TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998

NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

REPORT No. 6

1Noise By-law Exemption - Surentec Inc. -Sheppard Centre - North-east corner of Yonge Street and Sheppard Avenue East - North York Centre

2Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application OZ-88-40 -R. G. Thwaites - 15 Cameron Avenue -North York Centre

3Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-97-27 -Shell Canada Limited -2831 Bayview Avenue - North York Centre South

4Official Plan, Zoning Amendment and Subdivision Application UDOZ-97-39 and UDSB-1236 - Topview Developments Limited -East Portion of 2781-2801 Dufferin Street North York Spadina

5Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-97-49 -Vincent Planning and Development Consultants Inc. -1675 Jane Street - North York Humber

6Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application UDOZ-96-27 and UD52-97-03 - 1190082 Ontario Limited - 22 Old York Mills Road - North York Centre South

7Community Festival Event - Philippine Centennial Commission,Canada Chapter - Pistahan Filipino (Philippine Fiesta) - June 26, 27 and 28, 1998 - Mel Lastman Square - North York Centre

8Community Festival Event - Caribbean Sunfest 1998 -Trade & Culture Events - July 17 to July 19, 1998 -Mel Lastman Square - North York Centre

9Community Festival Event - The Ferrari Club of America (East and Central Canada Region) - June 11, 1998 -E.T. Seton Park - 770 Don Mills Road - Don Parkway

1040KM/H Speed Zone - Roanoke Road - Don Parkway

11Traffic Management Plan - Glenbrook Avenue -North York Spadina

12Boulevard Leasing Cafe - La Fontina Restaurant -

85 Kincourt Street - North York Humber

13Traffic Management Plan - Dane Avenue -North York Spadina

14Turn Restriction - Barber Greene Road - Don Parkway

15School Bus Loading Zone - Bannerman Street -North York Humber

16All Way Stop Control - Doon Road at Highland Crescent -North York Centre South

17Stopping Prohibitions - Connaught Avenue and Lariviere Avenue - North York Centre

18Parking Prohibition Amendments - Hobart Drive - Seneca Heights

19Temporary Road Closure - Logandale Road -North York Centre

20Encroachment - Apotex Inc. - Ormont Drive, Garyray Drive, Weston Road - Underground Utility - North York Humber

21Sidewalk (East Side) - Shermount Avenue from Glencairn Avenue to Hillmount Avenue - North York Spadina

22Retaining Wall and Sidewalk Extension -Glazebrook Avenue - North York Centre South

23Pylon Sign - 3338 Dufferin Street -North York Spadina

24Committee of Adjustment - UDCA-98-16 - Custodia Rizzo - 31 Kirby Road - Request for Staff Attendance at the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing - North York Humber

25Letter of Understanding - Public Access to Duncan Mill Greenbelt During Bayview Glen Day Camp Hours of Operation

26Community Festival Event - All Saints Greek Orthodox Church - Greekfest 98 - July 3, 4 and 5, 1998 - Mel Lastman Square - North York Centre

27Damaged Sod - 2 Northgate Drive,Off Whitley Avenue Flankage -North York Spadina

28Other Items Considered by the Community Council

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 6

OF THE NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

(from its meeting on May 27, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Milton Berger, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998

1

Noise By-law Exemption - Surentec Inc. -

Sheppard Centre - North-east corner of

Yonge Street and Sheppard Avenue East -

North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May5, 1998) from the City Solicitor, North York, and that the request for an exemption to the North York Noise By-law No. 31317, be refused:

Purpose:

To report on an application received from Surentec Inc., requesting an exemption to North

York Noise By-law No. 31317, as amended.

Financial Implications:

There are no financial implications for the City.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the request for an exemption to the North York Noise By-law No. 31317 be refused.

Background:

The former City of North York enacted Noise By-law No. 31317 on October 17, 1990 being a by-law to ensure an environment free from unusual, unnecessary, or excessive sound or vibration which may degrade the quality and tranquillity of life or cause nuisance.

Discussion:

The subject property is located on the north-east corner of Yonge Street and Sheppard Avenue E. and contains a multi use (commercial/office/residential) development. The property is undergoing re-development and the applicant is requesting permission to continue working after 7:00 p.m. and to do so until October 31, 1998 in order to complete alterations to the complex. The applicant advises that the "...mixed functions severely restrict the ability of the owner to re-develop the facilities..."

Since the fall of 1997 North York's By-law Enforcement office has received noise complaints from nine citizens who live in the vicinity of the complex. Currently there is a charge before the Courts alleging a violation of the noise control by-law and the matter is scheduled for trial on June 12, 1998.

Section 3 of North York Noise By-law No. 31317 states:

"Prohibition by Time and Place

No person shall emit or cause or permit the emission of sound resulting from any act listed in Schedule "B" hereto if clearly audible at a point of reception located in an area of the municipality within a prohibited time shown for such an area."

The '...point of reception...' in this case would be the residential properties to east and north of the subject property and therefore, the operation of any construction equipment is prohibited as follows:

A.All day Sundays and Statutory Holidays

B.7:00 p.m. one day to 7:00 a.m. next day.

Conclusions:

It would appear that the owner and contractor have allowed construction work to continue contrary to the by-law notwithstanding having been advised by our by-law enforcement staff that area residents are being disturbed by the noise. Accordingly, it is recommended that the request for an exemption to North York Noise By-law No. 31317, to permit construction equipment to operate after 7 p.m. be refused.

Contact Name:

David Roberts, Director of By-law Enforcement Services 395-7020

----------

Mr. Michael Hackl, Kerzner, Papazian, MacDermit, Barristers and Solicitors, and Mr. Glen Schabler, Project Manager, Surentec Inc., appeared before the North York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

2

Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application OZ-88-40 -

R. G. Thwaites - 15 Cameron Avenue -

North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that, in the event of an Ontario Municipal Board appeal on this decision, the City not retain outside consultants.")

The North York Community Council, after considering further deputations and submissions recommends as follows:

(1)that Draft Official Plan Amendment No. 455 and the Draft By-law attached to the memorandum (February 4, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, with respect to the Official Plan and Zoning Amendment submitted by R.G. Thwaites regarding 15 Cameron Avenue, be adopted.

The North York Community Council reports having held a further statutory public meeting on May27, 1998, with appropriate notice of this meeting, in accordance with the Planning Act.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (September 4, 1997) from the Commissioner of Planning:

Summary:

The proposal is to convert and expand an existing single dwelling residence to allow an office building. The site located at 15 Cameron Avenue is within a designated stable residential area immediately adjacent to the North York Centre.

The application was recommended for refusal by staff and the Planning Advisory Committee in January 1989 and on February 1, 1989 respectively; but was deferred sine die by Council on March8, 1989. A copy of the 1989 report and Council minutes are attached (see Schedule 'F').

In the intervening period, the City has reviewed and changed the official plan policies for the area south of Sheppard Avenue in the Downtown secondary plan (Official Plan Amendment No. 393). None of these changes affected the subject property. The site remained outside of the Downtown plan boundary. OPA 393 was subsequently referred to the Ontario Municipal Board and a hearing held between April and June of this year. The City is awaiting a decision from this hearing.

Over the last year, the City has reviewed its policies for the city centre (both Downtown and Uptown secondary plans) and has proposed a consolidated document with some policy changes. The new document is titled the North York Centre secondary plan (Official Plan Amendment No. 447). A public meeting for this proposed secondary plan has been scheduled for September 10, 1997. There are no proposed policy changes affecting the subject lands. The site remains outside of the North York Centre boundary.

The proponent, Mr. Thwaites, requested that his file be kept open during this period of review, and now wants his application to be reconsidered.

The proposed office development is not in conformity with the City's existing and proposed development strategy for the North York Centre and the adjacent stable residential areas. It would be a non-residential intrusion into an existing established residential neighbourhood. There has been no change in the planning strategy for this residential neighbourhood since the City's last review of this application in 1989.

Recommendation:

The application be refused.

3.0Proposal:

The proposal is to establish a C.9 specific development policy for the lands in the official plan and to zone the property to allow for the expansion and conversion of an existing single residential dwelling to permit an office use in addition to the existing RD-1 and R6 permitted uses.

The proponent wants to add onto the east side of an existing residential dwelling to create a office building with a gross floor area of 285.84 m² (3,076.75 ft²) at a 0.36 FSI. The proposed lot coverage would be 23.74 percent.

The backyard would be paved to provide a parking area with 13 spaces. Access to the parking area would be from Cameron Avenue (see Schedule 'B'). The existing unattached garage would be demolished.

The proposal is to create an office building with a residential type facade (see Schedules 'C' and 'D'). The intent is to have the proposed office building fit in with the existing residential streetscape on the lands to the north and west.

No retail or medical office uses are proposed.

We have confirmed with the applicant that he has not changed his initial concept for the development of the site, since our last review of his application in 1989.

4.0Location and existing site:

The site is located at 15 Cameron Avenue. It is one lot west of Yonge Street on the south side of Cameron Avenue (see Schedule 'A').

The property contains a house with a separate garage. There is a driveway to the garage and some landscaping. There is a block fence along the east boundary of the lot.

The lands are bounded on the north by Cameron Avenue and residential dwellings on the north side of the street, on the east by a Petro-Canada gas bar with a convenience store and donut shop concession, on the south by single residential dwellings fronting onto Franklin Avenue, and on the west by a single residential dwelling.

