December 9, 1998
To:North York Community Council
From:Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services
Subject:Fence By-Law Variance Request
219 Ruth Avenue - Ward 10
Purpose:
To address request for variance on height of fence on east side of the subject property.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
- that the application for a variance on the fence height be refused as the fence encroaches
upon the neighbouring premises and the owner advised to remove the fence; or
- as the Committee of Adjustment has approved the east side yard setback to the deck of 0
metres whereas 1.8 metre is required which does not include the width of the posts for the
fence, that the owner of #219 Ruth Avenue be requested to pursue the matter with the
neighbours in order to obtain their approval for the fence to remain as an encroachment
over their premises and, if approval is obtained from the neighbours to maintain the
encroaching fence, that the fence be reduced in height to 2.13 metres (7') measured from
grade.
Council Reference/Background/History:
David Ho on behalf of Mr. Tony Chan of 219 Ruth Avenue has requested the variance on the
fence on the basis that the fence is required to be 8 feet high measured from the deck and 11
feet high measured from grade to block the view of the roof of the neighbour's garage.
The problems at this site commenced in 1996 with (1) a deck structure constructed in the east
side yard which encroaches into the side yard setback in contravention of Zoning By-Law
7625, Section 6(9) and (2) the attachment to the deck of a fence greater than 2.13m (7 feet) in
height (actual measurement 10' to 12' measured from grade and approximately 38' in length)
in contravention of By-Law 30901, Section 3.1.3. A permit on record with the Building
Division reveals a 3' x 3' platform and steps in lieu of the deck structure.
Subsequently, charges on both contraventions were brought before the Ontario Court
(Provincial Division). Mr. Chan was convicted and fined $200.00 on each violation on
October 19, 1998.
There was a hearing with the Committee of Adjustment on October 22, 1998 with respect to
the variance required for the reconstructed unexcavated deck on the east side. The variance
requested was to allow a setback of 0 m in lieu of the required 1.8 m. That application was
approved.
Comments:
A photograph of the deck structure and fence is attached. As there is 0 m setback for the deck
structure, it is clear that the fence is encroaching which is substantiated by a survey as well as
being in contravention of By-Law 30901.
Further, Mr. Ho's depiction in the sketch attached to the variance request does not show that
the length of the fence extends another approximately 8.5 feet beyond the deck structure nor
does it reflect the height at 10' - 12' above grade.
Mr. Ho has stated in his variance request that the height of the fence is intended to block the
view of the roof of the neighbour's garage. This statement requires clarification given that the
roof of the garage is peaked and would not be an area used for the purposes of a roof deck.
Mr. Chan would face the problem of cutting into the deck structure in order to remove the
fence.
Conclusions:
- The committee of Adjustment has approved the 0 m setback which does not include the
fence; therefore, the fence is encroaching the neighbour=s property and should be removed.
Option:
- If Mr. Chan can come to an agreement with the neighbour to allow the fence to remain, the
City will have no objection to maintenance of the fence provided it does not exceed 2.13 m
in height, measured from grade.
Contact Name:
Donna Perrin, North District Manager
Municipal Standards and Court Services
395-7020
Reviewed by:
Harold BrattenVIRGINIA M. WEST
Director Commissioner
Municipal Licensing and Standards DivisionUrban Planning and Development Services
