(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that:

(1) approval of the outdoor licensed refreshment area at Dieppe Park associated with the 3rd Annual Jeff Shaw Memorial Fastpitch Tournament on June 5, 6 and 7, 1998, as a community event;

(2) the hours of operation for the outdoor licensed refreshment area be as follows:

Friday, June 5, 1998 from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.;

Saturday, June 6, 1998 from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; and

Sunday, June 7, 1998 from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; and

(3) received the following communication (Undated) from Mr. Paul Presidente, Chairman, The Dieppe Men's Fastball League:

"The Dieppe Men's Fastball League and co-hosts the Toronto's Masters Fastball Club will be hosting the 3rd Annual Jeff Shaw Memorial Fastpitch Tournament, June 5th, 6 and 7th 1998 at the Dieppe Softball Facility. Our committee is requesting for you and your councils approval for a beer garden at this prestigious event. The location would be the outdoor rink, all facilities included, along with the outside area east of the building bounded off from the north and south perimeter with a snow free fence to the existing home run fence. Preliminary discussions with Marilou Murray and the head parks keeper (Bob Ward) have indicated what costs would occur. Along with your municipal alcohol policies guidelines and procedures our committee is poised to comply to all implementations. Insurance for the three day event will be purchased through the Ontario Amateur Softball Association (OA.S.A.) At the cost of $162.00. The contact at the O.A.S.A. is Ron G. Taylor, Insurance Coordinator, P.O. Box 82503, 5 Points Mall Postal Outlet, Oshawa Ontario L1G 7W7, and can be reached at 1-705-778-2637. The application for Special Occasion Permit from the L.L.B.O. has been purchased, please see copy.

Teams that will be competing will be the Owen Sound, Ontario Champions, runner-up Canadian Finalists 1997 and defending tournament champions. Hefflin Builders, New York 5th ranked team in North America, Ashland Ohio, Scarborough Thunder, Napanee Express etc. It should be noted that the out of town and out of province teams have local players on the rosters. The success of the East York Fastball Players can be contributed directly to your facilities and programs.

The women's fastball league will be represented at the tournament by having a fund raising booth at the park and a donation to the Topham Midget Boys Fastball Program will made, if a profit can be made at this years event. Thank you for you and your councils considerations, I am looking forward to hearing from you soon."

Mr. Paul Presidente, Chairman, the Dieppe Men's Fastball League, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 17, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations, East York:

Purpose:

To advise the East York Community Council of the liability implications and legal cost to have the property owner sign Indemnity and Encroachment Agreements for permission to maintain a swing from a City tree at 67 Ferris Road, East York.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Mr. Quinto Annibale of the law firm of Loopstra, Nixon and McLeish has advised staff of the Parks and Recreation Division in East York Region that preparation of Indemnity and Encroachment Agreements and registration of such Agreements on title for the subject property would incur a legal cost of approximately $450.00.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the appeal by the homeowner of 67 Ferris Road be denied.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its February 18 and 19, 1998 meeting, the East York Community Council received a report from the Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations regarding an appeal by the homeowner of 67 Ferris Road to hang a tire swing from a City tree in the front yard of the subject property. The homeowner also appeared before the Community Council with respect to this matter. Upon considering all comments provided in the report and the comments made by the homeowner, the East York Community Council requested the Interim Functional Lead for Parks and Recreation to report on the following:

(i) the cost to the appellant to enter into a Waiver of Responsibility Agreement to allow the appellant to locate the tire swing in the municipal tree at 67 Ferris Road; and

(ii) a determination on whether this waiver will completely absolve the municipality of any and all liability.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Mr. Quinto Annibale of the law firm Loopstra, Nixon and McLeish was consulted in March 1998 on the liability and cost implications of preparing and registering appropriate legal documents granting permission to the property owner to maintain a swing in a City tree. Mr. Annibale has advised that a combined Indemnity Agreement and Encroachment Agreement would have to be entered into with the property owner and that such Agreements would have to be registered on title to protect the municipality in the event of change of ownership.

A Indemnity Agreement can be drafted which would substantially reduce the likelihood of the municipality being found liable for personal injury or property damage, or at least in the case of an indemnity, shift the burden of liability to someone other than the municipality. The Agreement can be drafted in the same manner as an Encroachment Agreement, which would have standard terms with respect to the use of the tree and would require the homeowner to release, indemnify and save the municipality harmless from and for any damages or liability, including third party liability and further, would require the owner to provide insurance to the municipality in the sum of $2,000,000.00. Nevertheless, even with these protections, it cannot be guaranteed that the municipality would not be found liable. The municipality would very likely be named in a lawsuit if an accident were to occur either with the homeowner or a third party. The municipality would then have to argue either that the municipality is not liable or that the waiver or indemnity contained in the Agreement was sufficient to protect the municipality and that the homeowner or his or her insurer should provide coverage.

Mr. Annibale has also advised that the same Agreement would have to grant permission to the property owner to encroach on the municipal road allowance for the purposes of maintaining a swing in a municipal tree. The reason for this is that the tree is located on the municipal road allowance.

Conclusions:

It is clear that the City cannot be guaranteed that it will be completely absolved of any and all liability by entering into an Indemnity Agreement. The likelihood of liability or ultimate responsibility for damages could be reduced substantially by entering into such Agreement. It should also be noted that hanging any type of swing from the tree would certainly result in abrasion and constriction damage to the branch that the rope would be attached to. This type of damage could compromise the structural integrity of the branch.

Contact Name:

Don Boyle

Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations

Phone: (416) 778-2180 Fax: (416) 466-4170

E-mail: dboyle@borough.eastyork.on.ca

the Former Borough of East York

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:

Purpose:

This report is to the April 1, 1998 meeting of the East York Community Council and responds to a request by the Toronto Transportation Department for an exemption from our Noise By-law No. 71-89 of the former Borough of East York for bridge rehabilitation work on the Don Valley Parkway.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

That the request for an exemption from noise By-law No. 71-89, as requested by the Toronto Transportation Department, be granted to facilitate rehabilitation work on the bridge along the Don Valley Parkway across the Bloor Street ramp through the nighttime and on weekends.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Toronto Transportation Department is requesting an exemption from the Noise By-law No. 71-89 of the former Borough of East York to facilitate rehabilitation work on the bridge along the Don Valley Parkway over the Bloor Street ramp.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The project is scheduled to begin soon after April 15, 1998, and to be completed by the end of September, 1998. Noisy operations such as concrete breaking and pile driving will be restricted to hours between 7:00 am and 11:00 pm.

Staff estimate that the noise generated will periodically exceed acceptable levels, and will be clearly audible at the nearest residences along Broadview Avenue, about 800 metres away.

The Don Valley Parkway will have to be closed to accommodate this project, to install traffic control barriers and signage associated with each stage. These closures can only be accommodated during nights and on weekends in order to minimize the inconvenience to residents and businesses. Also, the contractor will be given a tight schedule so that the project is completed in the shortest possible time. Consequently this type of work is always carried out through the night and on weekends.

Conclusions:

Granting the exemption for rehabilitation work on the bridge along the Don Valley Parkway over the Bloor Street ramp, to be carried out through nighttimes and on weekends, is not expected to cause an unbearable inconvenience to neighbouring residents.

Contact Name:

Kim Choo-Ying

Environmental Engineer, East York Office

Telephone No.: (416) 778-2218

Fax No.: (416) 466-9877

The East York Community Council submits the following report (March 5, 1998) from the Project Manager - Structures, City of Toronto Transportation Department:

In recent years the Transportation Department has rehabilitated various bridges located along the Don Valley Parkway. This year the bridge carrying northbound and southbound Don Valley traffic over the Bloor Street ramps will be rehabilitated. As in past years the construction will be done in 3 stages so that a minimum of two (2) lanes of traffic in both directions is maintained.