The adjacent house on the west is on the City's list of historically significant buildings and is known as the Frank Carmichael House (see Schedule 'G'). It is used as a residence.

The house at 16 Cameron Avenue on the north side of the street is leased and is used as a residence. It is owned by the adjacent property owner with a commercial building at the northwest corner of Yonge Street and Cameron Avenue. A portion of the backyard of 16 Cameron Avenue is used as parking area for the adjacent commercial building. The parking area appears to be a nonconforming use to the existing R7 zoning.

The site is on the edge of a stable residential neighbourhood and adjacent to a commercial strip along Yonge Street.

5.0Background:

This application was submitted on April 14, 1988 by Mr. Thwaites , the current property owner. The application was recommended for refusal by staff in January 1989 and the Planning Advisory Committee on February 1, 1989. The basis for the refusal was that the proposal would destabilize the adjacent residential neighbourhood, that new commercial lands should be located on arterial roads as directed by the City's official plan, and that its approval would be precedent setting for other residential properties along the Downtown boundary. Council deferred the matter sine die on March8, 1989 (see Schedule 'F').

In the intervening period, Mr. Thwaites waited until the finalization of the south Downtown planning area review was completed for the lands south of Sheppard Avenue to Highway No. 401 on both sides of Yonge Street, since it might affect his lands. During the review, the City examined the boundaries of the Downtown area and the associated land use designations. This review resulted in the Council approving Official Plan Amendment No. 393. The amendment did not change the Downtown secondary planning area boundary on the west side of Yonge Street. In addition, there were no changes to the land use designations or policies for the lands adjacent to the west boundary.

OPA 393 was subsequently referred to the Ontario Municipal Board for a hearing. This was held from April to June of this year. The City is awaiting the decision. However, Mr. Thwaites' property was not an issue at the hearing; and consequently, the decision will not affect his lands.

The City has recently completed a review of the Downtown and Uptown secondary plans for the City's commercial centre. Staff have recommended that there be some policy changes to these two documents in order to have some consistency in development requirements with the two adjacent secondary plan areas and to update the policies to reflect Council's current development strategy for the City centre. The two secondary plans and the policies agreed to by Council in OPA 393 have been consolidated into one document to be known as the North York Centre secondary plan. A public meeting on this proposed document has been scheduled for September 10, 1997. The proposed boundary of the consolidated North York Centre secondary plan does not change on the west side of Yonge Street, and the proposed policies do not include the lands outside of the boundary in the abutting stable residential areas. Accordingly, the applicant's land is not affected by the proposed policies in the North York Centre secondary plan.

Mr. Thwaites is now in the same situation as he was in 1988 when he submitted his application. His lands are immediately adjacent to the North York Centre boundary. His property is in a designated residential area.

The existing residential dwelling is currently leased for residential purposes only. Mr. Thwaites considers his house to be in a state of disrepair, and he does not want to repair, renovate, or build a new house. He lives in another house in the same neighbourhood on Franklin Avenue.

6.0Planning Controls:

This application was submitted under The Planning Act, 1983, as amended.

6.1Official Plan:

The lands are designated Residential Density One (RD-1). The RD-1 districts are intended to be areas of predominantly low rise ground oriented housing such as detached and semi-detached dwellings. Public facilities and amenities, community institutions and minor commercial uses which are ancillary to the residential use or which serve the local residential population are permitted. The proponent's office proposal would not comply with these policies.

The site is adjacent to the existing Downtown (proposed North York Centre) lands (see Schedule'E'). There is no proposal to amend the Downtown (North York Centre) boundary along this segment of the west side of Yonge Street in order to incorporate the applicant's lands into the secondary plan area. The policies of the existing and proposed secondary plans do not apply to the proposal. Subject to Part D.2, Section 3.14.12 , the City is not considering any new policies for the lands outside and adjacent to the secondary plan boundary.

6.2Zoning By-law:

The lands are zoned One-Family Detached Dwelling Sixth Density (R6). This zone permits one-family detached dwellings and accessory buildings, and some institutional and recreational uses subject to conditions.

An office use is not a permitted use.

7.0Other Comments:

As there has been no change in planning policy or development strategy for the subject site, the proposal has not been recirculated since our initial review. The following comments were submitted previously.

7.1External

The Metropolitan Planning Department notes that the proposal could set a precedent adding to the uncertainties of land use relationships at the North York Centre boundary. Proximity to the boundary does not justify extension of the city centre. See attached Schedule 'H'.

The Ministry of Transportation is not affected by the proposal. See attached Schedule 'I'.

Consumers Gas has no objections. See attached Schedule 'J'.

Bell Canada has no objections. See attached Schedule 'K'.

North York Hydro has no objections. See attached Schedule 'L'.

7.2Internal

Fire Department has no objections. See attached Schedule 'M'.

Public Works Department has no objections subject to their standard conditions. See attached Schedule 'N'.

Traffic Department (now Transportation Department) concurs with Metropolitan Planning Department comments. Should the proposal be approved, the driveway access width onto Cameron Avenue would have to be increased to 6.1 metres. See attached Schedule 'O'.

8.0Public Consultation:

There has been no further public consultation on the subject application since its initial review.

A community consultation meeting was not required.

There has been extensive public consultation on the south Downtown planning area review and the resultant Official Plan Amendment No. 393. The public also had the opportunity to express their point of view at the recent Ontario Municipal Board hearing on this amendment.

There has been significant public involvement including workshops in the preparation of the proposed North York Centre secondary plan (proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 447). A public meeting has been scheduled for September 10, 1997.

9.0Planning Issues:

9.1Commercial Development Strategy in the North York Centre and Adjacent Areas

The development strategy in this area of the City is to encourage commercial uses in the North York Centre particularly in the designated prime frontage areas along Yonge Street, Sheppard Avenue and Finch Avenue. The subject property is not within one of these areas designated for commercial uses.

Mr. Thwaites' property does not satisfy all of the requirements in the City's official plan (Part C.5, Section 2.7.0) concerning the expansion of a commercial area. The lot does not have frontage on an arterial road.

The City's development objective is to ensure the stability of the existing low density adjacent residential areas abutting the city centre. These areas are intended to be for predominantly low rise ground oriented housing with minor commercial uses which are either ancillary to the residential uses or which serve the immediate local population. The stable residential areas and the commercial core are meant to be separate but complementary to each other. Permitting an office use as an exception to the residential zoning on the subject property would not be in keeping with this strategy.

9.2Transitional Area between Core Commercial Uses and Residential Uses

The City's proposed strategy is to allow mixed use development (residential and non-residential) but with a 50 percent residential limitation for some lands adjacent to the city centre core including the Yonge Street/Sheppard Avenue subway node. The remaining portion of the city centre properties would be generally for residential uses with gradually deceasing densities moving from the core area to the established residential communities adjacent to the city centre boundary. To allow for a better change between these uses, transitional areas separating the residential and non-residential uses by allowing a mix of both are proposed at strategic locations. The adjacent Petro-Canada property to the east is in one of these transitional areas.

Although very close, the subject site is not within the area designated for mixed-use development and is still outside the city centre boundary.

In addition, the City's strategy is to have a clearly defined edge. Being outside of but adjacent to the boundary does not justify a boundary extension. A hard edge protects the stable residential area.

Mr. Thwaites' lands are adjacent to this hard edge but within the stable residential area.

9.3Precedent Setting

To permit an office use within an existing stable residential area will create a precedent. The lands to the north and south of the site are also adjacent to the same city centre boundary and a mix of existing commercial uses including a gas bar and a service station. Should this proposal be approved and a non-residential use be allowed to encroach into the same stable residential community, it will not be long before non-residential development applications are received from other property owners. This could encourage piecemeal development, defeat the purpose of having a hard-edge boundary and subvert the current strategy to conserve, protect and enhance the existing stable residential neighbourhoods.

9.4Frank Carmichael House

The Frank Carmichael house at 21 Cameron Avenue has been listed although not yet designated as a home of historical significance. This house is on the property immediately to the west of the subject site. It would be preferable to have this house preserved within a residential setting with no adjacent commercial encroachments.

9.5Site Layout

If this application was to proceed, a site plan application would be required. In the City's preliminary review of the proposal, there are layout concerns. These matters would be dealt with in more detail in the review of any site plan application.

The driveway and the parking area require the following changes:

(1) 6.0 m(19.6 ft.) driveway;

(3) 5.5 m(18.1 ft.) parking stall length and a 2.7m(8.8 ft.) parking stall width;

(4) the western strip along the driveway must be landscaped; and

(5) the residual perimeter parking area must be landscaped.

A detailed landscape plan which shall include details on a privacy fence and exterior lighting, a detailed grading/drainage plan to ensure that the parking area does not create offsite drainage problems, and revised building elevations providing further articulation to reduce the perceived mass of the building will be required for further review.

10.0Conclusion:

The proposed office development is not in conformity with the City's existing and proposed development strategy for the North York Centre and the adjacent stable residential areas. It would be a non-residential intrusion into an existing established residential neighbourhood. This would defeat the purpose of having a hard-edge boundary between the city centre and the existing stable residential neighbourhood.

If the application is approved, it would set a precedent. This could probably result in similar non-residential applications being submitted on other properties in the designated stable residential area on the west side of Yonge Street in the general area south of Sheppard Avenue.

