Driveway Widening Appeal - 170 Woburn Avenue (North Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (January4, 1999) from the Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services, District 1, Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

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

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that City Council deny the request for an exemption from the by-law to permit driveway widening at 170 Woburn Avenue, as such a request does not comply with Chapter 248 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

Background:

Councillor Michael Walker, in his communication to the Chair of Toronto Community Council, dated November 19, 1998, together with a communication dated October 8, 1998 from Mr. Sean Rourke, owner of 170 Woburn Avenue, requested an appeal to staff's decision to refuse the application for driveway widening at this location.

Comments:

Mr. Sean Rourke, owner of 170 Woburn Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M4E 2K5, submitted an application on October 8, 1998 to park a vehicle adjacent to the mutual driveway in front of the property.

Driveway widening is currently governed by the criteria set out in Chapter 248 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code. One of the criteria of the Code prohibits driveway widening where the property has access to a parking facility on the lot, or where there is adequate space for parking on the lot accessible by means of a public street or lane.

Inspection has shown that the property has access to the rear yard by means of a 4.2 m wide public laneway. The public laneway was reconstructed in concrete in 1983 and it is in good condition.

The back yard is enclosed by a newly constructed board fence. There is a large 2.78 metres wide gate situated in the middle of the rear fence that opens into the laneway, which can easily provide access to a vehicle parking in the back yard.

There is a large 110 cm diameter private tree at the rear of the property next to the fence on the west side of the property, and 5.8 metres from the rear fence.

The specifications for private trees over 30 cm in diameter are governed by Chapter 331, Trees, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, which require that no paving be installed within 2.4metres from the base of the tree. Inspection shows that the distance from the tree to the fence on the east side of the property is 6.1 metres, and when taking the clearance required around the tree into consideration, there is an area of 3.7 metres in width to accommodate a full size parking area. Most of the rear yard is sodded, and there are no obstacles to prevent parking, in the area of the back yard adjacent to the laneway. Other landscaping features, i.e. walkway and small patio, are located in the area between the tree and the house.

Based on the above reasons, Mr. Rourke was informed that his application was refused.

Notwithstanding the laneway access to the rear, the proposed parking space at the front of the property would meet the physical criteria of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 248.

Conclusions:

As the property has access to the rear of the property by means of an improved public laneway, and there is sufficient space to accommodate a parking area, this location is not eligible for driveway widening. This request should be denied by Council.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Nino Pellegrini, 392-7778