To install the traffic control barriers and signage associated with each stage, the Don Valley Parkway has to be closed. To minimize the inconvenience to the residents and businesses within Toronto, these Don Valley Parkway closures can only be accommodated during nights and weekends. Also, the contractor is given a tight schedule in order that the work is completed in the shortest possible time. As a result, night and weekend work is often done.

We are requesting an exemption to the East York community noise by-law in order that construction could be carried out through the night and on weekends as required. Noisy operations such as concrete breaking and pile driving would be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. whenever possible to minimize the inconvenience to nearby residents.

Work on the project is scheduled to start shortly after contract award on April 15; completion is scheduled by the end of September 1998.

Should you require any additional information please contact me at 392-8321. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Woodbine Avenue and Sandra Road

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:

Purpose:

This report is to the April 1, 1998 meeting of the East York Community Council and responds to a request by the Toronto Transportation Department for an exemption from Noise By-law No. 71-89 of the former Borough of East York to facilitate road resurfacing of O'Connor Drive from Woodbine Avenue to Sandra Road.

Financial Implications:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

That Council grant an exemption from By-law No. 71-89 to the Toronto Transportation Department to facilitate the resurfacing of O'Connor Drive, from Woodbine Avenue to Sandra Road on any two successive weekends between 7:00 pm, Friday to 6:00 am, Monday, between April 20, 1998 and August 21, 1998, and on a third weekend, if necessary, in case of inclement weather or equipment breakdown.

Background:

The Toronto Transportation Department had submitted to the Clerk's Department a request, dated March 13, 1998, for an exemption form the East York District's Noise By-law No. 71-89 to allow the resurfacing of O'Connor Drive from Woodbine Avenue to Sandra Road.

Discussion:

The project will be carried out on any two successive weekends from 7:00 pm, Friday to 6:00 am, Monday, between April 20, 1998 and August 21, 1998, and on a third weekend, if necessary, in case of inclement weather or equipment breakdown.

The sequence of tasks is that on the first weekend the existing/old pavement surface will be removed and a new base layer of asphalt will be laid. During the intervening week between rush hours, maintenance hole frames and covers will be adjusted. Finally, on the following weekend the surface asphalt pavement will be laid.

The Toronto Transportation Department wishes to complete this project within the dates and times mentioned in order to minimize disruption/inconvenience to the vast number of commuters using O'Connor Drive.

The heavy equipment used for road resurfacing will emit noise above levels normally found in residential areas, and may disrupt the restful sleep of some residents. The attached map shows the location of the project and residences that may be impacted.

It should be noted that an exemption for the subject project was approved by the former East York Council at its April 14, 1997 meeting.

Conclusions:

The noise generated by the project may impact negatively on adjacent residences. However, because of the inconvenience that can result if the project were carried out during normal working hours, and the relatively short construction period, staff support the request.

Contact Name:

Kim Choo-Ying

Environmental Engineer, East York Office

Telephone No.: (416) 778-2218

Fax No.: (416) 466-9877

The East York Community Council submits the following report (March 13, 1998) from the Manager, Road Resurfacing Projects Construction Branch, Transportation Department:

The purpose of this memorandum is to request an exemption from the East York Office's Noise By-law to allow road resurfacing to be completed on the arterial roads within the boundaries of the "old" Borough of East York at the locations shown on the attached table.

Each intersection will require a noise exemption for two (2) successive weekends between the hours of 7:00 p.m., Friday to 6:00 a.m., Monday between the dates specified. This will allow the existing pavement surface to be removed to a depth of 125 mm or down to the concrete roadbase and paved with base asphalt during the first weekend, followed by adjustment of maintenance hole frames and covers during the week between the rush hour periods and surface asphalt paving the following weekend. In case of inclement weather or equipment breakdown, a third weekend may be required.

It is imperative that this work is completed at the dates and times mentioned in order to minimize disruption to the vast number of commuters using these major arterial roads.

Please contact me at 392-8322 if you require additional information.

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends adoption of the following report (March 10, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:

Purpose:

To report to the April 1, 1998 East York Community Council further on the results of traffic studies conducted during the temporary installation of turn restrictions onto Donegall Drive.

Financial Implications:

The proposed recommendations can be accommodated in the 1998 Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) By-law No. 92-93, entitled "To regulate traffic on roads in the Borough of East York" be amended to remove the "No Right Turn, 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction for eastbound motorists on Fleming Crescent at Donegall Drive; and

(2) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Background:

The Council of the City of Toronto, at its meeting on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted the following recommendations made by the East York Community Council at its meeting on February 18, 19, 1998.

"The East York Community Council recommends that:

(1) the Interim Functional Lead for Transportation be requested to replace the yield sign at the intersection of Cameron Crescent and Macnaughton Road with a stop sign;

(2) the City Clerk be requested to poll the residents on Macnaughton Road and Cameron Crescent between Millwood Road and Parkhurst Boulevard with respect to the implementation of a right turn restriction from westbound Millwood Road onto northbound Macnaughton Road from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.;

(3) the Interim Functional Lead for Transportation be requested to report on alternative solutions to the traffic problems on Fleming Crescent; and,

(4) the Metropolitan Toronto Police Department be requested to enforce speed and parking restrictions on Macnaughton Road."

This report deals with the above-noted item No. 3 and reports on alternative solutions to the traffic problems on Fleming Crescent. Staff have forward a request to the Toronto Police Service to conduct appropriate enforcement measures on Macnaughton Road. Staff have also prepared a by-law amendment to replace the yield sign at the intersection of Cameron Crescent and Macnaughton Road with a stop sign.

Discussion:

Previously, staff recommended that the eastbound right turn restriction introduced at the intersection of Fleming Crescent and Donegall Drive be rescinded. Traffic volumes on Fleming Crescent have increased significantly since this turn restriction was introduced during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Prior to the introduction of this turn restriction, traffic volumes on Donegall Drive were generally evenly split between eastbound through and eastbound right turning movements. The following table highlights the results of before and after studies conducted at the intersection of Fleming Crescent and Donegall Drive.

The above table illustrates that, prior to the introduction of the peak period right turn prohibitions, eastbound traffic volumes on Fleming Crescent were generally split between through and right turns during both the morning and afternoon peak periods.

To augment the data collected for the February 4, 1998 report, staff conducted a traffic study at the intersection of Fleming Crescent and Parkhurst Boulevard on a typical weekday in March. Traffic volumes at this intersection indicated that during the a.m. peak period, 109 vehicles (97 percent of approach volume) proceeded from northbound Fleming Crescent to eastbound Parkhurst Boulevard, and during the p.m. peak period, 267 vehicles (93 percent of approach volume) were observed performing the same movement.

Although origin/destination studies have not been conducted, the volumes outlined above are consistent with the volumes expected with the majority of motorists accessing other areas of South Leaside. Fleming Crescent is a natural access point to South Leaside given the signalized intersection of Fleming Crescent and Bayview Avenue and the southbound peak period turn restrictions at the unsignalized intersection of Bayview Avenue and Parkhurst Boulevard.

It is evident that the traffic travelling eastbound on Fleming Crescent, which is restricted from accessing Donegall Drive due to the peak period turn restrictions at Donegall Drive and Fleming Crescent, continues eastbound towards Laird Drive via Parkhurst Boulevard. Staff concur with local residents that motorists are using Fleming Crescent to access Parkhurst Boulevard during the morning and afternoon peak periods whereas they may have used Donegall Drive to access Millwood Road prior to the introduction of the peak period turn restrictions.

Staff do not recommend, however, that further turn restrictions be implemented in this area of South Leaside. The introduction of turn restrictions on an incremental basis, without reviewing the system-wide implications, could result in traffic merely shifting between local streets in this area. Residents on other local streets where traffic volumes have increased would, in all likelihood, expect similar mitigation measures. It is anticipated that traffic would simply divert to northbound Donegall Drive, and we would expect the residents of this section of Donegall to Drive to request a northbound right turn restriction at Donegall Drive and Parkhurst Boulevard.

