamlined planning approval authority.

Outline of the Problem:

The existing Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act describes the matters for which a regulation may be established. These are simplified here as: the alteration of a watercourse; construction in a flood plain; and the placing of fill in watercourses, flood plains or on adjacent valley side slopes.

The existing clause regarding the regulation of construction in flood plains is provided in Section28(1) (e) and is as follows:

Prohibiting or regulating or requiring the permission of the authority for the construction of any building or structure in or on a pond or swamp or in any area susceptible to flooding during a regional storm, and defining regional storms for the purpose of the regulations."

The proposed clause regarding the regulation of development in flood plains and elsewhere, as in new Section 28 (1) (c), is as follows:

"Prohibiting, regulating or requiring the permission of the authority for development if, in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, or pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the development."

The concern with the new wording in Bill 25, Schedule I, as expressed above, stems very largely from the expansion of the areas to which the regulation may apply [s.28(1)(c)], the use of the broader term "development", as defined elsewhere [s.28(20)], and the vagueness of the area in which it may come to be applied [s.28(5)(e)].

Formerly, the area in which conservation authorities could regulate construction (now expanded to development) was limited to flood plains. Under Bill 25, conservation authorities may review development in flood plains and on adjacent valley slopes (from top of bank to top of bank, with possible extra setback allowances where reasonable) as well.

"Development" is defined within the proposed Conservation Authorities Act [s.28(20)] to mean:

"(a)the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind,

(b)any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of units in the building or structure,

(c)site grading, or

(d)the temporary permanent placing, dumping or removal of any kind of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere;".

Section 28 (20) (b) significantly expands the role of the conservation authorities into areas of community planning approval, and could include such development proposals as live-work conversions, internal unit conversions, or alterations to existing buildings.

Section 28 (5) is intended to limit the areas in which regulations may be approved to: shorelines, river or stream valleys, hazardous lands and wetlands; however, a further concern arises as a result of the broad catch-all of "other areas" as contained in sub-section 28 (5) (e) of the proposed new Act.

"The minister shall not approve a regulation made under clause (1) (c) [see above] unless the regulation applies only to areas that are: ..... or

(e) other areas where in the opinion of the Minister, development should be prohibited or regulated or should require the permission of the authority."

In combination, a conservation authority's expanded regulatory role under the meaning of "development", the expansion of areas in which "development" is regulated from flood plains to include valley sides, the added vagueness of the "other areas" in which conservation authority approval of development may come to be regulated, and the change of concern respecting "pollution or the conservation of land" from fill-related issues to all issues associated with a development, is of considerable concern.

The consequence of the above-noted changes, when taken together, could result in:

(1)duplication of development approval functions between conservation authorities and municipal planning authorities; and

(2)potential conflicts of opinions between conservation authority and municipal planning authority.

To the extent that duplication exists, it is compounded by the lack of a common appeal and resolution process. It is likely that a body charged with balancing many interests (i.e., a municipal planning authority) may, from time to time, arrive at a different conclusion in respect to a development than a body charged with addressing a smaller set of interests. The potential for a municipality to approve a development but for a conservation authority to refuse it, or vice versa, is apparent. Appropriate resolution of such differences will be difficult given that a development proponent can only appeal a municipality's decision to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) and can only appeal a conservation authority's decision via the Minister of Natural Resources to the Mining and Land Commissioners Board.

Outline of Proposed Solution:

The proposed solution arrived at, in consultation with TRCA staff, has two parts.

The first is to suggest the deletion in full of the most troublesome aspects of the definition of "development", specifically the clause that duplicates community planning functions in regard to changes to existing buildings [s.28(20)(b)], and to delete the "catch-all" clause that sets no limit on the area over which a conservation authority could, through regulation, come to have approval authority [s.28(5)(e)].

The second part of the proposed solution, is to suggest that the remaining problems of duplication concerning the use of the term "development", as defined in s.28(20), be subsequently addressed by:

(a)resolving these concerns, in consultation with the TRCA and the Province, and clarifying details of the appropriate regulatory powers of conservation authorities either in a supporting generic regulation or a TRCA specific regulation; and

(b)jointly resolving any outstanding concerns through agreements between the City and the TRCA.

Conclusions:

It is recommended that the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act that (i) expand the matters that may be regulated, expand the areas that may be regulated, and expand the powers that may be employed within such areas; (ii) which collectively cause concern for duplication and overlap with planning authority functions; and (iii) create potential conflict without adequate appeal mechanisms for developers or municipalities, be addressed by the Province deleting the most troublesome clauses now, and by the Province subsequently initiating consensual discussion toward a more appropriate conclusion that does not add to red tape problems.

I also recommend that I be authorized to continue discussion with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to develop a mutually satisfactory understanding of our respective roles and responsibilities in the areas of natural hazard and natural heritage policies and practices.

Contact Name:

Mr. Christopher Morgan, 392-0408, Fax: 392-0071.

6

Flexlink Advanced Auto Network (FAAN)

- Smart Mobility for the Millennium.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that Council:

(1)endorse, in principle, the concepts of the Flexlink Advanced Auto Network (FAAN) and other "car-sharing initiatives" for further consideration and exploration;

(2)request the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the General Manager, Transportation Services, to provide in-kind assistance to, and participate with, the (FAAN) Team in applying the FAAN approach to the specific needs of Toronto;

(3)request the FAAN Team to make a presentation to the Toronto Transit Commission and the Toronto Parking Authority.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having deferred consideration of the Auto Share - Car Sharing Network Inc. proposal to a future meeting of the Committee, at which time representatives of Auto Share will be invited to make a presentation.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following communication (August 24, 1998) addressed to Councillor Joe Pantalone, Chair, Urban Environment and Development Committee, from Mr Rocco Maragna, President, Maragna Architect Incorporated:

In your role as a Councillor, as Chairman of the Urban Environment and Development Committee and as someone who works to strengthen Toronto's reputation as a world class city, our group, with the support of the York Centre for Applied Sustainability and The Design Exchange, wish to bring to your attention a new transportation option. The Flexlink Advanced Auto Network (FAAN) has many economic, environmental and community benefits that can contribute to an enhanced quality of life in Toronto.

Basically, FAAN is a transportation system which is an intermediate between public and private transit and yet complements the two types. It optimizes use of the existing urban infrastructure and is designed to respond to consumers' needs. Application of advanced technology and processes results in increased efficiencies. For a more complete description and an explanation of benefits please refer to the attachment.

We request an opportunity to give a short presentation of this Smart Mobility concept to the UrbanEnvironment and Development Committee with a view to seeking the endorsement of this Committee, and a recommendation that City staff be directed to provide assistance to, and participate with, our team in applying this approach to the specific needs of Toronto.

If you, or your staff, require more information at this stage we would be pleased to respond. Our contact is Mr. Rocco Maragna who can be reached at the address noted above.

--------

Flexlink Advanced Auto Network

(FAAN)^TM

Smart Mobility for the Millennium

1.0Project Description:

1.1The Concept:

When Rocco Maragna was a graduate student at Harvard University in 1976, he conceived of a scheme whereby mobility was viewed in a similar way to traditional utilities or services. In this instance the vehicle did not have to be owned by the individual but could be accessed as required.