There has been no change in the planning strategy for this residential neighbourhood since our last review of this application in 1989. There have been two recent planning reviews. The strategy for this neighbourhood has been further confirmed to be for residential uses only.

The application should be refused.

The North York Community Council also submits for the information of Council the following memorandum (February 4, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning:

On September 10, 1997, the North York Planning committee recommended that a public meeting for this application be scheduled; and further, that staff make available at the public meeting, a draft official plan amendment and a draft zoning by-law to permit office uses as an exception to the existing R6 zone.

Copies of the draft official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment are attached.

_______

The North York Community Council reports having received the following communication (April 15, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding Clause 1 of Report No. 2 of the North York Community Council, headed "Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application OZ-88-40 - R. G. Thwaites - 15 Cameron Avenue - Ward 10 - North York Centre":

The North York Community Council on April 1, 1998, had before it a communication (March 12, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, referred Clause 1 of Report No. 2 of the North York Community Council, headed "Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application OZ-88-40 - R. G. Thwaites - 15 Cameron Avenue - Ward 10 - North York Centre", back to the North York Community Council for further consideration.

The North York Community Council reports having:

(1) received the following communication; and

(2)recommended that a second public meeting be scheduled to consider this application:

---------------------

The North York Community Council also reports having had before it the following communications:

(i)(May 22, 1998) from the property owners of 30, 39 and 44 Cameron Avenue, outlining their objections to the application;

(ii)(May 17, 1998) from T.M. Callaghan, 54 Franklin Avenue, in opposition to the application;

(iii)(May 11, 1998) from Joanne M. McKenna, 50 Cameron Avenue, in opposition to the application;

(iv)(May 8, 1998) from Honey Wagman and Melvin Wagman, 48 Cameron Avenue, in opposition to the application; and

(v)(May 6, 1998) from Stephen R. Jakob, 46 Cameron Avenue, outlining his objections to the application.

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

Mr. R.G. Thwaites, 145 Franklin Avenue, applicant, explained the merits of the application. In his opinion, the proposal represents an appropriate interim use of the property, provides a suitable buffer and will enhance the neighbourhood;

Mr. Alex Dyrow, 67 Bogert Avenue, commented in support of the application; and

Mr. Peter Peterson, 12 Forence Avenue, expressed his support for the application stating that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands and provides an adequate buffer between the existing commercial and residential uses in the area.

----------------

(A copy of the 1989 report, Council minutes, schedules, draft official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment referred to in the foregoing reports is on file in the office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

3

Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-97-27 -

Shell Canada Limited -

2831 Bayview Avenue - North York Centre South

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (April 23, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, and for the reasons that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands, recommends that the application submitted by Shell Canada Limited regarding a Zoning By-law Amendment for 2831 Bayview Avenue, be approved, with the following conditions:

(1)in connection with the site plan, the number and location of curb cuts be re-evaluated;

(2)the length of the median on Bayview Avenue, south of Sheppard Avenue East, be extended to prohibit southbound left turns from the gasoline/service station onto Bayview Avenue with the necessary modifications being made to facilitate access to the apartment buildings on the west side of Bayview Avenue.

The North York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 27, 1998, with appropriate notice of this meeting, in accordance with the Planning Act.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (April 23, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to recommend a zoning by-law amendment to permit Shell Canada Limited to redevelop their existing service station site at the southeast corner of Sheppard Avenue East and Bayview Avenue.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Council enact an implementing zoning by-law which allows a car wash and a 162 m² retail store as additional uses to the existing General Commercial - C1(45) site specific zoning.

Background:

History:

Shell Canada Limited have objected to Official Plan Amendment No. 392. The City has requested the proponent to withdraw their objection to the proposed secondary plan. In this regard, Shell has indicated that its appeal of OPA 392 will be withdrawn with Council's consideration of this application.

Proposal:

Shell Canada Limited wants to demolish their existing service station building and fuel pumps and redevelop the property to provide a gas bar with four pump islands and an attendant's booth, a propane island, a 161 m² retail convenience store and a car wash.

The total proposed gross floor area for the entire development is 278 m² (2,993 ft²), representing a density of 0.05 FSI.

Location:

The site is located at the southeast corner of Sheppard Avenue East and Bayview Avenue intersection. The property is in the Greenbriar neighbourhood just north of Highway No. 401.

The lands are adjacent to the North York YMCA. The Bayview Village shopping centre is located across Sheppard Avenue to the north. An ESSO gasoline and service station is located across Bayview Avenue to the west. There are single family dwellings and an apartment building south of the ESSO property. An office complex is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection.

The lands are adjacent to the proposed Bayview subway station.

Official Plan:

The existing designation for the site is Commercial, and the land is designated Arterial Corridor Area in proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 392. Both designations permit retail and service commercial uses.

The applicant's proposal conforms to the policies for development in an Arterial Corridor Area designation.

Zoning By-law:

The lands are zoned General Commercial - C1(45) with a site specific restriction allowing only a gasoline service station and accessory uses, a service station and accessory uses, and an automated bank machine.

The Ontario Municipal Board recently approved a city wide zoning by-law (By-law 32641) which allows retail stores, personal service shops and car washing establishments on properties with C1 zoning provided that the gasoline station property abuts an arterial road, and for car washes, provided that the site is not adjacent to lands zoned One Family Detached Dwelling (R) zone or Multiple Family Dwellings Second Density Zone (RM2). The retail stores and personal service shops can not exceed a 140 m² gross floor area. Noise fencing must be provided for a car wash use.

A zoning by-law amendment is needed to accommodate the applicant's redevelopment proposal.

Comments from Other Departments and Agencies:

The Transportation Department has no objections providing the location of the proposed car wash is shifted 7 metres (22.9 feet) to the south in order to provide additional vehicle storage for cars exiting the car wash. This and other matters concerning site access control and road widening will be dealt with at the site plan stage. See attached Schedules "E" and "F".

The Toronto Transit Commission has no objections providing a 7.62 metre (25 foot) minimum horizontal separation is kept between the subway and the fuel storage tanks and piping, providing the proposed vent rack is relocated, and providing notice of potential subway vibration is included in the site plan agreement. In addition, the Toronto Transit Commission will require a temporary surface easement during the construction phase of the subway and a permanent utility easement. See attached Schedule "G".

The Public Health Department has no objections providing prior to demolishing the service station, all hazardous materials are properly disposed of in a landfill site, and providing Shell Canada notifies the Technical Standards and Safety Authority of their proposed site modifications. See attached Schedule "H".

The Parks and Recreation Department requires a 2% cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication payment at the building permit application stage. See attached Schedule "I".

The Public Works Department has no objections subject to storm water provisions, service connection provisions and a garbage collection plan. See attached Schedule "J".

Community Consultation:

A community meeting was held on Monday September 29, 1997.

A representative from the YMCA noted possible traffic conflicts with their driveways and the accesses onto the Shell property, particularly if traffic increases. There are already traffic conflicts with cars turning into and out of the west side of their property and traffic entering and exiting the existing Shell station.

Most of the citizens attending the meeting were from the Kenaston Gardens subdivision. These lands are located to the east of the YMCA property on a dead-end street. Their road access is onto Sheppard Avenue at an uncontrolled intersection. The consensus was that they did not object to the proposed gas bar and retail convenience store; but did have concerns with the proposed car wash and the potential additional traffic onto Sheppard Avenue that they thought would be generated from its use.

Discussion:

(1)Gasoline Station Properties

Shell Canada is requesting that a car wash and convenience retail store be added as additional uses to their site which has site specific C1 zoning. The subject site is already being used for a gasoline/service station. The proposed redevelopment includes this use, but in a reconfiguration as a gas bar.

The adjacent YMCA property is zoned R4-Residential One-Family Detached Dwelling Fourth Density with a site specific provision allowing for recreational, social and educational uses as additional uses (By-law 27088). The existing YMCA is a well established institutional use at this location.

The adjacent YMCA facility is not a residential use. The City's strategy to prohibit additional uses to gasoline stations in residential neighbourhoods adjacent to properties with single family residential zoning should not apply to this situation. There is no conflict with adjacent land uses. Noise fencing will provide additional protection to the neighbourhood. The proposed gas bar complex fits in with the existing commercial uses at this intersection. A site specific exception to this strategy is appropriate at this location.

(2)Retail Store

The proposed gross floor area of the accessory retail convenience store is above the City's 140 m² normal standard by 21 m² for the building and attached garbage room. As this is only a minor increase in gross floor area, an exception in the proposed zoning by-law amendment to allow a larger gross floor area for these uses is recommended.

(3)Car Wash Location

The Transportation Department is concerned that there be enough distance between the exit of the car wash and the driveway access onto Sheppard Avenue. Should vehicles be delayed in making a right turn onto Sheppard Avenue due to traffic, there is the possibility a vehicle jam with the vehicles exiting the car wash. Accordingly, having reviewed the conceptual site plan, they have requested that the car wash be shifted 7 metres (22.9 feet) to the south. This will resolve this traffic issue and will be secured at the time of site plan approval.

(4)Traffic

The Transportation Department has confirmed that the capacity of the existing streets will accommodate the traffic emanating from the proposed uses in the redevelopment of the site.

(5)Site Accesses

The Transportation Department has requested access and curb improvements, and restrictions on inbound and outbound vehicles movements through site design, pavement markings and signage. This includes the requirement for an extension of the median along Sheppard Avenue. The median will prevent left turns from the site onto Sheppard Avenue. This will assist in traffic flow off of the site particularly near the car wash. In addition, it will provide enhanced traffic safety by preventing left turns from Sheppard Avenue onto the site.