Donegall Drive has historically been used as a by-pass to Bayview Avenue. The introduction of additional turn restrictions would severely limit access to the east by residents of Donegall Drive and Fleming Crescent. These residents would be required to travel south on their respective streets and access Parkhurst Boulevard via Cameron Crescent, or use Donegall Drive, south of Fleming Crescent to access Millwood Road as an alternate eastbound travel route. In either case, they would now be using local streets in their community which have historically not been used by these residents for accessing Parkhurst Boulevard or Millwood Road.

Additional turn restrictions would also impact the ability of other Leaside residents to access their streets. These residents would have to change their travel patterns and divert to other Leaside streets such as Parkhurst Boulevard.

Conclusions:

The temporary installation of a "No Right Turn, 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., Monday to Friday" restriction for eastbound motorists on Fleming Crescent at Donegall Drive has not demonstrated a reduction in infiltrating traffic into this section of Leaside. It has merely relocated traffic volumes from Donegall Drive onto Fleming Crescent. Given that traffic volumes were generally equal on Fleming Crescent and Donegall Drive before the peak period turn restrictions were implemented, it is recommended that this "No Right Turn" restriction be removed.

It would not be prudent to implement a turn restriction at Fleming Crescent and Donegall Drive without introducing a similar turn restriction at Donegall Drive and Parkhurst Boulevard. Turn restrictions at these 2 intersections would force local residents to use streets such as Cameron Crescent and Donegall Drive for eastbound travel. Staff do not recommend the introduction of any further turn restrictions in this area at this time.

Contact Name:

Peter Bartos, P.Eng., Transportation Engineer

East York Office

778-2225

pbartos@borough.eastyork.on.ca

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (March 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:

Purpose:

To report to the April 1, 1998, East York Community Council meeting regarding the removal of a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on Sammon Avenue.

Funding Sources:

The proposed recommendation can be accommodated within the Operating Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) By-law No. 92-93, entitled "To regulate traffic on roads in the Borough of East York" be amended to remove a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the north side of Sammon Avenue, from a point 42.5 metres west of the west curb line of Monarch Park Avenue to the east curb line of Bonnie Brae Boulevard; and

(2) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Background:

The Borough Clerk received a letter dated October 21, 1997, from Caroline Filion, 444 Sammon Avenue, requesting the removal of a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the north side of Sammon Avenue from a point 42.5 metres west of Monarch Park Avenue to Bonnie Brae Boulevard. Attached to the letter was a petition from residents on this block supporting the removal of the parking restriction. The letter was subsequently forwarded to the Development Services Department on October 27, 1997, for investigation.

Discussion:

Sammon Avenue, between Monarch Park Avenue and Bonnie Brae Boulevard, is regulated by: a "No Parking Anytime" restriction and a School Bus Loading Zone adjacent to St. Aloysius School on the south side of the street; and, a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the north side from a point 42.5 metres west of Monarch Park Avenue to Bonnie Brae Boulevard. The north side of the street is also governed by overnight permit parking between 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. Appendix 'A' illustrates the existing parking restrictions.

Prior to 1980, the north side of Sammon Avenue, between a point 42.5 metres west of Monarch Park Avenue and Bonnie Brae Boulevard, was regulated by a "No Parking Anytime" restriction because of the presence of a mid-block school crossing. Overnight permit parking was implemented on the north side of Sammon Avenue, between Monarch Park Avenue and Bonnie Brae Boulevard, on March 3, 1980, allowing five parking spaces. In December 1980, the "No Parking Anytime" restriction was changed to a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction to allow an increase in overnight permit parking from 5 spaces to 9 spaces. On October 1, 1984, Council approved the implementation of the current School Bus Loading Zone on the south side of Sammon Avenue and eliminated the mid-block school crossing. It was noted in that report to Council that a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" existed on the north side of the street, adjacent to the proposed School Bus Loading Zone. Records also indicate that on three occasions between 1982 and October 1997, staff were required to replace regulatory signs on this block that were removed by "persons unknown".

Ms. Filion's complaint requesting the removal of the "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction arose when staff were investigating a complaint about the travelled portion of Sammon Avenue, between Monarch Park Avenue and Bonnie Brae Boulevard, being reduced to one lane because of school buses parked in the School Bus Loading Zone on the south side of the street and vehicles parked on the north side. An investigation of the parking restrictions revealed that a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction was in effect, however, the signs indicating the restriction were not present and it is unknown how long they had been missing. The "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" signs were reinstalled on October 15, 1997, and Ms. Filion's letter and petition were received shortly thereafter requesting the removal of the restriction.

Transportation staff conducted a study on Sammon Avenue in the vicinity of the School Bus Loading Zone adjacent to St. Aloysius School to evaluate traffic operations when the loading zone was in use by school buses. The study revealed that school buses use the loading zone between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Staff observed vehicles stopping and parking in the "No Parking" zone on the north side of the street, generally to pick up and drop off children at the school. Even when the No Parking zone was clear, vehicles were reluctant to manoeuver around the school buses and would wait until oncoming traffic cleared before proceeding. The maximum time that a vehicle was delayed was 6 seconds.

An analysis of reported collisions on this block for the period from January 1, 1993, to December 31, 1997, revealed one collision which occurred on September 1, 1993, at 4:30 p.m. in which a child ran from between two parked vehicles on the north side of the street into the side of a westbound vehicle. No charges were laid and the child sustained minor injuries.

Our study indicated that traffic operations are not being negatively affected when vehicles are parked on the north side of Sammon Avenue when school buses are using the School Bus Loading Zone. Vehicles either park in the area regardless of the restriction or, when the "No Parking" zone is clear, motorists are reluctant to manoeuvre around the school buses and wait until oncoming traffic clears. Therefore, it is recommended that this "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction be removed.

Conclusions:

Although parking on the north side of Sammon Avenue is prohibited between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday across from the signed School Bus Loading Zone, a study conducted by staff revealed that vehicles regularly stop and park there. Furthermore, motorists travelling on Sammon Avenue wait until oncoming traffic is clear before proceeding through the single traffic lane that results when school buses are parked in the School Bus Loading Zone adjacent to St. Aloysius School.

If the "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction is removed, traffic operations are not expected to be negatively impacted since our study revealed that vehicles were delayed a maximum of 6 seconds before being able to proceed. Therefore, it is recommended that the "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the north side of Sammon Avenue, between a point 42.5 metres west of Monarch Park Avenue and Bonnie Brae Boulevard be removed.

Contact Name:

Bryan Muir, Transportation Technologist

East York Office

778-2227

bmuir@borough.eastyork.on.ca

Ms. Caroline Filion, East York, appeared before The East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council after considering the deputations and the report (March 4, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, recommends the adoption of the aforementioned report subject to also permitting a convenience store on the ground floor of the mixed use residential - commercial building at 7 Overlea Boulevard for the reason that the proposal is an appropriate use of land.

The East York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on April 1, 1998, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (March 4, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to provide the East York Community Council with a staff opinion and recommendations on an application to amend Zoning By-law No. 1916 to permit retail commercial uses, a video store and personal service shops on the ground floor of the 7-storey mixed use residential and commercial building at 7 Overlea Boulevard.

The report is for the Community Council's consideration at the public meeting on April 1, 1998.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1) Approve the application by Invar Building Corporation to amend Zoning By-law No. 1916 to permit retail stores and personal service shops on the ground floor of the mixed use residential-commercial building at 7 Overlea Boulevard, and to permit 5 parking spaces on the east side of the property, adjacent to Leaside Park Drive;

(2) That Council enact an amendment to Zoning By-law No. 1916 to permit the uses described in Recommendation (1) above.