Over 20 years later, this idea has emerged as an exciting way to take advantage of new developments in technology and to respond to constraints confronting today's transportation systems. The concept allows for a convenience and flexibility in transportation that is otherwise only available through the private automobile, with all its inherent costs and negative impacts. FAAN^TM (Flexlink Advanced Auto Network) is a flexible service that can either augment existing transportation infrastructure, by having vehicles available for individual use at transit nodes, such as subway stops, or it can be a stand-alone option, whereby an entire trip is by FAAN^TM vehicle. In either case, individual choice is enhanced.

The idea is simple. Fleets of vehicles would be available at strategic locations, on streets or in special space-saving parking facilities designed to minimize the impact of vehicles on the urban form. Alternatively, they could be delivered to a designated customer location as a higher service option. These environmentally friendly vehicles, or CiTiCars^TM, would be operated by a smart card allowing the consumer access to mobility without the cost of owning and maintaining a vehicle. Diagnostic and smart driving technology would be integrated to ensure that these vehicles are monitored and maintained properly. Parking would be easy, either in the parking facilities, or specially designated areas on streets. Vehicles would be dropped off for use by another. Flexibility and increased convenience by saving time are two features of this approach.

1.2Benefits:

This concept could play a pivotal role in the evolution of urban society and, hence, has far-reaching implications. Activities and resources associated with the automobile are predominant in our cultures, whether we live in North America and consider individual transport our right, or whether it is people of the developing countries who aspire to individual car ownership. In Canada approximately 50percent of urban land is dominated by streets, driveways, garages and parking lots.

If parts of society were to adopt FAAN^TM as either a supplement to their current transportation needs, or as a complete alternative, then the resulting "released resources" could be substantial. Expansion of traditional approaches to mass transit have encountered resistance because people are not prepared to sacrifice their perceived freedom of movement. This, despite the fact that traffic conditions are oversaturated and frustrating, to say the least, so that as individuals we pay a high premium for this "mobility". The FAAN^TM concept is particularly appealing because it recognizes the need for behavioural change and is a well-placed intermediate between individual and mass transit.

Assuming adoption, this concept enables a shift in our cultures' values that could lead to many of the other changes to which we aspire. For example, we seek to re-establish a sense of community, but the urban form does not encourage this. However, if some of the vast expanse of paved surfaces could be used for green space, both at the individual homeowner level and the public space/community level, then a more interactive, personal and less alienating environment would be created. Right now Toronto faces a crisis in requests to increase front yard parking, which reduces aesthetics, increases storm water run-off with associated water treatment costs/system overload, reduces tree coverage which in itself has environmental implications as well as the phenomenon of higher urban centre temperatures that increase space conditioning loads with a concomitant rise in power generation.

There are many potential environmental benefits. An obvious improvement is to "green" our cities, so that carbon dioxide sinks are located near to the centres of higher concentration/generation. The CiTiCars^TM themselves will be, by definition, the newest technology which will be more efficient in design, fuel consumption, etc. Professional fleet vehicle management will ensure that the CiTiCars^TM are well-maintained, thereby reducing pollution.

Increasing the efficiency of utilization of our existing transportation infrastructure has several positive effects. Congested highways cause considerable pollution, so anything that reduces the number of cars on the road cuts down on all those traffic jam emissions. Reduction in volatile organic carbons (VOCs), particulates, including such heavy metals as lead that has been demonstrated to deleteriously affect child brain development, nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), plus carbon dioxide are all part of the benefit.

Reduced pollution does more than address global environmental problems. Improved ambient air quality in cities will reduce the medical expenses, hospital costs and lost productivity through illness of all those respiratory-related diseases. In Ontario summertime smog is a major environmental problem with government health studies attributing 1,800 deaths per year to smog-related causes. This holistic approach to evaluating societal benefits over a range of sectors versus costs, often referred to as full cost accounting, drives much of the international discussion on global pollution.

Part of the FAAN^TM concept increases access to, and thereby utilization of, public transit. It does this by improving accessibility to those either not on bus routes, or those unwilling to use this form of transport. Easier parking at the subway nodes, and no parking costs for those arriving with a CiTiCar^TM could increase ridership and system viability. Greater usage of the TTC with densities then approaching those in European cities where extensive systems are cost-effective would benefit Toronto's infrastructure.

There is an opportunity to make huge gains on the greenhouse gas (GHG) side of the equation. This concept is viable, and can bring environmental returns, using currently available technology. However, if a more advanced form of motive power was used then the benefits could be amplified. Depending on which form of motive power is selected there would be a slight reduction in emissions using mixed fuels (such as alcohol fuels - methanol, ethanol), a greater return using natural gas -particularly when the well-head to end-use equation is compared to advanced battery technology, potentially better results using appropriate diesel-powered technology, and an almost zero emission opportunity using fuel cells.

Should an advanced motive technology be selected further down the road, then the impetus of the FAAN^TM initiative would help to contribute to infrastructure development and optimization. For example, there could be an increased number of gas refuelling stations.

The FAAN^TM approach and support services lends itself to other benefits in the area of human resources. Accessible employment opportunities will be created for vehicle maintenance, car jockey, parking facility management and general infrastructure support. The high technology end of the business, advanced motive technology production, the vehicles themselves, satellite tracking and communication systems, smart card access and control systems could all contribute to increasing the number of skilled, high-paying jobs. Furthermore, this infrastructure lays the groundwork for capacity building within the support industries.

There is the potential to develop partnerships with Canadian companies, or Canadian-based subsidiaries of multi-nationals, in the process of developing a pilot project through to full implementation. Our initial analysis reveals that this concept is highly relevant to transportation systems throughout the developing world. Canadian companies are working on mass transit systems, airports and other infrastructure areas where the addition of FAAN^TM would improve competitiveness. Air pollution and traffic congestion problems are so severe that there is a large and receptive market. Naturally there would be some modifications to the design to accommodate cultural differences. However, the essence of the concept fits well with the desire of the burgeoning middle class to have the use of private cars, and the need to improve traffic flows and decrease debilitating pollution.

1.3Project Design:

Prior to initiating a full-scale pilot, data collection and analysis combined with potential customer feedback is required. Therefore, this investigative project is the first of three phases. The second phase, which has been partially scoped out and a site located in Toronto, is to undertake the pilot project. It is anticipated that for the pilot project partners will be brought in as the commercial information obtained will be the springboard for entry into the marketplace.

The final phase is to form a joint venture company that will see application in North American markets, plus the creation, with off-shore companies, of subsidiaries that will operate in developing countries. In the latter case much of the debt financing will be sourced from commercial banks. However, there is an opportunity for there to be government to government agreements, backed by either the Export Development Corporation (EDC) or the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC), that link to Canada's international efforts to respond to the Kyoto protocol.

