August 30, 1999

To:Toronto Community Council

From:Angie Antoniou, Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services, District 1

Subject:Appeal - Driveway Widening - 543 Windermere Avenue (High Park)

Purpose:

To report on the applicant's appeal of staff's refusal of an application for driveway widening 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.

Recommendations:

The Toronto Community Council may recommend that:

(1)City Council deny the request for an exemption from the by-law to permit driveway widening at 543 Windermere Avenue, as such a request does not comply with Chapter 248 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code;

OR

(2)(a)City Council approve driveway widening at 543 Windermere Avenue subject to the driveway widening not exceeding 1.9 m in width; and

(b)the parking area being paved with semi-permeable paving materials, i.e. ecostone pavers or approved and equivalent permeable paving treatment acceptable to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

Background:

Councillor David Miller, in his communication dated June 22, 1999, together with a communication dated May 10, 1999 from Mr. Bjug Borgundvaag, owner of 543 Windermere Avenue, requested an appeal to staff's decision to refuse the application for driveway widening at this location.

Comments:

Mr. Bjug Borgundvaag, owner of 543 Windermere Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M6S 3L5, submitted an application on May 13, 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. The current criteria of the Code:

(a)prohibits driveway widening where the mutual driveway exceeds a maximum width of 2.6metres;

(b)requires that the new requirements of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 331, Trees, are complied with.

Inspection has shown that the property has an existing single car garage accessed by means of a 3.8metres wide mutual driveway. Based on the width of the mutual driveway, Mr. Borgundvaag was informed that his application was refused.

Notwithstanding that this location is not eligible for driveway widening because of the width of the driveway, the application was also reviewed to determine if the property would meet the other physical criteria of the Municipal Code, (i.e. landscaping requirements and clearances from trees).

There is a large 90 cm diameter City-owned tree fronting the property, which is situated 4.3 metres from the mutual driveway. The specifications for trees over 50 cm in diameter require that no paving be installed within 2.4metres from the base of the tree. Taking into account the required clearance from the tree, a 1.9 metre wide parking space could be constructed adjacent to the mutual driveway.

I also note that all other landscaping requirements of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 248 could also be met.

Conclusions:

As the property has a mutual driveway which exceeds the maximum width to permit licensing and a City-owned tree fronting the property, this location is not eligible for driveway widening. This request should be denied by Council.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Nino Pellegrini, 392-7768

Manager

NP/np

(p:\1999\ug\cws\bae\to991110.bae) - np