Background:

Site Description:

The site is a 1.05 ha (2.6 acres) property located at the southeast corner of Overlea Boulevard and Millwood Road. It is developed with a seven-storey, 14,128 m² (152,078 sq. ft.) building, formerly used for offices. The owners, Invar Building Corporation, are in the process of converting the building to a mixed use, residential-commercial building, with 144-unit condominium apartment units and ground floor commercial uses.

Proposal:

Vincent Planning and Development Consultants Inc. submitted an application on behalf of the owners to amend Zoning By-law No. 1916 to permit retail stores and personal service shops on the ground floor of the building. The purpose of the application is to allow the owners to lease space to a convenience store and service uses that would primarily serve the residents of the apartments in the building. The zoning by-law currently permits various office and service commercial uses, but retail uses and personal service shops are not permitted.

The applicant also requested an amendment to change Schedule "2" to By-law No. 68-97 (the site plan attached to the site-specific zoning by-law) to permit 5 parking spaces with access from Leaside Park Drive, for parking for a proposed convenience store.

Official Plan:

The site is designated East York Centre - Mixed Use Area in the Official Plan. Section 3.2.2 permits land in this designation to be developed for a mix of retail, service and office commercial, residential, public educational and institutional land uses.

The property is also designated as Special Policy Area 8. Section 3.15.8 permits land in Special Policy Area 8 to be used for residential and freestanding retail commercial uses only if a site specific Zoning By-law amendment is approved.

Zoning By-law:

The property is zoned Commercial Centre - CC(3) Site Specific Zone in Zoning By-law No. 1916. The site specific by-law (By-law No. 68-97) was passed by Council on May 20, 1997 to allow the owners to construct 144 residential units in the building. The by-law also permits the following commercial uses on the ground floor of the building:

a) Offices:

i) Business and Professional Office

ii) Government Office

b) Service Commercial:

i) Hotel with ancillary retail uses limited to a tuck shop and gift and boutique stores only;

ii) bank and financial institution;

iii) Clinic (including a drug dispensing facility limited to a Gross Floor Area of not more than 50 m²);

iv) Day Nursery;

v) Restaurant;

vi) Restaurant Take-Out, limited to a Gross Floor Area of not more than 100 m²;

vii) Commercial School;

viii) Places of Assembly (excluding a Church or a church hall);

ix) Places of Amusement;

x) uses Accessory to the foregoing.

Permitted commercial uses must be located within a wholly enclosed building, and are permitted on the ground floor only.

The applicants are now requesting an amendment to the zoning by-law to permit retail uses, a video store, and personal service shops (such as a barber shop, hairdressing shop, shoe repair and similar service establishments) on the ground floor, in addition to the uses listed above.

Comments:

Circulation:

The application was circulated to the usual commenting departments and agencies. No comments or concerns were received.

Notice of the Public Meeting:

Notice of the Public Meeting was circulated to every owner of land within approximately 400 feet of the site.

Planning Comments:

Land Uses:

The proposed uses are permitted by the Official Plan, subject to a rezoning for the proposed retail use. Retail uses are not new to the area. Council recently permitted retail uses on the 4 Corners properties on the north side of Overlea Boulevard, at 26, 28, 60 and 62-66 Overlea Boulevard, and on the south side of the street at 25 Overlea Boulevard.

The proposed uses will complement the new residential uses in the building. The uses will be subject to the current restrictions that require permitted commercial uses to be located on the ground floor of a wholly enclosed building. Staff support the continuation of this restriction, because it will contain any impacts on businesses in the area, and help maintain the image of the area.

Parking:

Adequate parking is provided on the site, however, the applicants are proposing 5 new parking spaces with access from Leaside Park Drive to provide convenient parking for the proposed convenience store. Transportation and Engineering staff have no concerns about the impact of the parking spaces on traffic flow on Leaside Park Drive.

Staff have no objection to this change, and can ensure through site plan approval that the parking spaces are appropriately designed and suitably landscaped.

City Wide Issues:

None.

Conclusions:

The proposed uses are permitted by the Official Plan, and are similar to uses that are being established on other properties in the area. The requirement that permitted commercial uses be located on the ground floor within a wholly enclosed building will ensure that the uses have minimal impact on the business uses and image of the surrounding area.

Staff are recommending that the application be approved, and that City Council pass an amendment to the by-law to permit the proposed changes.

Contact Name:

Paul Galvin, Planner

(416) 778-2043

(416) 466-9877 Fax

planning@borough.eastyork.on.ca

(a) Ms. Sharyn Vincent, Vincent Planning and Development Consultants, Toronto, advised that the applicant is in agreement with the staff's recommendations.

(b) Mr. Amrik Dhillon, Quick Stop Convenience & More, East York, expressing concern with respect to potential competition should a convenience store be permitted at 7 Overlea Boulevard.

The East York Community Council also submits the following draft By-law entitled "To Amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law No. 1916, as amended, of the Former Town of Leaside Planning Area":

Bill No.____

THE CITY OF TORONTO

BY-LAW NO.______

To Amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law No.1916, as amended,

of the Former Town of Leaside Planning Area.

The Council of The Corporation of the Borough of East York, HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1. The lands subject to this By-law are those lands outlined in a heavy black line and identified as "Area Subject to Amendment" as shown on Schedule "1" attached hereto.

2. Zoning By-law No. 1916, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding the following new clauses immediately following clause 7.3.4.c)(ii)(1)(b)ii)I):

"j) retail stores

k) Personal Service Shops

l) a video store"

3. Zoning By-law No. 1916, as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting clause 7.3.4.c)(ii)(3)(vi) and substituting therefore the following clause:

(vi) Siting of any Building

or portion thereof Wholly within the Building Envelope

delineated on Schedule "2" to By-law No.

_____.

FIRST AND SECOND READINGS:

Clerk Mayor

THIRD AND FINAL READING:

Clerk Mayor

Submitted by Otto Abbatangelo Regarding 221 O'Connor Drive

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council after considering the deputations and the report (March 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, recommends as follows:

(1) the adoption of the aforementioned report; and

(2) the Interim Functional Lead for Planning be requested to reaffirm the floor space index calculations for the development at 221 O'Connor Drive in a memorandum to the Ward Councillors.

The East York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on April 1, 1998, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act and appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (March 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Developoment Services, East York:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to provide the East York Community Council with a staff opinion and recommendations on an application to amend Zoning By-law No. 6752 to permit four dwelling units in an attached dwelling at 221 O'Connor Drive.

The report is for the Community Council's consideration at the public meeting on April 1, 1998.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1) Refuse the application by Mr. Otto Abbatangelo to amend Zoning By-law No. 6752 to permit four dwelling units in a detached dwelling at 221 O'Connor Drive;

(2) Pass an amendment to Zoning By-law No. 6752 to permit three dwelling units in a detached dwelling at 221 O'Connor Drive.

Background:

Site Description:

The site is a 410 m² (4,415 sq. ft.) property located at the southwest corner of O'Connor Drive and Elmsdale Road, one block west of Donlands Avenue. The site location is shown on the attached Location Map.

The property was originally developed with a one-storey bungalow, with an attached garage with access from O'Connor Drive. The City's building permit records are incomplete, but rear additions to the bungalow appear to have been built in 1947 and 1957. In 1974, the Committee of Adjustment permitted the construction of a two-storey rear addition. As a result of these additions, the existing building is approximately 35.0 metres (114' 6") long, and is comprised of the original bungalow and attached garage; a three-car garage attached to the rear of the bungalow, with access from Elmsdale Road; and another garage with a second storey, attached to the rear of the three-car garage.

The property appears to have been used for many years for a wholesale produce warehouse and a dwelling unit. In 1981, the Committee of Adjustment permitted the building to be converted to a medical office. The building is currently being used as a one-family dwelling. The garages and the second storey addition at the rear of the building are unused.

The building has a floor area of approximately 403.53 m² (4,343.62 sq. ft.), including five indoor parking spaces.