This study has five main areas of investigation:

-transportation-related - understanding the impacts of FAAN^TM upon vehicle usage and, hence, upon traffic patterns and flows;

-financial assessment - preliminary analysis of the costs to implement the concept, with comparisons to alternative modes of transport;

-behavioural response - obtaining feedback from potential users to appreciate the process that meets with the highest acceptability;

-environmental impacts - once a baseline of marketplace uptake and traffic impacts has been established then it is possible to estimate the reduction in emissions of key pollutants; and

-urban transformation - finally, once an estimate of traffic volumes, flows and user preferences has been compiled, then impacts on urban form, at the individual unit design level and at a city planning level, can be assessed.

2.0Environmental Benefits and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Potential:

The transportation sector in Canada relies almost exclusively on petroleum products. It accounts for 28 percent of our energy use and consumes 67 percent of our petroleum products. Not surprisingly, automobiles are the primary source of air pollution and significant contributors to both global warming and acid rain. They account for 35 percent of Canada's NOx emissions, 37 percent of CO emissions, 29percent of hydrocarbon emissions and about 29 percent of CO₂ emissions.

More efficient use of gasoline, or substitution with diesel, will reduce these pollutants. How much is a matter of research. Figures given by The Canadian Gas Association claim substantial improvements with natural gas vehicles - approximate reductions given are 80percent for NOx, 80-90 percent for CO, up to 90 percent for hydrocarbons and 20 percent for CO₂.

3.0Economic Benefits:

As described in section 1.0 there are opportunities for job creation at multiple skill levels. Furthermore, the likelihood of launching a Canadian joint venture is high. There are two companies, Bombardier and Magna, who are important players in the transportation market. Addition of a CiTiCar^TM model and the business organization to run FAAN^TM could complement their existing enterprises in both domestic and international markets. There may not be many vehicle component differences to conventional cars, but there would be some extension of current supplier capabilities.

Operating the business and supporting the FAAN^TM infrastructure will allow the opportunity for some of these activities to be outsourced to smaller companies than the primary project proponents/partners. This will strengthen the local SME sector and, with the potential for international sales, enable the smaller companies to enter these competitive markets more readily when linked to the bigger players.

Market size and customer uptake are key determinants in ascertaining financial returns. This study proposes to quantify the latter using accepted research methodologies. To gain some insight into the large potential that this concept has, we can examine the target markets - urban centres. Typically, there are said to be 600 major urban centers worldwide, therefore, the multiplication factor for FAAN^TM infrastructure is considerable.

4.0Urban Transformation Benefits:

Twentieth century urban planning has been shaped, primarily, by the automobile with a consequent loss of truly usable space in residential districts and the imposition of a huge and costly transportation infrastructure. Toronto's roads amount to over 5100 kilometres that take up between 25 and 40 percent of our public space with car-related uses. Inefficient use of urban land and extensive asphalt links give rise to urban sprawl and a sense of alienation that destroys neighbourhoods and a sense of community.

Recapturing parking space will enable people to:

(1)"green" the space at an aggregate level to provide community "mini" parks or extend private green space at the unit level; and

(2)increase utilization of city land thereby decreasing urbanization of Toronto's periphery with all the associated costs of new infrastructure, financially insecure mass transit systems, lost productivity due to commuting and the negative environmental impacts. Urban design will become free to utilize space more efficiently, creating more friendly, community-oriented forms that in themselves could have societal benefits as people reconnect/use streets to walk/keep fitter and reduce crime.

--------

The FAAN ^TM Team

(1)R. Maragna - Maragna Architect Inc.;

(2)D. Bell - York Centre for Applied Sustainability;

(3)M. Contreras - Fercon Architects and Planners Inc.;

(4)E. Greenwood - Greenwood Associates;

(5)T. Kato - Interlink Corporation;

(6)J. Plant - DS-Lea Associates Ltd.; and

(7)V.J. Sharpe - Astral Group.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (October 2, 1998) addressed to Councillor Joe Pantalone, Chair, Urban Environment and Development Committee, from Ms. Liz Reynolds, Executive Director, Auto Share - Car Sharing Network Inc.:

I am writing regarding Agenda Item No. (16), the Flexlink Advanced Auto Network (FAAN) presentation at the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

I am encouraged the Committee may be interested in exploring innovative forms of mobility management, but I request that it do so with the full knowledge of other programs of this nature currently running in the City of Toronto.

I request the opportunity to make a presentation to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the work of the Auto Share - Car Sharing Network Inc., which launched in Toronto in August 1998.

Auto Share's initial target areas are the downtown neighbourhoods of Riverdale, the Annex and St. Lawrence Market, where we have a growing membership. The Parking Authority has been most supportive in allocating spaces in our target areas near subway and bus stops. In conjunction with members of the Bloor West Eco Village, a strategy for early expansion to High Park is in development. Also, work has recently begun with the Scarborough Tenants Association for future expansion opportunities. We have developed thorough membership and insurance qualification procedures and are in the process of negotiating a back-up supply of cars from a national car rental company.

Prior to Auto Share's implementation, a market study, with funding assistance from the City of Toronto, was conducted. We discovered those interested in this form of access to mobility without ownership coincided with the findings of car-sharing organizations in other parts of Canada and Europe. In this connection, Auto Share has developed working relationships with the car-sharing organizations in Quebec City, Montreal, Vancouver and Victoria and we are beginning the process of developing a national association. As well, we receive ongoing advice and assistance from Mobility Management - ATG, the nation-wide Swiss car-sharing organization, and look forward to greater collaboration with them in future.

The importance of establishing such an organization with a strong community foundation is paramount. Nevertheless, we recognize the importance of developing partnerships with government and other appropriate corporations to increase the effectiveness of all available transportation options.

Although we are beginning Auto Share with conventional vehicles with high emission controls, we have spent considerable time researching the introduction of alternative fuels vehicles. We will work with Toyota Canada on a proposal for a pilot project using electric vehicles (E-Com) with ITS technology in the Auto Share program in Toronto.

In addition to extending an invitation to Auto Share, I would like to suggest that the Committee invite a speaker with no commercial interest in the subject of car-sharing and new mobility options. I am sure you know of Richard Gilbert's work as a consultant with the Centre for Sustainable Transportation and as a advisor to the OEDC on transportation issues. Dr. Gilbert is well-acquainted with car-sharing initiatives worldwide and is thus in a position to provide a balanced and articulate overview of the subject.

I look forward, hopefully, to an invitation to address the Committee and am pleased that it is looking with interest at alternative mobility options and car use reduction strategies.

_________

The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

(1)Mr. Rocco Maragna, President, Maragna Architect Incorporated;

(2)Dr. David V.J. Bell, Director, York Centre for Applied Sustainability, York University;

(3)Mr. Luigi Ferrara, Vice-President, Business and Public Programs and Services, The Design Exchange;

(4)Dr. Vicky J. Sharpe, Managing Director, GRI Canada; and

(5)Mr. Phil Piltch, on behalf of Auto Share - Car Sharing Network Inc.