At the site plan application stage, a bylaw to prevent left turns onto and from Bayview Avenue with appropriate signage will be a condition of approval. This will assist traffic management in the general area and in particular, the YMCA driveway.

These measures to control access onto and off of the site from both Sheppard Avenue and Bayview Avenue will result in right-in and right-out turning movements only.

(6)Soils and Hazardous Materials

The Public Health Department considers the proposal to be a site modification. A record of site condition soils assessment report with a peer review is not required. However, the proponents will have to contact the Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA) as required under the Gasoline Handling Act because there will be a relocation of the existing underground fuel tanks.

The Public Health Department requires that all environmentally hazardous materials be properly disposed of in a landfill.

(7)Urban Design - Site Plan

Car wash location; streetscape pedestrian, greening and aesthetics provisions; underground storage tank and vent locations; noise attenuation fencing and notice of subway noise and vibration intrusions will be dealt with at the site plan review stage. Appendix "A" is a brief summary of these matters. These and other issues will be addressed when the site plan is submitted.

Conclusions:

The proposed commercial development is a reworking of an existing service/gasoline station to a gas bar with additional uses. The proposed car wash and retail convenience store are additional uses permitted in gasoline stations across the City within C1 zones.

Design and streetscape concerns will be accommodated at the site plan review stage in conformity with the City's streetscape guidelines for this area.

The proposed redevelopment of the existing gasoline and service station is appropriate. A zoning by-law amendment to accommodate the car wash and a retail store as additional uses to the proposed gas bar is recommended.

Contact Name:

Michael SaundersTel: 395-7104

APPENDIX "A"

The site plan approval shall include the following provisions:

(a)the relocation of the car wash 7 metres (22.9 feet) to the south;

(b)the extension of the Sheppard Avenue East median to the east to prevent left turn vehicle movements on and off of the site;

(c)a by-law prohibiting left turn movements into and out of the site onto Bayview Avenue is enacted, and appropriate signage be put in place;

(d)access and curb improvements as outlined in the letter from the Transportation Department dated January 30, 1998 (see Schedule "E");

(e)streetscape and landscaping improvements as outlined in the letter from Metroplanning dated August 8, 1997 (see Schedule "D"), as required by the City's Sheppard Avenue East Streetscape plan, and as required by Urban Design Division;

(f)the relocation of the vent racks at least 7.62 metres (25 feet) from the proposed subway structure;

(g)a 2 metre (6.5 foot) noise attenuation fence along the eastern and southern property lines to the requirements specified in By-law 30901;

(h)attenuation measures be incorporated into the design of the proposed buildings to reduce noise and vibration to the lowest level technically feasible;

(i)a clause be included in the agreement notifying of the potential for noise and vibration emanating form the adjacent transit facilities and from traffic on Bayview Avenue and Sheppard Avenue East, and that the Toronto Transit Commission accepts no responsibility for the effects from the noise and vibration; and

(j)the Owner conveys to the City the required lands along Bayview Avenue and Sheppard Avenue East to secure the rights-of-way for the widening of the intersection as outlined on Schedule "D".

-----------

A staff presentation was made by Michael Saunders, Planner, Planning Department, North York Civic Centre.

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

Mr. Bernard Fox, 26 Rean Drive, in opposition to the car wash establishment proposed because it would generate additional traffic congestion in the area and would only aggravate the existing situation at the Bayview-Sheppard intersection.

Mr. Murray Balshin, 16 Medlock Drive, in opposition to the application stating his primary objections were with respect to the car wash use proposed and the negative impact it would create on the existing traffic congestion in the area. Mr. Balshin also had environmental and safety concerns about the proposed use in light of the number of children that attend the daycare facility at the YMCA located nearby.

Mr. Abraham Rashid, Director, YMCA Facility, on behalf of the YMCA, expressing their traffic concerns with the application and the proposed car wash use affecting access into the YMCA facility by its members. In light of the proximity of their daycare facility, Mr. Rashid was also concerned about the negative impact from the carbon monoxide fumes of cars waiting to be washed. Mr. Rashid concluded by requesting that appropriate landscaping and screening be provided in order to reduce the impact of the proposed car wash use.

Mr. Robert Dragicevic, on behalf of the applicant, Shell Canada Limited, explained the merits of the application addressing the concerns raised and indicated that in terms of this application, the issues with respect to traffic have been canvassed with North York and Metro Transportation staff as well as the TTC and there will be curb improvements and upgrades that will occur at the intersection. All of the accesses will be restricted to right-in and right-out. Mr. Dragicevic further indicated that Shell Canada will be required to provide acoustical fencing, the details of which will be further discussed at the time of site plan review. Other urban design issues such as the screening, landscaping and aesthetic provisions will also be reviewed at that time. In addition he stated that these locations have been identified by the City as appropriate locations for car wash establishments. In this particular case, the facility can accommodate from 45 to 60 vehicles per hour as well as provision for 24 stacking places.

-------------------

(Copies of the schedules, draft official plan amendment and draft zoning by-law amendment referred to in the foregoing report are on file in the office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998 had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (undated) from Mr. Simon Arieli, Toronto, Ontario, submitting comments regarding the rezoning for the Shell car wash, situated at Bayview and Sheppard Avenues.)

4

Official Plan, Zoning Amendment and Subdivision Application

UDOZ-97-39 and UDSB-1236 - Topview Developments Limited -

East Portion of 2781-2801 Dufferin Street

North York Spadina

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (April 28, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, and for the reasons that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands, recommends that the application submitted by Topview Developments Limited regarding Official Plan, Zoning Amendment and Subdivision for the east portion of 2781-2801 Dufferin Street (north side of Risa Boulevard), east of 2775 Dufferin Street (south side of Risa Boulevard), be approved, with the following revisions and additional condition:

(1)recommendation 2.1 be amended by adding a single exception which would permit a maximum coverage of 39% for Lot 2;

(2)recommendation 2.1 (ii) be amended to reflect a minimum rear yard setback of 4.3m instead of 6.0m; and

(3)the provision of a retaining wall adjacent to 31 Risa Boulevard, the form of which is to be determined through the site plan process.

The North York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 27, 1998, with appropriate notice of this meeting, in accordance with the Planning Act.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (April 28, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning:

Purpose:

This report recommends approval of the application to permit the residential development of the lands for 12 detached houses on the north side of Risa Boulevard and 4 detached houses on the south side of Risa Boulevard.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

(1)for the North Parcel the Official Plan designation be amended to Residential Density One (RD1);

(2)the zoning be amended to One-Family Dwelling Seventh Density Zone (R7) with the following exceptions:

(2.1)For the north parcel:

(i) Minimum Lot Frontage - 7m;

(ii) Minimum Rear Yard Setback - 6m;

(iii)Minimum Side Yard Setback - 1.2m on one side and 0.6m on the other side;

(iv)Maximum Building Height - 3 storeys and 8.8m;

(v)Maximum Length of Dwelling - 16.8m; and

(vi)Minimum Lot Area - 250 square metres;

(2.2)for the south parcel:

(i) Minimum Lot Frontage - 8.5m;

(ii)Minimum Front Yard Setback - 7.5m;

(iii) Minimum Side Yard Setback - 1.2m on one side and 0.6m on the other side;

(iv)Maximum Building Height - 3 storeys and 8.8m;

(v)Maximum Length of Dwelling - 16.8m; and

(vi)Maximum Driveway Slope - 10%;

(3)the Draft Plan of Subdivision, prepared by McBain & Carmichael Ltd., dated April 24, 1998, be approved, subject to the following conditions:

(3.1)prior to the registration of the Plan, the owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to carry out the following to the satisfaction of the appropriate City officials:

(i)submit a record of site condition that is acknowledged by the Ministry of Environment and Energy prior to the issuance of any building permit; and

(ii)submit plans and agree to carry out the approved landscaping treatment for the lots which abut employment uses;

(3.2)the standard conditions of approval for subdivisions, attached as Schedule "P";

(3.3)the conditions of the Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission, attached as Schedule "H";

(3.4)the conditions of Bell Canada, attached as Schedule "I";

(3.5)the conditions of the North York Transportation Department, attached as Schedule "K";

(3.6)the conditions of the North York Public Works Department, attached as Schedule "L";

(3.7)the conditions of the North York Parks and Recreation Department attached as Schedule "J"; and

(4)for the south parcel the owner shall be required, prior to final site plan approval, to:

(4.1)demonstrate through a landscape plan appropriate buffering techniques that will be used between the residential and abutting employment uses; and

(4.2)submit a record of site condition that is acknowledged by the Ministry of Environment and Energy.

Background:

Proposal:

The application proposes the residential development of the lands on the north and south side of Risa Boulevard, east of Dufferin Street. The application includes the subdivision of the lands on the north parcel in order to permit the construction of 12 detached houses, as shown on Schedule C. On the south parcel, the applicant proposes to construct 4 detached houses (Schedule D). The street elevation for the north side of Risa Boulevard is shown on Schedule E. The pertinent statistics are as follows:

Location and Existing Site:

The lands are located east of Dufferin Street on the north and south sides of Risa Boulevard. Both parcels are vacant and located on the edge of a low density residential community with detached houses located immediately to the east. A mix of service commercial and industrial uses are located to the west along Dufferin Street.