Proposal:

Mr. Abbatangelo acquired the property in April 1997, and is proposing to convert the property to a four-unit dwelling. The following is a description of the proposed units:

a) The original bungalow is a two-bedroom unit with a floor area of approximately 137 m² (1,470 sq. ft.), plus a 17 m² (180 sq. ft.) attached garage. This dwelling unit is shown as Existing Residential Unit No. 1 on the attached Ground Floor plan.

b) The applicant is proposing to construct a second storey addition over the existing bungalow to create a new four-bedroom dwelling unit with a floor area of approximately 153 m² (1,650 sq. ft.). This unit is identified as Proposed Residential Unit No. 2 on the attached 2nd Floor plan. Unit Nos. 1 and 2 would each have private access through a shared front hallway at the front of the house.

c) The applicant is proposing to construct a second storey addition over the three-car garage at the rear of the bungalow, to create a new one-bedroom dwelling unit with a floor area of approximately 70 m² (745 sq. ft.). This unit is identified as Proposed Residential Unit No. 3 on the attached 2nd Floor plan.

d) The applicant is proposing to convert the existing second storey space over the rear garage into a two-bedroom dwelling unit with a floor area of approximately 90 m² (975 sq. ft.). This unit is identified as Proposed Unit No. 4 on the attached plan. Units 3 and 4 would share an entrance from Elmsdale Road.

The residents would have access to five parking spaces in the attached garages.

Official Plan:

The property is designated Low Density Residential in the Official Plan for the Borough of East York. The policies for this designation are in Section 3.3 of the Official Plan.

The Low Density Residential policies permit the land to be zoned for ground-oriented housing forms, such as detached, semi-detached and row house dwellings. Other housing forms such as plexes may also be permitted.

Section 3.3.8 states, "The zoning by-law shall establish the density and nature of development in Low Density Residential areas based on the prevailing and desired physical characteristics of the area."

Section 2.5 of the Official Plan contains general housing policies that encourage intensification of the existing housing stock. Section 2.5.22 permits apartments in detached and semi-detached dwellings and rowhouses in residential areas provided they maintain a minimum of one parking space per residential unit. The applicant is proposing to provide five parking spaces. The proposal complies with Section 2.5.22.

Zoning By-law:

The property is zoned R1C in Zoning By-law No. 6752. The zoning by-law permits one-family detached and semi-detached dwellings, and institutional uses, but not a four-family dwelling. An amendment to the by-law is necessary for the building to be converted to four units.

Comments:

Circulation:

The application was circulated to the usual commenting departments and agencies. The following replies were received.

a) The Building and By-law Enforcement Division indicated that the apartment accesses may have to be redesigned to comply with the Ontario Building Code.

b) The East York Board of Education provided the following comments:

"The East York Board of Education continues to be concerned about the impact of residential development on school facilities.

"Although this zoning application represents a small infill project, the accumulated effect continues to add to the over crowding of public school facilities within the Borough. It is the Board's position that this is an important factor for consideration in all redevelopment applications."

The School Board has expressed this concern on other applications. In the past, the Board indicated it will not support new residential development until assistance is obtained to accommodate the increased enrolment generated by such projects. The Board can generate property tax revenue to pay for school improvements, however, they have not taken measures to introduce any development charges.

c) The Parks, Recreation and Operations Department indicated that they will continue to provide municipal waste and materials collection for this site at a frequency and location determined by the Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations.

d) The East York Hydro-Electric Commission, the Fire Department, the Transportation and Engineering Services Division, Rogers Cable, and the East York Health Unit all replied with no concerns about the proposal. No other comments were received.

e) The application was circulated to the Ward 3 Residents Association. No comments were received.

Notice of the Public Meeting:

Notice of the Public Meeting was circulated to every owner of land within approximately 400 feet of the site.

Planning Comments:

The building is an anomaly in the neighbourhood because of its unusually large mass and length. It has apparently outlived its role as a commercial building, and the applicant is attempting to utilize it for residential uses that are generally more compatible with the uses permitted by the zoning by-law.

Staff concur with the applicant that the building is suitable for additional residential units, however, staff cannot support four units on the property because the proposal for four units requires an addition to the dwelling that would be incompatible with the surrounding area. The housing policies in Section 2.5 of the Official Plan encourage improvements to the housing stock by intensification of use, provided the intensification does not adversely affect the physical character of stable low density residential areas. The existing building maintains the appearance of a bungalow from O'Connor Drive. This is the only element of the existing building that maintains the physical character of the neighbourhood. The proposed second storey addition over the original bungalow would maintain the existing height, but would increase the bulk of the building, which would be detrimental to the prevailing physical character of the neighbourhood.

Staff can support three units, provided there is no addition over the original bungalow. In the opinion of staff, the proposed Residential Unit Nos. 3 and 4 can be constructed without creating a substantial impact on the neighbourhood. The addition proposed over the existing garages would have some visual impact on the neighbours to the west, but it would not adversely affect the physical character of the area. Furthermore, it would allow the owner to put this underutilized building to better use, by providing intrinsically affordable housing through intensification of the existing housing stock.

City Wide Issues:

None.

Conclusions:

Staff are not satisfied that the site can accommodate four dwelling units without adversely affecting the physical character of the area. Staff therefore recommend that the application be refused. Staff are also recommending that Council pass a zoning by-law amendment to permit three dwelling units on the property because, in the opinion of staff, the building can be converted to three units without adversely affecting the neighbourhood.

Paul Galvin, Planner

Phone: (416) 778-2043

Fax: (416) 466-9877

planning@borough.eastyork.on.ca

(a) Mr. Otto Abbattangelo, East York, advising that he felt the proposed renovations were in keeping with other buildings in the general area and that he was interested in physical improvements to his building.

The East York Community Council also submits the following draft By-law entitled "To Amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law No. 6752, as amended, of the former Township of East York":

Bill No.______

THE CITY OF TORONTO

By-Law No._____

To Amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law No. 6752,

as amended, of the former Township of East York

The Council of The Corporation of the Borough of East York in accordance with the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

1. Zoning By-law No. 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a new subsection 7.5.4.33 immediately following subsection 7.5.4.32 as follows:

"7.5.4.33 221 O'Connor Drive

7.5.4.33.1 Area Restricted

The provisions of this Section shall only apply to those lands being Lot 44 and Part Lot 77, Plan M513, known municipally in the year 1998 as 221 O'Connor Drive, and designated as R2A.33 on Schedule "A" of this By-law.

7.5.4.33.2 General Provisions

On those lands referred to in Section 7.5.4.33.1 of this By-law, no person shall use, occupy, Erect, or alter or cause to be used, occupied, Erected or altered any Building, Structure or land or part thereof except in accordance with the following provisions:

1) Permitted Uses, Buildings and Structures

a) A detached Dwelling containing three Dwelling Units

b) All of the uses permitted in Section 7.5 of this By-law.

2) Development Requirements

a) For the uses permitted in Section 7.5.4.33.2.1)a) of this By-law, the R2A Zone Requirements for One Family Detached Dwellings under Section 7.8 and Section 5.6 regarding encroachments into required yards shall apply.

b) For the uses permitted in Section 7.5 of this By-law, the Zone Requirements of Section 7.5.3 shall apply.

3) Other Provisions of the By-law

None of the other provisions of this By-Law shall apply to prevent the use, occupation, erection or alteration of any Building, Structure, land or part thereof on the lands referred to in Section 7.5.4.33.1 in accordance with the provisions of Section 7.5.4.33.2. In all other respects, all of the other provisions of this By-law shall apply to the lands described in Section 7.5.4.33.1.

2. The lands subject to this By-law are those lands outlined in a heavy black line identified as "Area Subject to Amendment" on Schedule "1" attached hereto.

3. Schedule "A" to Zoning By-law No. 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zoning category for the lands identified as "Area Subject to Amendment on Schedule "1" attached hereto from "R2A Residential Zone" to "R2A Residential - Site Specific (R2A.33) Zone".