(A copy of the attachment to the FAAN ^TM proposal, entitled "FAAN - Our Cities Tomorrow -OurCities Today", has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

7

Thirty Kilometre Per Hour Speed Limits Applied in

Conjunction with Substantive Traffic-Calming Projects

- Renewal and Extension of Enabling Legislation.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (September 22, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the brief filed by Ms. Swarbrick to the General Manager, Transportation Services, and to the Toronto Pedestrian Committee, for consideration and further report thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee in due course.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 22, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To initiate the process of applying to the Provincial Legislature for the legislation necessary to renew and extend the City's authority, which is set to expire in June 1999, to apply a regulatory 30kilometres per hour speed limit on streets where substantive physical traffic-calming measures have been implemented.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil.

Recommendations:

(1)That the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be authorized to apply for special legislation to remove or, alternatively, extend the "sunset clause" in Bill Pr 54, an "Act Respecting the City of Toronto" (the 30 kilometres per hour speed limit legislation), and also to extend the legislation to apply to the entire area of the City of Toronto; and

(2)that the appropriate City officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary to give effect to the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that are required.

Background:

On June 27, 1999, special legislation enacted at the request of the former City of Toronto, allowing the former City Council to set regulatory speed limits at 30 kilometres per hour (km/h) on streets with traffic-calming will lapse, because of a "sunset clause" contained in the Act. The legislation, Bill Pr 54 known as an Act Respecting the City of Toronto, 1996, replaced a similar Act of 1994 (which had included a two-year sunset clause). In Ontario, speed limits on streets may not be set lower than 40 kilometres per hour. Speed limits may be set as low as 20 km/h on roads within parks. No other jurisdiction in Canada has provision for 30 kilometres per hour speed limits on streets but it is common in Europe where traffic-calming is widely used.

Comments:

Since the initial authority has existed, the 30 km/h speed limit has been used only in conjunction with substantive traffic-calming initiatives, as originally intended. In total, 20 streets measuring approximately 14 kilometres in length have the reduced speed limit as documented in Appendix A of this report. Other streets are currently being considered for traffic-calming and may result in additional cases of the lower speed limit. At this time, the legislation is applicable only to streets within the former City of Toronto boundaries.

On Balliol Street, the location of the former City's traffic-calming pilot project in 1994, the 85^thpercentile speed (the speed exceeded by 15 percent of vehicles) was reduced from 47 km/h to 36km/h, and the average speed dropped from 40 km/h to 30 km/h. On streets with speed humps, 85^th percentile speeds have typically fallen from 40 km/h to 30 km/h, with average speeds (usually about seven kilometres per hour lower) falling by a similar amount. More comprehensive monitoring of vehicle speeds at traffic-calming locations will be undertaken in the autumn of this year to support the legislative application.

Through the limited amount of data that has been collected to date, it has been documented that traffic speeds have been significantly reduced by traffic-calming. A legal speed limit which reflects the driving environment is a matter of sound engineering design. As is stated in Ontario's "Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices", the Ministry of Transportation's standard traffic engineering publication:

"The indicated maximum rate of speed, determined and legalized by the Road Authority, is the rate of speed that can be safely maintained by a fully competent driver if all conditions affecting the road, the vehicle and the driver are ideal."

Accordingly, based on the City's experience with traffic-calming, the 30 km/h speed limit option is both a useful and necessary traffic engineering tool. It is important to emphasize that this tool should only be used for its intended purpose; that being to designate only those streets where physical measures have been implemented to reduce the safe driving speed to this level. It is not appropriate to install such signs on a stand-alone basis, or in situations where safe operating speeds exceed 30kilometres per hour. Currently, the legislation applies only to the former City of Toronto. There is interest, amongst staff, Councillors and the general public, in extending this provision generally across the new City. This application will provide an opportunity to standardize the legislative authority through the entire area of the new City.

It is acknowledged that traffic-calming is still controversial in Toronto (and elsewhere in North America). Obtaining legislative authority for the use of the 30 km/h speed limit does not commit the City to use this authority in any area or on any particular street. A more complete analysis of traffic-calming in the former City of Toronto has been requested by the Toronto Community Council and a report on this matter, including City-wide policy implications, will be submitted this autumn. In the meantime, it seems prudent to initiate the legislative application to the Provincial authorities as soon as practicable, so as not to miss the expiry date in June next year.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. Andrew Macbeth,

Manager, Transportation Management,

392-1799.

--------

Appendix A

Streets with 30 kilometres per hour Speed Limits

StreetLocation

Balliol StreetFrom Mount Pleasant Road to Cleveland Street

Balmoral AvenueFrom Yonge Street to Avenue Road

Barton AvenueFrom Bathurst Street to Christie Street

Boon AvenueFrom St. Clair Avenue West to the former north City limit

Boulton AvenueFrom Dundas Street East to Queen Street East

Clinton StreetFrom College Street to Harbord Street

Cowan AvenueFrom King Street West to Springhurst Avenue

Earlscourt AvenueFrom St. Clair Avenue West to the former north City limit

Euclid AvenueFrom College Street to Bloor Street West

Farnham AvenueFrom Yonge Street to Avenue Road

Glengrove AvenueFrom Yonge Street to Avenue Road

Harvie AvenueFrom St. Clair Avenue West to the former north City limit

Huron StreetFrom Bloor Street West to Harbord Street

Logan AvenueFrom Gerrard Street East to the former north City limit

Nairn AvenueFrom St. Clair Avenue West to the former north City limit

River StreetFrom Spruce Street to Bayview Avenue Ramp

Springhurst AvenueFrom Dufferin Street to Jameson Street

Spruce StreetFrom Parliament Street to River Street

Wellington StreetFrom Bathurst Street to Niagara Street

Yarmouth AvenueFrom Christie Street to Shaw Street

________

Ms. Rhona Swarbrick, Protect Established Neighbourhoods, appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter, and also filed a written brief with respect thereto.

8

Contract No. T-38-98:

Road and Track Allowance

Reconstruction at Four Locations.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (August 31, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

To increase the contract price for Contract No. T-38-98, Road and Track Allowance Reconstruction at Four Locations, to allow for site conditions encountered on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Symons Street and Royal York Road and on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Kipling Avenue and 23rd Street.

Funding Source:

Funding for this project has previously been approved by Council and is available in the Toronto Transit Commission's Track Reconstruction Program. The Treasurer has previously certified that financing can be provided under the updated Debt and Financial Obligation Limit and that it falls within corporate debt guidelines. The work is being undertaken on behalf of the TTC and the funds are available in Capital Account No. C-TR025 - Work for Others, to accommodate the extra cost of this Contract.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the contract price for Contract No. T-38-98, Road and Track Allowance Reconstruction at Four Locations, be increased by $150,000.00 net to a total of $1,463,813.41 to accommodate the additional work necessary at Lake Shore Boulevard West between Symons Street and Royal York Road and on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Kipling Avenue and 23rd Street.

Background:

At its meeting on June 3, 1998, the Bid Committee awarded Contract No. T-38-98, Road and Track Allowance Reconstruction at Four Locations, to Crownwood Construction Ltd. at a contract price of $1,313,813.41 (GST included).

