UDZ-94-30 - Pearl Godfrey -

123 and 125 Steeles Avenue East -

Ontario Municipal Board Appeal -

Retention of Outside Planning Consultant - North York Centre

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the report (December15,1998) from the City Solicitor.

The North York Community Council also reports, for the information of Council, having requested:

(1)the Commissioner of Corporate Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to bring forward a joint report to the appropriate Committee regarding a policy on the hiring of outside planning consultants to testify at Ontario Municipal Hearings; that such report include the account in the Legal Department which should be used for this purpose other than the Corporate Contingency Account; and

(2)that a copy of this joint report be also submitted to the February 19, 1999 meeting of the Budget Committee for its consideration during deliberations of the 1999 Operating Budget.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (December 15, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

The Legal Division is requesting Council authority to retain an outside planning consultant for the pending Ontario Municipal Board Hearing.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

A maximum of $15,000.00 to be allocated from a Corporate Contingency Account for the retention of an outside planning witness.

Recommendation:

That a maximum of $15,000.00 be allocated to the Legal Division from a Corporate Contingency Account to retain a planning consultant to testify at an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing yet to be scheduled to hear the Appeal of the landowner.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The landowner has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board from the refusal of the Council of the former City of North York to enact a Zoning By-law to permit the lands at 123 and 125 Steeles Avenue East to be developed with two semi-detached dwellings having a total of 4 units. North York planning staff recommended approval of the application; the Planning Committee and Council of the former City refused the application and did not adopt the Planning Department's recommendation.

Since planning staff cannot provide evidence under oath, we require a planning consultant to support the Decision of the Council of the former City of North York.

Conclusions:

We estimate that an upset limit of $15,000.00 be set aside in a Corporate Contingency Account for this purpose.

Contact Name:

Larry J. Darkes

Solicitor

Planning and Administrative Tribunal Law

Tel. No. (416) 392-7247

Fax No. (416) 392-0005

________

A recorded vote on the motion, moved by Councillor Feldman to defer consideration of this matter until a policy has been established regarding the allocation of funds to retain outside planning consultants for pending Ontario Municipal Board hearings, was as follows:

FOR:Councillor Feldman

AGAINST:Councillors Mammoliti, Moscoe, Berger, Flint, Chong, Filion, Shiner, King

ABSENT:Councillors Sgro, Li Preti, Augimeri, Gardner, Minnan-Wong

Lost

A recorded vote on the recommendation to adopt the report, moved by Councillor Moscoe, was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Mammoliti, Moscoe, Berger, Flint, Gardner, Chong, Filion

AGAINST:Councillors Feldman, Shiner

ABSENT:Councillors Sgro, Li Preti, Augimeri, Minnan-Wong, King

Carried

A recorded vote on the motion moved by Councillor Shiner for the requested joint report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Moscoe, Feldman, Berger, Flint, Chong, Filion, Shiner, King

AGAINST:Councillors Mammoliti, Gardner

ABSENT:Councillors Sgro, Li Preti, Augimeri, Minnan-Wong

Carried