Request for Exemption to By-law No. 81-89
Regulating the Height of Fences
5 Crandall Road
The East York Community Council unanimously recommends that:
(1)the request for exemption to East York By-law No. 81-89, which regulates the height of fences, at 5 Crandall
Road be approved;
(2)Section 3.2.2 of By-law No. 81-89, respecting the requirement for a non-refundable fee in the amount of
$200.00, be waived, and such amount refunded to Ms. Atkinson; and
(3)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect to the
foregoing, including the introduction of the necessary Bill in Council.
The East York Community Council submits the following report (September 21, 1999) from the East District
Manager, Municipal Standards:
Purpose:
To report to the October 12, 1999 meeting of the East York Community Council in order to provide a report on a request
for an exemption from the height of a fence at 5 Crandall Road as submitted by Ms. Pamela Atkinson.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
The applicant has submitted the required, non-refundable fee of $200.00 as part of her exemption request.
Recommendations:
This report is submitted without recommendation and suggests that the East York Community Council make a decision
based on the merits of the exemption request following input from the applicant and any other interested parties.
Background:
As a result of a complaint from an area resident, staff were called to investigate the construction of additional fencing on
top of an existing fence on a deck as well as adjacent to a patio.
Comments:
The Municipal Standards Division inspected and subsequently determined that three panels of fencing were added on top
of existing fencing which was located on a deck and adjacent grade-level patio.
The additional panels added to the deck fencing consists of two lattice panels. The first panel is 2.18 metres in length
(7'2") and is 2.97 metres (9'9") in height from the surface of the deck and 3.91 metres (12'10") in height from grade. The
second panel is 1.3 metres (4'3") in length and is 1.83 metres (6') in height from the deck surface and 2.96 metres (9'6") in
height from grade.
By-law No. 81-89, Section 2.3.2 permits fences on decks to be no higher than 1.9 (6'3") metres in height from the surface
of a deck and no more than 2.4 (8'2") from grade. Consequently, the first panel violates these two restrictions while the
second fails on one of the restrictions.
The third panel consisting of board-on-board fencing has been installed on top of an already existing board-on-board fence.
The additional portion has a length of 1.9 metres (6'3") and ranges in height from 2.69 metres (8'10") tapering down to the
height of the original fence.
By-law No. 81-89, Section 2.1.2 restricts the heights of such fences to 2.35 metres (7'8") provided that that portion of the
fence in excess of 1.9 metres (6'3") consists of open lattice work. Accordingly, the fence extension next to the patio at
grade fails on both tests of this section.
All the other fencing around the rest of the yard complies with all other requirements of the By-law.
Conclusions:
The variances requested are quite significant but the applicant has submitted a letter outlining why they feel they need the
additional height of fencing and it seems that it involves the impact of a rear addition to the neighbouring property and it
will be necessary for the East York Community Council to determine whether or not the reasons outlined by the applicant
warrant approval of the requested variances.
Contact Name:
Michael Vince
Manager of By-law Enforcement
397-4481
The East York Community Council also submits the following communication (September 8, 1999) from Ms.
Pamela Atkinson, East York:
By way of this correspondence I wish to apply for an exemption from the By-law which restricts the height of a fence on a
deck and approximately four feet of a garden fence at the patio level for the following reasons:
(i)The deck has been an integral part of my home environment for more than 20 years, and used extensively by our
family.
(ii)A two storey addition has been built by my neighbours bringing their building to within four feet of my home and
deck. The location of three windows immediately facing the deck is intrusive and has invaded the privacy which I have
enjoyed for over two decades.
(iii)The portion of lattice that has been added, and which is not compliant with the By-law has been installed in a tasteful
manner. There are no protrusions from the deck and the fence does not in any way harm, impede or damage my neighbours
property or property value.
(iv)The increased height of the garden fence at the patio level provides a small mount of privacy for a barbeque. This
area is now overlooked by a large and imposing second floor deck.
I am enclosing pictures so that you may see that the fence has been constructed to offer privacy, and also to suit the existing
structure of my home.
I understand that staff and/or elected officials may be reviewing this situation further. They are invited and welcome to
visit the site at 5 Crandall Road.
I understand also that there is a $200.00 fee for making this application. A cheque payable to the City of Toronto is
enclosed.
Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.
--------
(A copy of the photographs referred to in the foregoing communication from Ms. Atkinson was circulated to Members of
the Community Council with the Agenda for the meeting of the East York Community Council and the originals are on file
in the office of the City Clerk.)
--------
The following persons appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter:
-Ms. Pamela Atkinson, East York;
-Mr. Brad Holland, East York; and submitted photographs of the subject fence; and
-Mr. Don Laskin, East York.
--------
(The East York Community Council also had before it photographs, submitted by the East District Manager, Municipal
Standards, showing the subject fence as seen from the properties at No. 5 and 7 Crandall Road respectively, copies of
which are on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