Discussion:

At the design stage of the project, staff dug test pits and carried out coring on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Symons Street and Royal York Road and on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Kipling Avenue and 23rd Street. The tests were undertaken to determine the existing (environmental) condition of the material to be excavated and to establish the condition of the TTC track allowance pavement structure. The results indicated that there were no unusual environmental conditions and that the existing foundation slab that supports the rail structure was in good condition and did not have to be removed.

During the course of construction the foundation slab was confirmed to be in good condition but was generally deeper than found at the test pit locations As a result additional concrete had to be placed in the infill area to ensure that the rail system could be positioned at the required elevation and would have proper structural support.

Conclusion:

The contract price for Contract No. T-38-98 should be increased by $150,000.00 to a total of $1,463,813.41 to allow for the site conditions encountered on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Symons Street and Royal York Road and on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Kipling Avenue and 23rd Street. This will allow the contract to proceed as scheduled.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. John Marcinek, P. Eng., Project Manager, Metro Hall Office, 392-8342.

9

Proposed Installation of Pedestrian Crossover:

McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that:

(1)traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard, subject to such installation being effected at no cost to the City; and

(2)the necessary funding therefor be made available from Account No.70697-00000-00000-853, Section 37 agreement, as follows:

(a)Bamburgh Gate Developments Inc. - $60,000.00; and

(b)Monarch Construction Ltd. - $25,000.00.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the General Manager, Transportation Services, to review this matter with the Toronto Pedestrian Committee prior to installing the proposed traffic control signals at McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (July 30, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To report on the results of the traffic signal warrant studies conducted at McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard. To obtain approval for the installation of a pedestrian crossover at the subject location.

Funding Source:

Funds are available for the installation of pedestrian crossovers as per Section 37 agreement, Account No. 70697-00000-00000-853. The estimated cost of the installation of a pedestrian crossover at this location is $19,300.00.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that a pedestrian crossover be installed on McNicoll Avenue at Silver Springs Boulevard.

Background:

The subject location has been investigated on numerous occasions in response to pedestrian safety concerns raised by the Silver Springs Community Association.

At its meeting on September 30, 1997, Scarborough Council adopted Clause No. 9, Report 16 of The Works and Environment Committee which contained the following recommendation:

"That prior to the crosswalk being installed on McNicoll Avenue at Silver Springs Boulevard, Metropolitan Toronto Council be once again requested to install traffic lights at this location. If Metro's response is negative, that staff be authorized to proceed with this crosswalk installation"

Due to the timing of Scarborough Council's request, Metropolitan Toronto Council was not able to respond in 1997. In December 1997, the Metropolitan Toronto Transportation Department responded to the Scarborough City Clerk's office indicating that the installation of traffic control signals at the subject location is not warranted.

Scarborough District staff submitted a report regarding this issue to the Scarborough Community Council at its July 22, 1998 meeting which concluded that a pedestrian crossover should be installed. Scarborough Community Council deferred the report and requested another report to further discuss the installation of traffic control signals.

Discussion:

McNicoll Avenue in this vicinity is a four-lane collector roadway with a posted speed limit of 50kilometres per hour. Silver Springs Boulevard, a local road, forms a "T" intersection on the south side of McNicoll Avenue. A northbound stop sign on Silver Springs Boulevard currently controls traffic at this intersection. A TTC bus loop, the L'Amoureaux Community Centre and Mary Ward Secondary School are located on the north side of McNicoll Avenue immediately east of SilverSprings Boulevard. L'Amoureaux Tennis Centre, Silver Springs Elementary School and St. Sylvester Elementary School gain access to Silver Springs Boulevard south of McNicoll Avenue. A pedestrian underpass is located immediately to the west of Silver Springs Boulevard and allows pedestrians to cross McNicoll Avenue free from potential conflicts with vehicles. Adjacent traffic control signals are located approximately 390 metres to the west at Birchmount Road and 375 metres to the east at Kennedy Road.

Over the past two years, several eight-hour traffic control signal warrant studies have been conducted and revealed that the warrants for traffic control signals are not met at McNicoll Avenue and SilverSprings Boulevard. The results are listed below:

For the traffic control signal warrants to be satisfied, one of the "Minimum Vehicular Volume" or "Delay to Cross Traffic" warrants must be 100 per cent. satisfied or any two of the three warrants must be at least 80 per cent. satisfied. The "Collision Hazard" warrant is based on the number of collisions that occurred at the intersection in a three-year period which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. Collision statistics provided by the Toronto Police Service indicate six collisions occurred over a three-year period from January 1, 1994, to December31, 1996 which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. None of these collisions involved pedestrians. Based on the above information, the technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not met.

During the most recent study, 53 pedestrians were observed crossing McNicoll Avenue over the eight-hour period. Although there is a pedestrian underpass immediately to the west of Silver Springs Boulevard, the majority of pedestrians crossed McNicoll Avenue on the east side of Silver Springs Boulevard and were heading towards the TTC bus loop and Mary Ward Secondary School.

In 1997, Scarborough Council authorized staff to proceed with the installation of a pedestrian crossover at this location subject to a negative response from the Metropolitan Toronto Transportation Department regarding the installation of traffic control signals. Given that Toronto Transportation Services staff do not support the installation of unwarranted traffic control signals, a pedestrian crossover should be installed on McNicoll Avenue at Silver Springs Boulevard.

As instructed by the Urban Environment and Development Committee, staff have contacted the Ward Councillors. Both Councillors Mahood and Shaw would prefer the installation of traffic control signals to the installation of a pedestrian crossover at the subject location.

Conclusions:

The technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not met at McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard. In support of the September 1997 resolution of Scarborough Council, a pedestrian crossover should be installed at this location.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. Martin D. Maguire, Acting Manager, East Traffic Region, 392-5243.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (October 2, 1998) from Councillor Doug Mahood, Scarborough Agincourt:

Due to previous commitments and an important Ontario Municipal Board Hearing occurring on Monday, October 5, 1998, I will be unable to attend the October 5th meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

I am requesting that Members of the Urban Environment and Development Committee support the installation of traffic control signals at the intersections of:

(1)McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard (Item No. 9); and

(2)Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue (Item No. 10).

I have had numerous discussions with residents regarding both of these very dangerous intersections and fully support the installation of traffic control signals at these locations. The Midland/Lockie intersection connects Agincourt Junior Public School (located at the west end of the current crosswalk) with the Agincourt Collegiate High School (located at the east end of the current crosswalk). There have been very serious personal injury accidents at this location and it is only a matter of time before one or more young children are killed at this location. A set of traffic signals is an absolute necessity at this intersection.

The former City of Scarborough had Section 37 funds dedicated for traffic improvements in this area, and I request that Members of the Committee recommend the funding of these traffic improvements using these funds.

--------

The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Ms. Cathy Gaspar, Member, Silver Springs Community Association; and

-Councillor Sherene Shaw, Scarborough Agincourt.

(A copy of the location map, which was appended to the foregoing report, has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

10

Installation of Traffic Control Signals:

Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that:

(1)traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue; and

(2)the necessary funding therefor be made available from Account No.70697-00000-00000-853, Section 37 agreement - Monarch Construction Ltd. -$85,000.00.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (July 30, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To report on the results of the traffic signal warrant studies conducted at Midland Avenue and LockieAvenue.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Background:

This location was investigated in response to concerns raised by members of the public about the operation of the existing pedestrian crossover at Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue.