FIRST AND SECOND READINGS:

Clerk Mayor

THIRD AND FINAL READING:

Clerk Mayor

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council after considering the deputations and the report (March 5, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, recommends the adoption of the aforementioned report for the reason that the proposal is an appropriate use of land.

The East York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on April 1, 1998, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act and appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (March 5, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:

Purpose:

This is an report to the April 1, 1998 meeting of the East York Community Council. Its purpose is to provide Council with Staff recommendations on the application to rezone the premises at 458 Dawes Road from its current Industrial SI zoning to Commercial C - Site Specific zoning. The site is to be used for a specialty food store.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1) approve the application by Ernesto and Leonora Palma and Celia Lim, to amend Zoning By-law 6752, by rezoning the lands at 458 Dawes Road from Industrial SI to Commercial CA - Site Specific zoning; and,

(2) enact a zoning by-law amendment in the form attached.

Background:

Introduction:

Mr. and Mrs. Palma and Ms. Lim currently operate their specialty food store out of 460 Dawes Road which adjoins 458 Dawes Road on the north. Their lease with the owner of that property expires at the end of August 1998 and it is uncertain if it can be renewed. Consequently, when the premises at 458 Dawes Road came on the market, they chose to buy it with the intent of relocating their business to that new location.

The building at 458 Dawes Road, had previously been used for commercial purposes. This use, however, was discontinued for more than 6 months, resulting in a loss of its 'legal non- conforming status. That status would have made it possible to continue the proposed commercial use, provided the Committee of Adjustment had sanctioned its extension. The loss of that status now makes it necessary to rezone the site for its intended commercial function.

Proposal:

The applicants propose to convert a fifty eight (58) square metre (625 square feet) portion of an existing one hundred and five (105) square metre (1,132 square feet) building to a specialty retail store. The remaining forty seven (47) square metres (506 square feet) of the building`s floor space will be used for product storage.

Official Plan:

The Official Plan designates the premises "Main Street Commercial Residential". This designation permits the proposed street front commercial uses.

Zoning By-law:

Zoning By-law 6752 zones the land "Industrial SI". This zoning restricts its use to largely manufacturing and accessory uses. Freestanding retail stores are not a permitted use.

The same By-law also details various applicable development requirements, including the minimum required number of parking and loading spaces. In the case of this site, these are set out in Section 8.5.2 General Exceptions. It allows parking and loading facilities to be comprised of an area equal to seven and a half (7.5) metres times the mean width of the rear seven and one half (7.5) metres of the lot.

Comments:

Agency Circulation:

The application was circulated to all the required departments/agencies. Comments received via this circulation are, where appropriate, incorporated in Planning Staff`s evaluation of the application.

Public Input:

Notice of the Public Meeting was circulated to ratepayers within two hundred (200) metres (600 feet) of the subject site. Any comments received as a result of this circulation will be made available at the public meeting.

Discussion:

Proposed Uses:

As previously indicated, the proposed store is not new to this general location. It already operates out of 460 Dawes Road which adjoins it directly to the north. Other similar uses, ranging from a take-out restaurant to service stores, occupy the remaining buildings located along this stretch of Dawes Road.

Parking/Loading:

The applicant`s drawings show a combined parking and loading area at the rear of their property capable of accommodating 1 car. It is accessed via a narrow laneway to the rear of the commercial strip at this location. Although neither the parking area or the access lane leading to that area meet conventional standards for such facilities, they do meet the minimum requirements set out in East York`s Zoning By-law.

The City`s engineer advises that he has no objections to the parking provisions proposed to service the store. His comments note that the store`s clientele consist mainly of area residents who typically walk, and that overall he expects the lack of readily accessible parking to have little impact on this area`s parking operations.

Delivery of products currently takes place from the street. This is the established method of servicing all the commercial establishment along this strip. Staff are not aware of any problems caused by this servicing arrangement.

Property Upkeep and Appearance:

Planning staff have discussed the upkeep and appearance of these premises with the applicant`s representative. He indicates that the owners are prepared to make some general improvements to the building's facade and that they also plan to make substantial improvements to the interior of the building. Staff have not required that the applicants apply for Site Plan approval because the proposed rezoning does not represent a significant enough change to the usability of the premises. However, we anticipate that the age and condition of all the structures along this strip of Dawes Road will necessitate their eventual redevelopment. At that time we will be able to comprehensively and effectively review the issues surrounding the area`s appearance.

Conclusion:

This rezoning request confirms a previously established use of these premises. The use is compatible with the remainder of the uses established in the adjoining buildings along this strip of Dawes Road and should be approved.

Staff recommend that Council approve this application, and that the attached Zoning By-law amendment, be enacted.

Contact Name:

Jean Besz,

Senior Planner East York Community Office

(416) 778-2045

(416) 466-9877

Site and Building Statistics:

Site Area 156.4 m² (1,683.5 square feet)

Lot Frontage 6.4 m (21 feet)

Front Yard 0

Rear Yard 5 m (17 ft)

Building`s Gross Floor Area 105 m² (1,132 square feet)

-Proportion of the

Building to be

Devoted to Retail 58 m² (625 square feet)

-Proportion of the

Building to be

Devoted to Storage 47 m² (505.9 square feet)

No. of Combined Parking

and Loading Spaces 1 space

Mr. Geronceo Cadawas, Scarborough, on behalf of Ernesto and Leonora Palma, advising that the applicants have conducted their business out of the property located at 460 Dawes Road for the past four years and do not want to lose their business. They purchased this property so that they could continue their business operations, and at the time of purchase, did not realize the property was zoned Industrial.

The East York Community Council also submits the following draft By-law entitled "To Amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law No. 6752, as amended, of the former Township of East York":

Authority: East York Community Council Report No. XX , April 1, 1998

Intended for first presentation to Council: April 1, 1998

Adopted by Council:

Bill No._____

The Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:

1. Zoning By-law No. 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended, by adding a new Section 8.A.23 immediately after Section 8.A.22 of the By-law as follows:

8.A.23 CA ZONE SITE SPECIFIC (458 Dawes Road)

8.A.23.1 Area Restricted

The provisions of this Section shall only apply to those lands being Part of Lot 7 Registered Plan 5433 Borough of East York, Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, designated CA.23 on Schedule "A" of this By-law.

8.A.23.2 General Provisions

On those lands referred to in Section 8.A.23.1 of this By-law, no person shall use, occupy, Erect, or alter or cause to be used, occupied, Erected or altered any Building, Structure, or land or part thereof except in accordance with the following provisions:

(1) Permitted Uses Buildings and Structures

i) Retail Commercial

- Food Store, provided it does not include any sitting or eating areas intended for the consumption of food on the premises;

- convenience/variety store;

- novelty store;

- craft store

- Personal Service Shop;

- Service and Repair Shop;

- boutique; and,

- Custom Workshop.

ii) uses Accessory to the foregoing

(2) Use Restrictions

i) Notwithstanding anything else in this by-law, Adult Entertainment Parlours and the keeping and having of any games of skill and chance, or part skill and part chance which are operated or activated in whole or in part by or with mechanical or electrical means, shall be prohibited.

ii) All uses shall be located within a wholly enclosed Building. Open Outside Storage of goods, materials equipment and the outdoor display of merchandise, whether accessory to a permitted use or not, shall be prohibited. This provision shall not however apply to the temporary outside display of goods or materials being offered for sale during the hours of operation of the respective retail commercial uses set out in Section 8.A.23.2.(1) i) of this by-law.