To the west of the northern parcel, the applicant previously received approval to develop the Dufferin Street with a donut shop and automobile service uses, as shown on Schedule D.

Planning Controls:

Official Plan:

The north parcel is designated Mixed-Industrial which permits employment uses and an amendment is necessary to permit the residential land use. The south parcel is designated Residential Density One (RD1) which permits the proposed residential uses (Schedule A).

Zoning:

Industrial-Commercial Zone (MC) with a holding zone by By-law No. 33091 which permits employment uses (Schedule B). A zoning by-law amendment is necessary in order to permit the residential land use.

Other Department Comments:

The following section summarizes the comments received from the departments and agencies circulated:

The North York Board of Education and the Metropolitan Separate School Board notes that accommodation is available at certain schools and expresses its concern regarding accommodation pressures in other schools (Schedules "F" and "G")

The Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission and Bell Canada report that satisfactory arrangements should be made for required facilities to serve the residential subdivision (Schedules "H" and "I").

The Parks and Recreation Department reports that the proposal will be subject to the City's cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication requirement (Schedule "J").

The Transportation Department reports that the houses are to have an adequate parking space supply and that a sidewalk will be required along the north side of Risa Boulevard (Schedule "K").

The Public Works Department reports that servicing is available to accommodate the proposal, that the grading on adjacent properties should not be altered and that certain road and infrastructure matters will be secured as part of the subdivision (Schedule "L").

The Public Health Department notes the conclusions of the applicant's environmental studies and the City's peer review consultant regarding the suitability of the site conditions to accommodate the residential land use (Schedules "M1" and "M2").

The Economic Development Centre reports that the proposed residential land use is an alternative land use that can be accommodated on the site while maintaining the employment nature of the Dufferin Street frontage (Schedule "N").

Community Consultation:

Several meetings between the applicant and residents, including community meetings with the local Councillors and staff, have taken place since the applications were submitted. The community and the applicant have worked hard alongside the local Councillors and staff to achieve a residential proposal that addresses the principle community concern regarding the introduction of semi-detached houses into the neighbourhood. In response to the community concerns, the applicant submitted revised plans which propose only detached houses. This plan was well received by the community at a community meeting held on April 7, 1998. A copy of the issues that were raised at the February and April community meetings are reproduced in Schedule "O". Submissions that have been received from the community are included in the appendix section of this report.

Discussion:

Planning Issues:

Land Use:

In principle, the proposed change in land use from industrial to residential is consistent with the pertinent Official Plan policies regarding such proposals. The lands are located on the periphery of a small industrial area (comprising about six properties) on the east side of Dufferin Street, and the residential development would not be expected to unduly impact the continued viability of the remaining industrial uses in the area. The boundaries for change are logical, form an extension of an existing stable residential community and can create a well defined edge between residential and non-residential uses. Given the modest scale of the project, the community service needs of the new residents can be met with existing resources.

Subdivision Design and Context (North Parcel):

The proposed subdivision of the north parcel into 12 detached residential lots and a new cul-de-sac road represents a compact and efficient form of development. The proposal fits in well with the existing urban fabric by extending westward the residential frontage on Risa Boulevard while maintaining the employment nature along Dufferin Street. Surrounding properties, particularly the employment properties to the west and north, should not be unduly impacted in terms of their existing or future redevelopment opportunities.

Buffer Treatment (North and South Parcels):

The introduction of residential beside employment uses raises the need to accommodate suitable buffer measures between the two land uses. The proposal includes a mix of landscaping, fencing and acoustical wall techniques which will serve to ensure a compatible relationship between the residential and employment uses. These landscape techniques are in addition to the existing employment zoning controls which limit the range of uses on employment lands that are adjacent to residential lands in order to minimize conflict between the uses. The subdivision agreement can require the landscape buffering techniques for the north parcel. The south parcel is not subject to a subdivision, but will be created through a consent by the Committee of Adjustment and the houses will be subject to site plan approval at that time. It is recommended that, as part of the site plan approval, the applicant shall obtain approval for a landscape plan that shows the buffering techniques that will be used between the residential and abutting employment uses.

Urban Design and Zoning Standards (North and South Parcels):

As a compact, infill subdivision, the proposal has a variety of lot sizes which will accommodate modest front, rear and side yard setbacks. The proposal makes efficient use of the two parcels in a manner that is consistent with low density residential infill projects. The table on the following page compares the proposed zone standards with a typical R7 zone. Some adjustments to the proposed zone standards should be incorporated into the proposal in order to achieve a more appropriate:

(a)rear yard setback: a minimum of 6.0m should be provided in order to maximize the rear yard and to accommodate a larger separation between the residential and employment uses.

(b)building height: all of the houses are proposed to have a building height of 2½ storeys and about one-half of them are shown to be 9.5m tall. A building height of 3 storeys would achieve the applicant's proposal and is acceptable provided that a maximum absolute building height of 8.8m is maintained. This should ensure a more compatible relationship with the surrounding bungalow residential neighbourhood which has a maximum building height zoning permission of 2 storeys and 8.8m.

(c)lot coverage: there are two lots that show a maximum lot coverage that exceeds the 35% permitted in the neighbourhood. Maintaining the maximum 35% lot coverage should not jeopardize the integrity of the proposal.

(d)driveway slope: the maximum 10% that is permitted by the R7 zone should be maintained for all of the lots. Given that the applicant intends to create the lots on the south parcel through a consent by the Committee of Adjustment, an exception should be provided in order to permit the maximum 10% driveway slope.

Site Condition:

Environmental site assessments are being refined to confirm the suitability of the site condition for the residential land use. The assessments that have been submitted suggest that the residential land use is appropriate. This conclusion must be verified by the submission of a record of site condition for both parcels of land.

Conclusions:

The proposed residential infill subdivision represents a compact and efficient form of development that is appropriate for the lands.

Contact Name:

Franco Romano, Senior Planner

Phone: 395-7119Fax: 395-7155

----------

A staff presentation was made by Randy Jones, Planner, Planning Department, North York Civic Centre.

The North York Community Council reports having also had before it a communication (May 21, 1998) from Mr. Adam J. Brown, Brown, Dryer, Karol, Barristers and Solicitors, Solicitor on behalf of the applicant.

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

Ms. Jean Devana, 108 Stayner Avenue, spoke on behalf of herself and Ms. Anna Shuryn, property owner of 31 Risa Boulevard, expressing their concerns with the proposed development. Ms. Devana requested that a retaining wall be erected by the applicant in order to ensure that no drainage problems occur as a result of any grading changes required for the new development.

Mr. Adam Brown, Solicitor, on behalf of the applicant, Topview Developments Limited, commented on the merits of the application. During his submission he indicated that the final plan is a result of a significant amount of input from the community and planning staff, including a reduction of the overall number of units proposed, the elimination of semi-detached homes, the increase in the resulting lot frontages, and compliance with the Works Department requirements with respect to the size of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Brown further indicated that the applicant would be willing to erect a fence and a zero to two-foot retaining wall in order to address the concerns raised by the neighbouring property owners. In concluding he stated that the applicant concurred with the recommendations contained in the planning report subject to Recommendation 2.1 (ii) being amended to reflect a minimum rear yard setback of 4.3 metres instead of 6.0 metres and subject to Recommendation 2.1 being amended by adding a single exception which would permit a maximum coverage of 39% for Lot 2.

Mr. Frank Spezzano, on behalf of his father who lives at 207 Times Road, requested additional information about the proposal and requested clarification on the number and size of lots proposed.

-------------------

(Copies of the schedules, draft official plan amendment and draft zoning by-law amendment referred to in the foregoing report are on file in the office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

5

Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-97-49 -

Vincent Planning and Development Consultants Inc. -

1675 Jane Street - North York Humber

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (May 7, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, and for the reasons that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands, recommends that the application submitted by Vincent Planning and Development Consultants Inc. regarding Zoning Amendment for 1675 Jane Street, be approved.

The North York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 27, 1998, with appropriate notice of this meeting, in accordance with the Planning Act.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (May 7, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to recommend a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a retail store on the vacant portion of the site, south of the existing development.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the application be approved and the site be rezoned from C1 and R4 to C1 (exception), subject to the following conditions:

i)no minimum front yard setback shall be required and the maximum front yard setback shall be 9.7 metres; and

ii)notwithstanding any future severance, partition, or division of the site, the provisions of this By-law shall continue to apply to the whole site as if no severance, partition or division occurred;

(2)during site plan review the objectives set out in Appendix A shall be achieved; and

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

Background:

History:

This application was received after a similar proposal was refused by the Committee of Adjustment on November 6, 1997. The Committee indicated that a rezoning process would allow for a more rigorous review of the impacts and relationship between this development and neighbouring properties. The applicant (Loblaws Properties Inc.) appealed the decision of the Committee to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). A hearing date has not yet been set. Counsel for Loblaws Properties have also appealed this rezoning application to the OMB under Section 34(11) of the Planning Act.

Proposal:

The applicant proposes to construct a one-storey Loblaws (No Frills) store on the vacant southern portion of the site (Schedule "A"). The existing one-storey commercial building on the northern portion of the site will be retained. The building currently houses a Mr. Transmission business and a No Frills store which is to be leased out. The new retail store is proposed to have a total gross floor area of 2,323 m² with a potential future expansion of an additional 464 m² . The site statistics are outlined below.