Discussion:

Midland Avenue in this vicinity is a four-lane arterial roadway with a posted speed limit of 50kilometres per hour and a two-way, 24-hour volume of approximately 21,100 vehicles. Lockie Avenue, a local road, forms a "T" intersection on the west side of Midland Avenue. An eastbound stop sign on Lockie Avenue controls traffic at this intersection. A pedestrian crossover (PXO) is located on the south leg of the intersection and a crossing guard is on duty during the peak pedestrian student crossing hours. At Lockie Avenue there is a northbound far-side bus bay and a southbound far-side bus bay. Agincourt Collegiate Institute is located on the east side of Midland Avenue opposite Lockie Avenue. Agincourt Junior Public School is located on the south side of Lockie Avenue immediately west of Midland Avenue. Adjacent traffic control signals are located approximately 875 metres to the north at Huntingwood Drive and 385 metres to the south at Sheppard Avenue East.

Over the past three years, several eight-hour traffic control signal warrant studies have been conducted which consistently revealed that the warrants for traffic control signals are not met at the intersection of Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue. The warrant studies also included the traffic movements at the Agincourt Collegiate Institute north driveway as the fourth leg of the intersection. The results are listed below:

For the traffic control signal warrants to be satisfied, one of the "Minimum Vehicular Volume" or "Delay to Cross Traffic" warrants must be 100 percent satisfied or any two of the three warrants must be at least 80 percent satisfied. The "Collision Hazard" warrant is based on the number of collisions that occurred at the intersection in a three-year period which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. Collision statistics provided by the Toronto Police Service indicate four collisions occurred over a three-year period from January 1, 1994, to December31, 1996, which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. Three of these collisions involved pedestrians who were hit by vehicles while crossing at the PXO. Two of the three pedestrians sustained minor injuries while one pedestrian sustained major injuries. Based on the above information, the technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not met.

The operational characteristics of the existing PXO were evaluated according to the guidelines that were developed for the "Audit of Operational and Physical Suitability at Pedestrian Crossovers in Metropolitan Toronto". The results are as follows:

A review of the PXO environmental criteria which were not satisfied revealed that they are either conditions that are presently being addressed or ones that have minimal impact on public safety in this case. For instance, the current speed profile of vehicles on Midland Avenue is a concern. The Police have attended public meetings regarding this issue and are conducting speed enforcement. The road width is technically five lanes but the fifth lane is a southbound far-side bus bay and the PXO is located at the north end of the bus bay. This bus bay does not increase the complexity of the crossing environment to the degree that a left-turn lane or a through lane would and therefore has minimal impact. Although there are far-side TTC bus stops in both directions, the northbound bus stop is a considerable distance from the PXO and both stops have bus bays which allow for good visibility when buses are present.

Based on the low 24-hour traffic volume on Midland Avenue and the fact that a crossing guard is on duty during the peak school crossing hours, the subject location continues to be suitable for a PXO.

Staff have contacted the Ward Councillors and both Councillors Mahood and Shaw have requested that traffic control signals be installed at the subject location. Councillor Mahood has specifically requested that mid-block pedestrian-actuated traffic control signals be installed.

Conclusions:

The technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not met at Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue and the location is suitable for a PXO.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. Martin D. Maguire, Acting Manager, East Traffic Region, 392-5243.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following communication (October 2, 1998) from Councillor Doug Mahood, Scarborough Agincourt:

Due to previous commitments and an important Ontario Municipal Board Hearing occurring on Monday, October 5, 1998, I will be unable to attend the October 5th meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

I am requesting that Members of the Urban Environment and Development Committee support the installation of traffic control signals at the intersections of:

(1)McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard (Item No. 9); and

(2)Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue (Item No. 10).

I have had numerous discussions with residents regarding both of these very dangerous intersections and fully support the installation of traffic control signals at these locations. The Midland/Lockie intersection connects Agincourt Junior Public School (located at the west end of the current crosswalk) with the Agincourt Collegiate High School (located at the east end of the current crosswalk). There have been very serious personal injury accidents at this location and it is only a matter of time before one or more young children are killed at this location. A set of traffic signals is an absolute necessity at this intersection.

The former City of Scarborough had Section 37 funds dedicated for traffic improvements in this area, and I request that Members of the Committee recommend the funding of these traffic improvements using these funds.

--------

Councillor Sherene Shaw, Scarborough Agincourt, appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (October 12, 1998) from Ms. Pat Evans, Chair, Agincourt Collegiate Institute School Council, regarding the installation of traffic control signals at Midland Avenue and Lockie Avenue.)

11

Proposed Extension of the

Southbound Left-Turn Prohibition at

Old Weston Road and Rockwell Avenue.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 8, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To extend the hours that the existing southbound left-turn prohibition is in effect at the intersection of Old Weston Road and Rockwell Avenue.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with the implementation of the proposed southbound left-turn prohibition are contained in the Transportation Services Division's 1998 Current Budget. The estimated cost of installing appropriate signs is $600.00.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the existing southbound left-turn prohibition at the intersection of Old Weston Road and Rockwell Avenue, which is currently in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, be extended to be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday; and

(2)the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

Background:

At the request of Councillor Betty Disero, our Department reviewed the feasibility of extending the southbound left-turn prohibition at the intersection of Old Weston Road and Rockwell Avenue to be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday.

Discussion:

Currently, at the intersection of Old Weston Road and Rockwell Avenue southbound left turns are prohibited from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday. The current prohibition has been in effect since 1995 and was installed at the request of the former City of Toronto Council. Between 1976 and 1995 southbound left turns were prohibited at all times at this intersection.

The proposed extension of the prohibition of southbound left turns to include the period between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on weekdays has been proposed in order to reduce the volume of neighbourhood traffic using Rockwell Avenue to access this residential area. The extension of the prohibition would displace approximately 20 vehicles per hour. This displaced traffic would have to use alternate routes to access the neighbourhood, such as Silverthorn Avenue and Blackthorn Avenue via Rogers Road. Councillor Disero has conducted consultation with residents in the affected area.

Councillors Betty Disero and Dennis Fotinos support the proposed extension of the southbound left-turn prohibition on Old Weston Road at Rockwell Avenue.

Conclusions:

We have no objection to the extension of the southbound left-turn prohibition at Old Weston Road and Rockwell Avenue to be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, since it will have a negligible impact on the road network in this area.

Contact Name:

Ms. Jacqueline White, Acting Manager, Central Traffic Region, 397-5021.