(3) Development Requirements

i) Minimum lot Area 156.0 m²

ii) Minimum Lot Frontage 6.3 m

iii) Minimum Yards

Front 0 m

north Side 0 m

south Side 3.3 m

Rear 5.0 m

iv) Maximum Gross Floor Area

- Devoted to the uses

set out in Section

8.A.23.2.i) iii) and

accessible to the

general public 60.0 m²

- Devoted to storage and

not accessible to the

general public 48.0 m²

v) Minimum number of Parking and

Loading Spaces as set out in

Section 8.5.3 of

this by-law:

"General Exceptions"

in By-law 6752

vi) Notwithstanding the minimum requirements of section 8.A.23.2.(3) iii) above, steps or stairs may encroach into the required Rear Yard.

vii) None of the provisions of this By-law shall apply to prevent the use, occupation, erection or alteration of any Building, land or part thereof on any lands referred to in Section 8.A.23.1. in accordance with Section 8.A.23.2 In all other respects all of the provisions of this By-law No. with the exception of Section 8.1.3, 8.2, 8.4.1 to 8.4.4 inclusive, 8.5.1 and 8.5.2 shall apply to the lands referred to in Section 8.A.23.1.1.

4. That the lands subject of this By-law shall consist of those lands outlined in a heavy black line and identified as "Area Subject to Amendment" on Schedule "1" which is attached and forms part of this by-law.

5. That schedule "A" to By-law No. 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone category for the "Area Subject to Amendment", identified on Schedule "1" hereto from Industrial SI to Commercial CA. 23 - Site Specific.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , A.D. 199 .

Mayor City Clerk

(Corporate Seal)

(City Council on April 16, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that:

(1) East York By-law No. 34-93, entitled "To provide for Disabled Person Parking Permit Holders", be amended to implement a disabled parking space on the east side of Bryant Avenue south of the driveway at 1 Bryant Avenue;

(2) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take necessary action to give effect thereto; and

(3) the following report (January 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Development Services, East York be received:

Purpose:

To implement a disabled parking space on Bryant Avenue for use by disabled residents.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The recommended change can be accommodated within the existing Operating Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) East York By-law No. 34-93, entitled "To Provide for Disabled Person Parking Permit Holders" be amended to implement a disabled parking space on the east side of Bryant Avenue, from a point 43.3 metres north of Denton Avenue to a point 49.9 metres north of Denton Avenue;

(2) this disabled parking space be removed when Mr. Alec Goydas ceases to reside at 18 Bryant Avenue; and

(3) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Development Services Department received a letter from Mr. Alec Goydas, 18 Bryant Avenue, dated October 21, 1997, requesting the installation of an on-street disabled parking space adjacent to 18 Bryant Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Bryant Avenue, between Denton Avenue and Dentonia Park Avenue, is governed by a "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the west side of the street and the three-hour parking by-law on the east side. A review of parking on Bryant Avenue during a typical weekday indicates that parking is near capacity, however, designating one space as a disabled parking space would not necessarily eliminate an on-street parking space since the disabled permit holder has no on-site parking and currently parks on the street. It is recommended that one on-street parking space on the east side of Bryant Avenue, adjacent to 18 Bryant Avenue, be designated as a parking space for a disabled permit holder. A plan indicating the location of the proposed disabled parking space is attached.

Mr. Goydas and the neighbouring residents will be notified by the City Clerk's Department, East York Office, that this report is being presented to the East York Community Council.

Conclusions:

It is recommended that a disabled parking space be installed on the east side of Bryant Avenue, adjacent to 18 Bryant Avenue, to facilitate disabled residents in the vicinity. The removal of one on-street parking space on Bryant Avenue is not expected to significantly impact parking in this area.

Contact Name:

Peter Bartos, P.Eng., Transportation Engineer

East York Office

778-2225

(City Council on April 16, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)

(a) Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendment Applications and

Subdivision Application for 870 Pape Avenue:

Consideration of Building Permit and Planning Fees.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Interim Functional Lead for Planning to report to the May 6, 1998, meeting of the East York Community Council on the following:

(i) costs incurred with respect to the development at 870 Pape Avenue; and

(ii) the planning fees charged by the former Borough of East York in comparison to the planning fees proposed for the City of Toronto in context with this application and other applications which are requesting a refund or waiving of associated planning fees; and

(2) received the following communication and report:

(March 12, 1998) from Mr. Howard Cohen, C&A Developments Incorporated, expressing concern regarding the requested fees associated with the development at 870 Pape Avenue; and

(March 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising of the chronology of events associated with the development at 870 Pape Avenue.

Mr. Howard Cohen, C & A Developments Incorporated, appeared before The East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(b) Tax Issues with respect to Multi-Unit

Residential Rental Buildings.

The East York Community Council reports having recommended to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force the following:

(1) that the Task Force be requested to find a solution to the inequities in respect of payment of higher rates of taxation for multi-unit residential buildings in comparison to single family dwelling units; and

(2) that tenants and tenants' associations be granted an absolute and unqualified right to access to information concerning the assessed value and rate of taxation of their units:

(March 18, 1998) from Mr. Howard Tessler, Executive Director, Federation of Metro Tenants' Association, regarding the rate of taxation with respect to multi-unit residential rental buildings.

Mr. Howard Tessler, Executive Director, Federation of Metro Tenants Association, appeared before The East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(c) Stay at Home in Leaside (SAHIL)

Project at 1387 Bayview Avenue.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(March 13, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, responding to a request by Stay at Home in Leaside with respect to issuance of a building permit for the SAHIL project at 1387 Bayview Avenue prior to payment of the building permit fees and recommending that the report be received for information.

(d) Traffic Concerns on Orchard Green.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report and communication:

(March 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising of the results of a study evaluating the effectiveness of turn restrictions implemented on Moore Avenue at Orchard Green and recommending that the report be received for information; and

(March 31, 1998) from Mr. Norm Sultmanis, East York, requesting a "Watch for Children" sign to be installed at the west limit of Evergreen Gardens and Orchard Green.

(e) Towing from Private Property.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(1) recommended to The Emergency and Protective Services Committee that a review of the Towing from Private Property By-laws from the former municipalities with the purpose of harmonizing the various by-laws be undertaken; and

(2) received the following report:

(March 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, responding to a request from Councillor Howard Moscoe, North York, Spadina, with respect to amendments to the Borough of East York By-law No. 27-79 to exclude towing by Municipal Law Enforcement Officers and recommending that the report be received for information.

(f) East York Parking Contract with A.P.C.O.A.

Parking Development and Management Ltd.

The East York Community Council reports having deferred consideration of the following report to allow the Interim Functional Lead for Transportation to report to the May 6, 1998, meeting of the East York Community Council on an analysis comparing the City of Toronto and the A.P.C.O.A. Parking Development and Management Ltd.'s costs to undertake parking operations within the East York community:

(March 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising on the process the Development Services Department staff will undertake in the transition of the East York District's parking operations after the contract between A.P.C.O.A. Parking Development and Management Ltd. and East York expires on May 31, 1998, and recommending that the report be received for information.

Mr. Mickey Narun, A.P.C.O.A. Parking Development and Management Ltd. appeared before The East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(g) Parking Standards for Restaurants on

O'Connor Drive and Woodbine Avenue:

Status of Appeal and Work Program Item.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(March 20, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising of the status of the appeal of Borough of East York Zoning By-law No. 141-97 regarding the provision of parking spaces for restaurants and advising of the status of the 1998 Planning Division's Work Program item with respect to the restaurant parking standards on other streets in East York and recommending that the report be received for information.

(h) Zoning By-Law Amendment Application

submitted by Paul Jeffery in connection

with 1150 Woodbine Avenue.

The East York Community Council reports having concurred with the recommendation contained in the following report:

(March 11, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising that a Zoning By-law Amendment Application was submitted to permit five dwelling units in a semi-detached dwelling at 1150 Woodbine Avenue and recommending that the East York Community Council convene a daytime public meeting for this application in the second quarter of 1998 and request the City Clerk to provide public notice by circulation.

(i) Temporary Use Zoning By-Law Amendment

Application submitted by G-Tek Automotive

Corp. in connection with 26 Cranfield Road.