Site Location:

The site is located on the southeast corner of Jane Street and Lawrence Avenue. In this vicinity, Jane Street serves as the boundary between the former Cities of York and North York. There is a mix of residential and commercial use in the neighbourhood. Retail uses front both Jane Street and Lawrence Avenue. Low rise apartments are located south of the site on Jane Street. Low density residences are generally located behind the commercial properties fronting the arterial roads.

Official Plan:

The site is designated as Arterial Corridor Area (ACA) which permits a mix of residential, commercial and institutional uses (Schedule A). For commercial developments, densities up to 1.0 FSI (Floor Space Index) are permitted. No amendment to the Official Plan is required.

Zoning By-law:

The northern portion of the site is zoned C1 (General Commercial) while the southern portion is zoned R4 (Residential Fourth Density) (Schedule B). An amendment to the zoning by-law is required to permit the construction of the retail store on the southern portion of the site.

Department Comments:

Listed below are the significant comments received:

The Transportation Department have reviewed the Traffic Impact Study and the revised site plan and have no objections to the proposal subject to the conditions and requirements outlined in ScheduleF. Further review of access arrangements, changes to signalization at the Jane Street and Lawrence Avenue intersection, and a land conveyance along Lawrence Avenue West will be required.

The Public Works Department indicates that a water main is to be constructed in order to accommodate this development (Schedule G). Additional comments include conditions pertaining to the funding of works, stormwater discharge levels and garbage collection.

Community Consultation

A community open house was held on March 9, 1998. Area residents within a 200 metre (600 ft) radius were given notice of the open house at the Councillors' request. The proposal was generally supported and written submissions are included in the attached Index. Most of the issues raised pertained to the site plan and are outlined below.

Impacts on Abutting Residential Properties

-the loading area should be designed so that it is located away from the residential areas in order to minimize noise impacts;

-the rear portion of the lot should include landscaping and fencing which screens and separates the proposed commercial use from the residential properties, but does not shade adjacent gardens;

-the lighting should be arranged so that bright lights are oriented away from residences;

-some residents favoured the walkway into the residential neighbourhood while others indicated the walkway should be closed for safety reasons; and

-parking and site design should promote a safe environment;

Traffic Impacts

Questions were raised on whether the traffic generated by this proposal can be accommodated. The Transportation Department indicates that with some modification to the access arrangements, traffic can be accommodated.

As a result of the community meeting the applicant submitted a revised site plan which included the following changes:

-moved the proposed building closer to Jane Street and relocated the parking to the north;

-enclosed the loading area and made improvements to meet zoning standards;

-clearly defined how on-site circulation would be provided;

-moved the southern access to align with Speers Avenue;

-identified potential buffering and landscaped areas along the Jane Street frontage and adjacent to residential areas; and

-defined a visible continuous pedestrian route from Jane Street to Thurodale Avenue;

The applicant is continuing to work with residents to resolve these issues which will be finalized through site plan approval.

Discussion:

Land Use

The site is part of the Lawrence Avenue Arterial Corridor Area (ACA) which extends from Black Creek Drive in the north to Tretheway Drive in the south. The proposed development is consistent with the ACA policies and while below the density and height limits permitted at a major intersection, will bring significant reinvestment and vitality to the neighbourhood. The proposed store will infill a vacant parcel along this portion of Jane Street. The impact of the development on adjacent residences will be mitigated through appropriate urban design criteria.

The proposed C1 zone which permits retail uses, is appropriate for this site given its location at a major intersection. The proposal meets the C1 zone standards with the exception of front yard setbacks. An exception to the front yard setback is recommended to permit the building to be closer to Jane Street providing an urban street edge.

Urban Design

The introduction of the new store along with enhancements to the existing site will result in an overall improvement to the appearance of the area. Enhancements will be sought to the Jane Street frontage including landscape treatment along the boulevard to complement the proposed building location in relation to the street. The building facade and canopy along Jane Street will be further reviewed to achieve a high quality of urban design. At the Lawrence Avenue frontage opportunities to increase the landscaped area and realign the parking in relation to the boulevard will be achieved during the site plan process. The proposed walkway from Thurodale Avenue will provide added access for residents to the proposed store and serve as a path to Jane Street. Pedestrians have created an informal walkway through the vacant site to Jane Street and to the existing parking lot. Refinements to the site plan as suggested by the residents will be further addressed through the site plan process.

Traffic and Access

The Transportation Department concurs with the findings of the Traffic Impact Study and is satisfied that the traffic generated by the proposed development can be accommodated. Access arrangements will be further reviewed during the site plan approval process and the traffic consultant will be required to provide further analysis of site access.

Soil Conditions

The applicant has provided a soils report given the potential for soil and groundwater contamination from the Mr. Transmission establishment on the northern portion of the site and past uses. As per the interim policy, the soils report will be subject to a peer review and a Record of Site Condition verifying the consultant's results will be required as part of site plan approval.

Conclusions:

The applicant's proposal for a new No Frills retail store on the southern portion of the site located at Jane Street and Lawrence Avenue is consistent with the policies set forth in the North York Official Plan. The proposed store will benefit the neighbourhood by providing added amenity and investment to the area. A detailed review of landscaping, buffering, lighting, servicing, access and other related issues will be addressed at the site plan stage. It is recommended that an implementing by-law covering the entire site be enacted.

Contact Name:

Mary McElroy, Planner

Phone: 395-7100Fax: 395-7155

----------

APPENDIX A

During the Site Plan Approval stage, the following shall be achieved:

i)minimize the impact of loading facilities and operations on neighbouring properties;

ii)enhance landscaping, buffering and fencing along adjacent residential properties;

iii)provide an appropriate parking lot design including drainage facilities and placement of lighting;

iv)provide streetscape improvements to the Jane Street and Lawrence Avenue frontages, and ensure that the design of the proposed building is street related; and

v)address the technical comments of the Transportation Department (Schedule F), Public Works Department (Schedule G), Public Health Department (Schedule H).

----------

The North York Community Council also reports having had before it a communication (May 12, 1998) from Ms. Dorothy Stewart, 17 Ellis Avenue, advising of her opposition to the application.

Mr. Adam Brown, Solicitor, on behalf of Vincent Planning and Development Consultants Inc., appeared before the North York Community Council indicating that a number of community meetings have been held on this application. The final plan before the Community Council is in response to the concerns raised by neighbouring property owners and it is acceptable to all parties involved.

-----------

(Copies of the schedules and draft zoning by-law amendment referred to in the foregoing report are on file in the office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

6

Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application

UDOZ-96-27 and UD52-97-03 - 1190082 Ontario Limited -

22 Old York Mills Road - North York Centre South

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following reports (April28, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, and for the reasons that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands, recommends that the applications submitted by 1190082 Ontario Limited regarding Official Plan and Zoning Amendment and Official Plan Amendment and Temporary Use Zoning By-law for 22 Old York Mills Road, be approved with the following revision and additional condition:

(1)the Gross Floor Area include the recreational amenity and storage space; and

(2)recommendation 2.3 be amended to permit a maximum of 120 units, of which a minimum of 15% shall have a maximum floor area of 76m² for one bedroom units and 97m² for two bedroom units or any combination thereof.

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

(a)requested the Planning Department, in consultation with the community and Ward Councillors, to review the lands at 45 York Mills Road in light of the previous York Mills study endorsed by North York Council in October 1991, for a future report to the North York Community Council; and

(b)referred the concerns outlined in the communication dated May 26, 1998 from Mr. J.P. Wleugel, (property owner of 5 Campbell Crescent) to the Planning staff for consideration during the site plan process.

The North York Community Council also reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 27, 1998, with appropriate notice of this meeting, in accordance with the Planning Act.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (April 28, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to recommend an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a residential development on the site.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

Official Plan

(1)Part D.5 of the Official Plan (York Mills Office Centre Secondary Plan) be amended to:

(a)permit stand-alone residential uses on the subject site;

(b)encourage the provision of indoor recreational, mechanical and garbage space to serve new development. The area dedicated for such space shall be excluded from the calculation of permitted density;

(c)add a statement which indicates that the calculation of density will be considered over all of the lands north of Old York Mills Road and south of York Mills Road in Area#4; and

(d)add a clause that notwithstanding the height and sight line limitations applicable to the subject site in Area #4, the height of all buildings to be erected be restricted so as not to obstruct sight lines across the valley from top of bank to top of bank. Pipes and chimneys may exceed the relevant height limitation by a maximum of 1.0m but the area of the roof occupied by such structures exceeding the limitation shall be restricted by Council.

Zoning By-law

(2)the R3 and C1(45) zoning on the property be amended to Multiple-Family Residential Sixth Density Zone (RM6) exception, subject to the following provisions:

(2.1)for the purposes of this exception, the following definitions shall apply:

(a)"Mechanical areas" shall mean the floor area within a building that is used exclusively for the accommodation of mechanical equipment necessary to physically operate the building, such as heating and ventilation, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing, fire protection and elevator equipment.