(A copy of the location plan, which were appended to the foregoing report, has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

12

Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals:

Westclair Centre Site Driveway

- Weston Road North of St. Clair Avenue West.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (September 18, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the General Manager, Transportation Services:

(a)to review this matter with the Toronto Pedestrian Committee prior to installing the proposed traffic control signals at the central site access for the Westclair Centre development on Weston Road, north of St. Clair Avenue West; and

(b)to submit more detailed intersection maps with future reports of this nature.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (September 18, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To obtain approval for the installation of traffic control signals at the central site access for the Westclair Centre development on Weston Road north of St. Clair Avenue West.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with new traffic control signal installations will be the responsibility of the developer, Imland Corporation. The estimated upset limit for installing the traffic control signals is $100,000.00.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that at the central site access for the Westclair Centre development on Weston Road north of St. Clair Avenue West:

(1)traffic control signals be installed;

(2)westbound right-turns-on-red be prohibited;

(3)the southerly westbound approach lane be designated for left turns only from Weston Road to the City of Toronto property line;

(4)the northerly westbound approach lane be designated for left and right turns only from Weston Road to the City of Toronto property line;

(5)pedestrian crossings be prohibited at all times on Weston Road between the north curb line of the central site access and a point 30.5 metres south of the south curb line of the central site access; and

(6)the appropriate by-law(s) be amended, accordingly.

Background:

The development of a 143,000 square foot retail commercial development with parking for 693vehicles has been approved at the northeast corner of Weston Road and St. Clair Avenue West. In our conditions of approval for this development, we required that traffic control signals be in place at the central site access prior to the occupancy of any building on the site. The developer was also required to provide a letter of credit for all costs associated with the traffic control signal.

Discussion:

Weston Road north of St. Clair Avenue West is a four-lane roadway with a centre left-turn lane which extends north to Gunns Road. The proposed development is located on the east side of Weston Road and extends north from St. Clair Avenue West to Gunns Road. Three driveways from the site are proposed to Weston Road. Our review of the development application determined that in order to accommodate the traffic generated by the site, a traffic control signal at the central site access would be required. The estimated traffic demand at the central site access would meet the provincial warrants for traffic control signals. Adjacent traffic control signals are located at the intersection of Keele Street and St. Clair Avenue West 245 metres to the south of the central site access, and at the intersection of Weston Road and Gunns Road 205 metres north of the central site access.

In our review of the proposed signal, it was also determined that the required horizontal sight distance for vehicles travelling northbound on Weston Road to a vehicle making a westbound right-turn-on-red would not be met. Consequently, the westbound right-turn-on-red movement should be prohibited.

The proposed configuration of the east leg of the intersection will include one inbound lane, one outbound left-turn lane and one outbound shared left/right lane. As a result of this configuration, pedestrian crossings will be limited to the north side of the intersection for the added safety of pedestrians.

Conclusions:

Traffic control signals should be installed on Weston Road at the central site access to the Westclair Centre development in order to accommodate the traffic generated by the site.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Ms. B.J. Walewski, Acting Manager, Program and Development Engineering, 392-8589.

________

Ms. Rhona Swarbrick, Co-Chair, Toronto Pedestrian Committee, appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter; and filed a written brief with respect thereto.

(A copy of the location plan, which was appended to the foregoing report, has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

13

Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals:

McNicoll Avenue and

Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (September 9, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the General Manager, Transportation Services:

(a)to submit a report to the November 2, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee listing the 21 traffic control signals that have been approved and funded for installation in 1998, as well as the signals which have been approved and placed on the Department's priority list, but funding for which has not been allocated; and

(b)to meet with the Toronto Pedestrian Committee (TPC) to develop a protocol for consulting with the TPC regarding the installation of traffic control signals prior to reporting thereon to the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (September 9, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To obtain approval for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of McNicoll Avenue and Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with new traffic signal installations are contained in the Works and Emergency Services Capital Program under Project No C-TR031. In 1998, $1.6 million has been allocated for new traffic control signal installations. These funds have been fully committed already through the approval of 21 new signal installations. Therefore, unless additional funding is identified in 1998, new signal approvals for the balance of 1998 will be placed on a priority list for 1999 and await approval of the appropriate budget item in the 1999 Capital Budget. The estimated cost of the installation of traffic control signals at this location is $72,900.00.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that traffic control signals be approved on McNicoll Avenue at Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court.

Background:

This location was investigated in response to a request from a member of the public to improve the delay experienced by vehicles waiting to enter McNicoll Avenue from Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court.

Discussion:

McNicoll Avenue in this vicinity is a two-lane collector roadway with a posted speed limit of 50kilometres per hour and a two-way, 24-hour volume of approximately 12,000 vehicles. Harold Evans Crescent and Placer Court are both local roads that intersect with McNicoll Avenue to form a full intersection with four approaches. Harold Evans Crescent is on the north side of McNicoll Avenue and Placer Court is directly opposite on the south side. At Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court, there are eastbound, westbound and southbound near side bus stops. The intersection is located in an industrial area bounded by Highway No. 404 to the west, Steeles Avenue East to the north, Pharmacy Avenue to the east and an Ontario Hydro corridor to the south. Adjacent traffic control signals are located approximately 1180 metres to the west at Don Mills Road and 395metres to the east at Victoria Park Avenue.

An eight-hour traffic control signal warrant study was conducted and revealed that traffic control signals are technically warranted. The results are listed below:

For the traffic control signal warrants to be satisfied, one of the "Minimum Vehicular Volume" or "Delay to Cross Traffic" warrants must be 100 per cent. satisfied or any two of the three warrants must be at least 80 percent satisfied. The "Collision Hazard" warrant is based on the number of collisions that occurred at the intersection in a three-year period which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. Collision statistics provided by the Toronto Police Service indicate one collision occurred over a three-year period from January 1, 1994, to December31, 1996, which was potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. Based on the above information, the technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are met.

Neither McNicoll Avenue, Harold Evans Crescent or Placer Court are arterial roads and the installation of traffic control signals would not have an impact on the effectiveness of the network of arterial roads. Furthermore, the traffic control signals would provide benefits to all road users in the immediate area.

Staff have contacted the Ward Councillors and Councillor King has voiced support for the proposed installation of traffic control signals at this location while Councillor Shiner has reserved judgement.

Conclusions:

The installation of traffic control signals on McNicoll Avenue and Harold Evans Crescent/Placer Court are technically warranted and would provide benefits to all road users in the immediate area. In 1998, $1.6 million has been allocated for new traffic control signal installation. Twenty-one traffic control signals have been approved so far in 1998, which fully commits all these funds. Therefore, unless additional funding is identified in 1998, the installation of newly-approved traffic control signals will have to await approval of the appropriate budget item in the 1999 Capital Budget.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. Martin D. Maguire, Acting Manager, East Traffic Region, 392-5243.

__________

Ms. Rhona Swarbrick, Co-Chair, Toronto Pedestrian Committee, appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter; and filed a written brief with respect thereto.