The East York Community Council reports having concurred with the recommendation contained in the following report:

(March 11, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising that a Temporary Use Zoning By-law Amendment Application was submitted to allow the applicant to continue using an existing building at 26 Cranfield Road for motor vehicle repairs and recommending that the East York Community Council convene a day time public meeting for this application in the third quarter of 1998 and instruct the City Clerk to provide public notice by circulation.

(j) Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendment

Applications submitted by Threegees Development

Corporation in connection with 11 Curity Avenue.

The East York Community Council reports having concurred with the recommendation contained in the following report, as amended, by striking out the phrase "in the third quarter of 1998" where it appears in the recommendation and inserting in lieu thereof the phrase "as soon as possible":

(March 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising that Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications were submitted to develop the property at 11 Curity Avenue with a 1,832 square metre mixed use commercial-industrial building that would incorporate a mix of light industrial, office, retail and service commercial uses and recommending that the East York Community Council convene an evening public meeting for this application in the third quarter of 1998 and instruct the City Clerk to provide public notice by circulation.

(k) Draft Plan of Condominium Application

submitted by Leaside Green Inc. in

connection with 2-22 Leaside Park Drive

and 15 and 17 Overlea Boulevard.

The East York Community Council reports having concurred with the recommendation contained in the following report:

(March 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York advising that a Draft Plan of Condominium Application was submitted requesting condominium approval from the Commissioner of Planning of the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto for 82 townhouse units at 2-22 Leaside Park Drive and 15 and 17 Overlea Boulevard and recommending that the report be received for information.

(l) Authority to Hold Public Meetings regarding

Rental Housing Protection Act Applications.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(March 12, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that City Council has delegated the authority to hold public meetings regarding Rental Housing Protection Act applications to the Community Councils.

(m) Request to Prohibit the Idling of Vehicle Engines.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(February 26, 1998) from Ms. Bernadette Black, East York, requesting the East York Community Council to address the issue of vehicles left idling for long periods of time and/or in the proximity of residential housing.

(n) Draft Discussion Paper on the Roles and

Responsibilities of Community Councils.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the City Clerk to schedule a special meeting of the East York Community Council, in consultation with the Ward Councillors, to consider the draft discussion paper on the roles and responsibilities of Community Councils; and

(2) that interested parties be advised of the upcoming special meeting of the East York Community Council to consider this discussion paper:

(March 12, 1998) from the City Clerk advising of the recommendations of The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team regarding the draft discussion paper on the roles and responsibilities of Community Councils and specifically advising of the referral of the draft discussion paper to the Community Councils for consideration and community consultation, and report thereon to the Special Committee.

(o) Governor's Bridge Subdivision

Payment of Planning Fees

Draft Plan of Subdivision 55T-81048.

The East York Community Council reports having requested the Interim Functional Lead for Planning to report to the May 6, 1998 meeting of the East York Community Council on the following communications and on the consultation with Mr. Jeffrey Davies, Davies, Howe Partners, on behalf of Jasamax Holdings Inc. concerning the fees associated with this plan of subdivision:

(March 18, 1998) from Mr. Randy Eadie, Jasamax Holdings Inc., Markham, expressing concern regarding payment to the City of Toronto in respect of the former Borough of East York Planning Fees By-law invoiced to Jasamax Holdings Inc. with respect to the approvals associated with the Governor's Bridge subdivision under Ontario Municipal Board Case No. PL970532 and Draft Plan 55T-81048; and

(March 27, 1998) from Mr. C.M. Loopstra, Loopstra, Nixon & McLeish, Solicitors, East York Office, requesting that The East York Community Council defer the matter of planning fees with respect to the Governor's Bridge subdivision until Jasamax Holdings Inc. has provided particulars of their complaint, specifically, whether the fees are in connection with the cost, engineering cost or both, in order to allow staff to properly respond to their concerns.

Mr. Jeffery Davies, Davies, Howe Partners, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(p) 1998 City Planning Work Program.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Interim Functional Lead for Planning to report on policies for the O'Connor Employment Area in conjunction with the planning application submitted by Mr. Goldman for 1590 O'Connor Drive; and

(2) received the following communication:

(March 24, 1998) from the City Clerk requesting comments from the East York Community Council to the April 20, 1998, Urban Environment and Development Committee regarding the 1998 City Planning Work Program.

Mr. Murray Goldman, The Goldman Group, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(q) Seniors Task Force:

1999: Year of the Older Person.

The East York Community Council reports having received the deputation of Ms. Edna Beange.

Ms. Edna Beange, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(r) City of Toronto Interim

Purchasing By-law.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(March 12, 1998) from the City Clerk advising the East York Community Council of the Purchasing Policies and Procedures for the City of Toronto.

(s) Ontario Municipal Board Decision Regarding Governor's Bridge

Subdivision 55T-81048.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication and referred it to the Interim Functional Lead for Planning for any appropriate action:

(Undated) from Mr. Donald Lake, East York, expressing concerns, advising of issues and submitting a petition with approximately 133 signatures regarding the Governor's Bridge Subdivision.

(t) Child Nutrition Programs for the City of Toronto.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(March 19, 1998) from Ms. Catherine Moraes, Chair, Toronto Community Partners for Child Nutrition, advising of the problem of child hunger and under nourishment in the City of Toronto, the role of the Toronto Community Partners for Child Nutrition and requesting continued support for child nutrition programs.

(u) Provision of Animal Services in 1998.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(1) recommended to the Budget Committee the following:

(i) that the East York Community Council supports the recommendations of the Board of Health from its meeting held on March 24, 1998, that the East York and York Animal Shelters remain open; and

(ii) that there be no reduction in animal services to the East York community;

(2) received the following communications:

(April 1, 1998) from Ms. Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance of Canada, requesting support of the Board of Health's recommendations and advising of the effects of the Chief Administrative Officer's recommendations on East York Animal Services;

(March 30, 1998) from Ms. Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance of Canada, expressing concern with respect to the proposed strategy for animal services within the City of Toronto for 1998; and

(March 26, 1998) from the City Clerk advising of the recommendations of the Board of Health from its meeting on March 24, 1998, respecting the interim arrangement for the provision of animal services in 1998.

The following persons appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing:

- Ms. Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance of Canada, Toronto;

- Ms. Andrea Harrison, East York; and

- Ms. Holly Penfound, East York.

Respectfully submitted,

MICHAEL PRUE,

Chair

Toronto, April 1, 1998

(Report No. 5 of The East York Community Council was adopted, without amendment, by City Council on April 16, 1998.)

Clause Page

1 Request for an Outdoor Licensed Refreshment
Area at Dieppe Park Submitted by the Dieppe
Men's Fastball League 2415

2 Tire Swing Located at 67 Ferris Road 2416

3 Request for Exemption to
Noise By-Law No. 71-89 of
the Former Borough of East York
for Bridge Rehabilitation Work 2418

4 Request for Exemption to Noise
By-Law No. 71-89 of the Former Borough of East York
Road Resurfacing on O'Connor Drive Between
Woodbine Avenue and Sandra Road 2422

5 Traffic Concerns on Donegall Drive 2424

6 Removal of a No Parking Zone
on Sammon Avenue 2430

7 Public Meeting Held Under Section 34 of the Planning Act
with Respect to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application
Submitted by Invar Building Corporation Regarding
7 Overlea Boulevard 2434

8 Public Meeting Held Under Section 34 of the Planning Act
with Respect to a Zoning By-Law Amendment Application
Submitted by Otto Abbatangelo Regarding 221 O'Connor Drive 2442

9 Public Meeting Held Under Section 34 of the Planning
Act with Respect to a Zoning By-Law Amendment Application
Submitted by Ernesto and Leonora Palma and Celia Lim
Regarding 458 Dawes Road 2455

10 Implementation of a Disabled Parking Space on Bryant Avenue 2465

11 Other Items Considered by the Community Council 2466