(b)for the purposes of this exception, "gross floor area" shall mean the aggregate of the areas of each floor, measured between the exterior faces of the exterior walls of the building or structure at the level of each floor, but excluding:

(i)a maximum of 861 m² used as mechanical and garbage collection areas;

(ii)a maximum of 266 m² used as storage for the residential units and located on the ground floor or below grade; and

(iii)a maximum of 753 m² used as indoor recreational amenity space;

(2.2)subject to modification during the site plan review, the maximum gross floor area on site shall not exceed the sum of:

(a) 7,435 m² attributable to the existing site;

(b)2,151 m² attributable to the closed portions of Old York Mills Road; and

(c)5,704 m² attributable to the adjacent western lot; and

(2.3)the maximum number of dwelling units shall be 141, of which a minimum of 25% of the total number of units shall have a maximum floor area of 55m² for bachelor units, 70m² for one bedroom units, 80m² for two bedroom units and 120m² for three bedroom units or any combination thereof;

(2.4)the minimum yard setbacks shall be as generally set out in Schedule "C" to this report, subject to any modifications approved at the site plan stage;

(2.5)the maximum building height shall be 9 storeys and the maximum height of the structure shall be 161.5 metres above sea level, with the exception of an elevator room, pipes and chimneys, which shall be limited to a maximum of 1.0 metre above the building height and occupy an aggregate maximum area of 100 square metres area on the roof surface;

(2.6)parking shall be provided at the rate of 1.42 parking spaces per dwelling unit, of which 0.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be for the use of visitors, and all located on the subject site within the residential; and

(2.7)the provisions for minimum landscaped area and maximum coverage shall not apply;

Other Conditions

(3)prior to the enactment of a zoning by-law for the residential project, the applicant shall apply for and receive site plan approval to include the provisions outlined in Schedule "E";

(4)the applicant shall enter into an undertaking agreeing to develop the residential project as a condominium corporation, in accordance with City (former City of North York) policy; and

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

Background:

Proposal:

The applicant proposes to construct a residential project consisting of 141 residential condominium units as shown in Schedule "C". The maximum height is proposed at 9 storeys with 2 storey townhouse units fronting onto Old York Mills Road (see Schedule "C2"). There is a large landscaped area proposed for the northwest quadrant of the property and parking for 200 vehicles within the building. Building and street elevations are shown in Schedules "D1" to "D4". As shown in Schedule "D5", the subject property includes a portion of the Old York Mills Road right-of-way being purchased from the City and includes a portion of the density from the abutting property. A total gross floor area of 17,100 m² is proposed. The applicant requests that areas totalling 2,110 m² for the lobby, mechanical and electrical rooms, storage rooms, elevator core, garbage rooms and all of the proposed recreational amenity space be excluded from the gross floor area. A summary of the most pertinent project statistics is set out in Table 1 below:

Site Location:

The site is located on an island surrounded by York Mills and Old York Mills Roads, east of Yonge Street. A surface commercial parking lot currently exists on the site, with a gasoline station facility abutting to the west. There is a 4 to 6 storey office building on the north side of York Mills Road. To the south of Old York Mills Road is a TTC station, park and institutional uses. The west side of Yonge Street in the immediate vicinity is dominated by parkland and open space. Surrounding uses are primarily low density residential.

Official Plan and Zoning:

The site is designated YMO (York Mills Office) in the York Mills Office Centre Secondary Plan (see Schedule "A") within Area #4, permitting a mix of uses. Residential uses are permitted, provided they are above the first floor in conjunction with other non-residential uses. The maximum floor space index (FSI) is 2.0. While a general top of bank elevation is set out as 162 metres above sea level in this area, Council shall not permit development to exceed the lower surveyed top of bank elevation of 161.5 metres above sea level opposite the easterly end of this property.

The site is zoned primarily One Family Detached Dwelling Third Density Zone (R3) in Zoning By-law7625 (see Schedule "B"). Rezoning is required to a multiple-family residential (exception) zone.

Comments from Other Departments and Agencies:

The following section summarizes significant comments received:

The Works and Emergency Services Department (Transportation) notes the comparatively lower traffic levels expected from the solely residential project and recommends approval of the application subject to site plan matters and a shift in the proportion of visitor parking spaces (Schedule "G").

As part of its comments contained in Schedule "H"", the Works and Emergency Services Department (Public Works) provides conditions related to the purchase of a portion of Old York Mills Road.

The Parks and Recreation Department requests in Schedule "I" that a 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication applies to the residential development application given the area's parkland surplus.

The Toronto Transit Commission notes its requirements relating to the residential proposal with respect to the proximity of the subway station and bus service in Schedule "J".

While the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority requires a standard permit, it finds that the residential proposal does not conflict with its policies (see Schedule "K").

The Toronto District School Board notes accommodation pressures at some area schools in its comment in Schedule "L". The Toronto Catholic School Board has commented that it has no objections to the proposal.

Community Consultation:

A community meeting was held on April 23, 1998. A questionnaire was also circulated by the local councillors. A summary of the main comments made at the meeting and in the questionnaire is attached as Schedule "F". In summary, the following issues were raised at the meeting and are reflective of the main issues noted in the questionnaires:

(1)Height of the building

-Residents felt the overall height should be lower as it sets a precedent for development in the area particularly for the School Board site located to the east. The overall height of buildings is specifically discussed later in this report. It is noted that any development outside of the Centre, such as on the School Board lands, would be subject to an Official Plan amendment where the height would need to be determined in context of the area and the impacts on abutting properties.

-A stronger transition in building height between the existing community and the new development was favoured by the community, similar to the way in which the York Mills Office Centre has developed. The transition of building height is specifically addressed in the Urban Design section of this report.

(2)Traffic

-It was felt that the overall volume of traffic expected from this 141 unit development could not be accommodated in the area. The traffic impacts are specifically discussed later in this report and in the Transportation Department comments attached as Schedule "G".

-The issue of existing traffic infiltration through the residential neighbourhoods was raised, particularly because of the access proposed on Old York Mills Road. The applicant had originally proposed vehicle access from York Mills Road at the existing lights. Comments from the Transportation Department and the TTC did not support this location and as a result, access is now proposed solely from the Old York Mills frontage. In regard to the existing traffic infiltration, the Transportation Department has been monitoring the results of traffic calming measures within other areas of the City. These measures could be successful in addressing some of the infiltration issues in this community.

(3) Old York Mills Road

-Some area residents requested that there be less parking along Old York Mills Road and that the pick up and drop off area in front of the TTC be accommodated. The reconfiguration of the Old York Mills Road allowance will be necessary when the sale, to the applicant, of a portion of the road is completed. The eastern portion of Old York Mills would be reduced to a width of 18.5 metres with no on-street parking. The final design of the entire roadway from Yonge to York Mills will need to address taxi queuing, pick up and drop off and parking requirements.

Supplementary materials, including letters from area ratepayers are provided at the back of the report in the "Index".

In accordance with North York Community Council's decision at its April 1, 1998 meeting, notices have been sent for the statutory public meeting to be held on May 27, 1998.

Discussion:

Land Use:

The general intent of the Secondary Plan is to encourage a prestigious office park development with a mix of uses being specifically permitted in this area because of the excellent subway access and the nearby residential community in the valley. At this central location residential uses are limited to the upper floors. The applicant has proposed recreational uses on the majority of the ground floor, which is permitted by the plan. An amendment to the Official Plan is recommended in order to permit the 2-storey townhouses to the south, which enables the creation of a residential frontage along Old York Mills and an appropriate interface with the residential community to the south. The approval of this residential development will provide for a mix of uses at this central location within the Office Centre as generally intended by the Plan.

Density:

The Secondary Plan permits a maximum density of 2.0 FSI within this area. The applicant is proposing to construct a residential building which is equivalent to 2.0 FSI on the subject site, including road allowance to be acquired from the City, and 1.0 FSI from the abutting gasoline station site. The density proposed to be stacked on this site results in a net proposed density of up to 3.6FSI. This stacking of density is consistent with the Official Plan. The remaining density of 1.0FSI (5,704 m²) on the gasoline station site would allow for its future redevelopment, however it is anticipated that for the foreseeable future, redevelopment will be limited to the recently proposed revamping of the Shell site. To ensure the distribution of density on this island is recorded in the Official Plan, it is recommended that a statement be added to indicate that the calculation of permitted density is over the entire island.

The applicant has also requested specific exemptions from gross floor area for mechanical equipment, garbage areas, storage space, recreational amenity areas and the building's lobby. A summary of the proposed exemption is shown below:

Proposed Recommended

Overall Gross Floor Area17,400 m²17,170 m²

Exemptions from GFA

Mechanical and Garbage area 861 861

Storage Area 266 266

Recreational Space 753 753

Lobby Area 230 0

TOTAL 2,110 1,880

Resulting Gross Floor Area15,290 m² 15,290 m²

Other sites have been granted exemptions from gross floor area within this Secondary Plan area where it enables design and community service objectives to be met. At this site, it is recommended that the mechanical and garbage area, storage area and recreation space be exempt from gross floor area for the following reasons:

-enclosing the mechanical space on the roof and removing some of the mechanical to a below grade location will enhance views from the residential areas along the top of the valley;

-the 2 storey townhouse podium on the Old York Mills frontage with the 9 storey building set back 14 metres achieves an appropriate street edge and a benefit to the overall proposal. The result of this design creates additional gross floor area behind the townhouses, which the applicant is proposing to use as storage space; and

-the proposed substantial recreational amenity space, achieves two objectives. Firstly, it supplements the existing public facilities in the area, and secondly, the recreational space ensures that a good edge condition is provided along the York Mills frontage.