(A copy of the location plan, which was appended to the foregoing report, has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

14

Proposed Adjustment to the Northbound

Through Prohibition on Eglinton Avenue West

at Glen Cedar Road/Old Park Road.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 9, 1998) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To adjust the times and days of the northbound through prohibition at the intersection of EglintonAvenue West and Glen Cedar Road/Old Park Road.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with the implementation of proposed adjustment to the northbound through prohibition are contained in the Transportation Services Division's 1998 Current Budget. The estimated cost of installing appropriate signs is $600.00.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the existing northbound through prohibition on Eglinton Avenue West from Glen Cedar Road to Old Park Road, which is currently in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and from 3:00p.m. to 7:00 p.m., except Sundays and Public Holidays, be modified to be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday; and

(2)the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

Background:

At its August 13 and 14, 1997 meeting, the former Metropolitan Toronto Council adopted a report, entitled"Proposed Traffic Management Plan - City of York-Ward 1 (Cedarvale)". This proposed plan dealt with traffic management in the Cedarvale community and consisted of various measures such as: removal of parking on Eglinton Avenue West; modifications to turn prohibitions to/from Eglinton Avenue West; and traffic-calming within the community.

One recommendation involved the existing northbound left-turn prohibition and through movement prohibition on Glen Cedar Road at Eglinton Avenue West. The proposal was to adjust both prohibitions from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 am and 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday, to 7:00a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday. However, when the report was adopted, Council struck out the recommendation that the northbound through prohibition be adjusted but proceeded to change the northbound left-turn prohibition to weekday peak periods only. This was done in order to provide an opportunity for one of the former Councillors to consider this matter further. As a result, the northbound through prohibition differs from the northbound left-turn prohibition in terms of times and days that it is in effect. The original intent was to have uniformity throughout the turn prohibitions associated with the Cedarvale traffic management plan.

Discussion:

The intersection of Eglinton Avenue West and Glen Cedar Road/Old Park Road is controlled by traffic signals. Currently, signs in the field indicate that northbound through and left-turn movements are prohibited from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday. However, the by-laws state that northbound left turns are prohibited from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, while northbound through movements are prohibited from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday.

It would be prudent that both northbound through and left turns be prohibited during the same time periods. Therefore, the adjustment of the northbound through prohibition to be in effect from 7:00a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday would be in keeping with the goal of the Cedarvale traffic management plan, which has recently been implemented, and it would mirror other turn prohibitions along this section of Eglinton Avenue West.

We have consulted with Councillors Davis, Mihevc, Johnston and Walker and they have no concerns with this proposal.

Conclusions:

The adjustment of the northbound through prohibition at the intersection of Eglinton Avenue West and Glen Cedar Road/Old Park Road, to be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, would be in keeping with the goal of the Cedarvale traffic management plan and it would mirror other turn prohibitions along this section of Eglinton Avenue West.

Contact Name:

Ms. Jacqueline White, Acting Manager, Central Traffic Region, 397-5021.

(A copy of the location plan, which was appended to the foregoing report, has been forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the October 5, 1998 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

15

Other Items Considered by the Committee.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)

(a)Sheppard Subway - Status of Permits and Approvals.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having received the following communications:

(i)(May 21, 1998) General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, advising that the Toronto Transit Commission on May 20, 1998, considered Report No. (27), entitled "Sheppard Subway Status of Permits and Approvals"; that the Commission received the subject report for information and approved the following:

(1)that staff report on the critical path for completion of the Sheppard Subway, including tenders, site plan approvals, building permits, design work, tunnelling work and any other appropriate deadlines associated with the project; and further

(2)that any site plan approval conditions which add costs beyond the approved budget for the Sheppard Subway project be forwarded to the City Budget Committee and City Council for additional project and funding approval;

and stating that the foregoing is forwarded for the information of the City of Toronto Council.

(ii)(July 30, 1998) from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, responding to a request made by the Urban Environment and Development Committee for a full report on the potential cost overruns on the Sheppard Subway project; submitting a copy of the briefing given to the Toronto Transit Commission on July 9, 1998, which covers the potential cost overruns; advising that the TTC does not expect to have any more information until after September 8, 1998; and that staff will be present at the September 8, 1998 meeting of the Committee to respond to any questions.

(iii)(August 31, 1998) addressed to the Toronto Transit Commission from the Chief General Manager of the Commission and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services regarding building permits for the Sheppard Subway; and specifying the outstanding issues that must be resolved prior to the issuance of the remaining permits and approvals.

(b)Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having:

(A)recommended to the Budget Committee the adoption of:

(1)additional project approval and financing of $10.1 million for City Project No.415, "127 Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacements (Orion II)"; noting that such additional project approval and financing is required no later than October30, 1998, at which time the bids expire; and

(2)an increase of $800,000.00 in the 1998 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget, subject to successful negotiations between the Toronto Transit Commission and Overland Custom Coach Inc. regarding the delivery of 14 ELF low-floor buses in 1998; and

(B)directed that the following communication from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, be forwarded to the Budget Committee for consideration:

(i)(September 24, 1998) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, advising that the Toronto Transit Commission on September 23, 1998, approved the Recommendations contained in Report No. (6), entitled "Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement".

(ii)(October 5, 1998) from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), regarding the purchase of Wheel-Trans buses; advising that an evaluation of the continuous delivery option of ELF buses, combined with an accelerated retirement of the Orion II vehicles, would result in net overall savings of approximately $2.0 million; that, however, the continuous delivery option would require an increase to the 1999 and 2000 Operating Budgets which is significantly higher than the staggered delivery option; and stating that while City Council needs to consider the overall impact to the City of bringing forward the purchase, either approach is acceptable to the TTC.

(c)Non-Concurrence with the Proposed Installation of Traffic

Control Signals on Cherry Street at Commissioners Street.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having:

(1)again deferred consideration of the following report (May 20, 1998) from the Interim Functional Lead, Transportation, until such time as the Toronto Cycling Committee has had an opportunity to review the safety issues at the intersection of Cherry Street and Commissioners Street;

(2)requested the General Manager, Transportation Services, to submit up-to-date Police statistics when this matter is again before the Urban Environment and Development Committee for consideration; and

(3)received the following communication (September 23, 1998) from the City Clerk:

(i)(May 20, 1998) from the Interim Functional Lead, Transportation responding to a request from the Toronto Community Council to study the feasibility of installing traffic control signals at the intersection of Cherry Street and Commissioners Street; advising that an audit of the physical suitability of the pedestrian crossover (PXO) at this intersection did not reveal any characteristics which would make this location unsuitable for a PXO, and that staff of the former City of Toronto report that the PXO has been operating satisfactorily since it was installed in 1984; that, after reviewing the potential impacts of redevelopment and reconstruction in the area, staff have concluded that traffic control signals will not likely be required at the aforementioned intersection in the next few years; and recommending that the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Cherry Street and Commissioners Street not be approved.

(ii)(September 23, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the Toronto Cycling Committee on September 22, 1998, recommended to the Urban Environment and Development Committee that consideration of the foregoing report dated May 20, 1998 from the Interim Functional Lead, Transportation, be further deferred until such time as the Network/Bicycle Planning Sub-Committee of the Toronto Cycling Committee has met on-site to consider the issue of traffic safety.

(d)Feasibility of Burying the F. G. Gardiner Expressway.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having requested the General Manager, Transportation Services, to submit a report to the November 30, 1998 meeting of the Committee on the feasibility of burying the F. G. Gardiner Expressway.

Respectfully submitted,

JOE PANTALONE,

Chair

Toronto, October 5, 1998

(Report No. 12 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998.)