The lobby area of 230 m² is to be included in the calculation of gross floor area as it is for other residential buildings. A corresponding reduction in the overall gross floor area of the building will be necessary. The resulting gross floor area, excluding the recommended exemption, is 15,290 m², representing a density of 3.19 FSI on the proposed site.

Building Height:

The Secondary Plan requires that all buildings within the office park be no higher than the adjacent top of bank. The closest adjacent top of bank would be that behind the York Mills office centre on the north side of York Mills Road which was established as 161.5 metres above sea level. Accordingly, the highest elevation of all structures on this site would need to conform to this height limit. The applicant's proposal can conform to this elevation without the loss of any of the roof top design features.

In other areas of the Office Centre, small extensions above this plane have been permitted provided they are limited both in terms of the area they cover on the roof and in the height above the plane. It is recommended that pipes, chimneys and the top of the elevator be permitted to extend 1 metre above 161.5 metres and that they cover no more than 100 square metres on the building's roof top. This limited extension beyond the adjacent top of bank is expected to have a minimal impact on the sight lines from the homes along the top of bank.

Urban Design:

The proposed building has been located in a manner which provides a strong streetscape presence along the Old York Mills frontage as well as a gateway treatment at the intersection of York Mills and Old York Mills. Along the west periphery of the York Mills frontage, the applicant has provided a building placement and well defined landscaped area to mitigate the mirror effect of the York Mills Centre across the street. The landscaped area will be complemented with a continuous architectural element (i.e., arcade) as well as landscaping to continue a strong streetscape edge.

To ensure that the development provides an appropriate relationship to the adjacent streets and the residential areas to the east and south, it is recommended that the enacting by-law be implemented after site plan approval. The site plan process will allow for the review of the submission in further detail with respect to design issues and will allow for refinement of the zoning by-law. As a condition, site plan approval should ensure that:

-the York Mills frontage provides for pedestrian connections to the street as well as a pedestrian connection to north;

-the eastern edge of the site provides for a gateway to the Centre from the east as well as an appropriate transition to the residential area to the east. This could be achieved through terracing of the east end of the building in a manner similar to that proposed for the west end of the building. In addition, the east face of the building should be complemented with a larger landscaped area; and

-the building and landscaped open space areas are grade related with the adjacent streets.

For a further listing of the urban design objectives to be satisfied as part of the site plan process, refer to Schedule "E".

Traffic:

Transportation Department has indicated that the traffic volumes from the residential proposal can be accommodated on the road network. The residential use will generate significantly less traffic than an office use which would also be permitted on this site. In regards to parking, the Transportation Department has indicated that the total parking supply is adequate given the subway location, however 35 visitors spaces must be provided.

Other Issues:

The provision of affordable housing in accordance with the Official Plan will require that at least 25% of dwelling units in all new developments be small-sized, intrinsically affordable units.

A Phase II environmental study has indicated no contamination as a result of the adjacent gasoline station to the west. The removal of the upper fill during construction of the project will eliminate any potential for methane on site. As a condition of the site plan approval, the applicant will agree to submit a Record of Site Condition confirming the soil condition is suitable for residential uses, prior to the issuance of the building permit.

Conclusions:

A residential redevelopment of the site is generally supported, with conditions and modifications respecting minor redesign of the building's height, terracing, the visitor parking ratio and other urban design elements. The proposal is consistent with the general intent of the York Mills Office Secondary Plan with minor amendments. Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments are recommended.

It is recommended that the implementing zoning by-law not be enacted until site plan approval is obtained given the site's prominence and the important siting and design elements involved in ensuring the success of the project and its integration with the commercial and residential area in which it is located.

Contact Name:

Jane Clohecy, Acting Manager

Phone: 395-7100Fax: 395-7155

--------

The North York Community Council also submits the following report (April 28, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to recommend an Official Plan and Temporary Use Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a commercial parking lot to continue pending redevelopment of the site.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

(1)Part D.5 of the Official Plan (York Mills Office Centre Secondary Plan) be amended to permit surface parking for a temporary period.

(2)The lands be rezoned by a temporary use by-law to permit a 72 space surface commercial parking lot on the subject site for a period no longer than one year from the date of the passing of the by-law.

(3)The applicant submit a site plan application in keeping with staff's previous recommendations as shown in Schedule "C2". During the site plan review process, the matters identified by the Works and Emergency Services Department (Public Works) in Schedule "E" and the Legal Department (By-law Enforcement) in Schedule "G" to this report will be addressed.

(4)The appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect hereto.

Background:

Proposal:

The applicant proposes to continue parking operations with an improved 112 space lot as shown in Schedule "C", pending redevelopment of the site for a residential use (Application UDOZ-96-27). By-law Enforcement has notified the applicant that the parking lot is not permitted by the zoning by-law. This application was the subject of a preliminary report at the January 21, 1998 North York Community Council meeting.

Previous Proposal:

In 1995 an application was submitted by the then North York Parking Authority proposing temporary use of this site for a 72 space parking lot. Planning and Transportation staff had recommended approval of the application subject to the approval of a site plan application (see Schedule "C2"). The North York Planning Committee on September 27, 1995, had deferred the application to allow the applicant to finalize the leasing arrangements for the site. The applicant had indicated that their existing arrangement would not be binding on a future owner as the site had gone into receivership and would be sold. This file has since been closed.

Site Location:

The site is located on an island surrounded by York Mills and Old York Mills Roads, east of Yonge Street. A surface commercial parking lot currently exists on the site, with a gasoline station facility abutting to the west. There is a 4 to 6 storey office building on the north side of York Mills Road. To the south of Old York Mills Road is a TTC station, park and institutional uses. The west side of Yonge Street in the immediate vicinity is dominated by parkland and open space.

Official Plan and Zoning:

The site is designated YMO (York Mills Office) in the York Mills Office Centre Secondary Plan (see Schedule "A") within Area #4, permitting a mix of uses. The site is zoned primarily One Family Detached Dwelling Third Density Zone (R3) in Zoning By-law 7625 (see Schedule "B"). An Official Plan amendment and temporary use zoning by-law are required to allow surface parking for the temporary commercial parking lot.

Comments from Other Departments and Agencies:

The following section summarizes significant comments received:

The Works and Emergency Services Department (Transportation) does not support approval of this application due to impacts on transit policies and peak direction traffic for the temporary parking lot proposal (Schedule "D"). As part of its comments contained in Schedule "E"", the Works and Emergency Services Department (Public Works) requests improvements to the parking lot.

The Legal Department (By-law Enforcement Section) requests improvements to the parking lot to meet by-law standards (Schedule "F").

The Toronto Licensing Commission reports that under Metro Licencing By-law 20-85, Schedule 24, Part 2, all public parking lots for which payment is required must be licensed. The licence first obtained in 1991 for the subject property has been continually renewed.

Community Consultation:

A community meeting (held on April 23, 1998) and a questionnaire was circulated by the local councillors. The comments from both the meeting and questionnaire related to the long term residential redevelopment proposal.

Discussion:

In 1995, staff recommended approval of a temporary use by-law to permit a public parking lot operated by the then North York Parking Authority on the site. Key reasons for supporting the 72 space temporary parking lot at that time were that it satisfied the general requirements for public parking lots as set out in the Zoning By-law, provided additional parking for the subway patrons and improved upon the appearance of the site. These reasons are equally applicable to this proposal. In addition, the pending residential application clearly signifies the applicant's intention that the use will be short term. It is therefore recommended that the temporary use be permitted for a parking lot for one year only.

It is necessary that the applicant apply for site plan approval, at which time improvements to the site such as repaving and landscaping the edges of the site as well as throughout the lot should be required. The site plan should be generally consistent with the 72 space parking lot previously recommended, enabling a significant landscaped area in the eastern portion of the site. The applicant will have up to one year to obtain site plan approval and undertake the improvements on site. If the applicant requests an extension to the temporary use, Council will need to consider the request in light of the improvements that have taken place.

Conclusions:

It is recommended that a 72 space parking lot be permitted for a temporary period of one year, representing an interim use pending redevelopment of the site. Improvements to the site will be achieved through the site plan approval process.

Contact Name:

Alan Binks, Planner

Phone: 395-7100Fax: 395-7155

--------

A staff presentation was made by Alan Binks, Planner, Planning Department, North York Civic Centre.

The North York Community Council also reports having had before it the following communications:

(i)(April 29, 1998) from David R. Thexton, outlining his objections to the application;

(ii)(May 1, 1998) from Tim Sheeres outlining his intention to address the North York Community Council on this matter;

(iii)(May 5, 1998) from Barbara Wilkes, advising of her opposition to the application;

(iv)(May 22, 1998) from Ms. Pamela J. Spence and Mr. Robert W. Turner, advising of their objections to the application;

(v)(May 23, 1998 and May 25, 1998) from Dr. Frank W. B. VanBork, outlining his concerns with the application;

(vi)(May 25, 1998) from Ms. Morag Fitzgerald outlining his concerns and identifying outstanding issues which should be resolved;

(vii)(May 26, 1998) from John P. Wleugel advising of his support for the application but requesting that the issues regarding parking on Old York Mills Road; control of traffic flow on Campbell Crescent both during and after construction and improved and safe pedestrian walkway on Campbell Crescent be addressed by Council; and

(viii)(May 27, 1998) from Mrs. M.W.E. Kidd in favour of the proposed development.

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

Mr. Steve Upton on behalf of the applicant, 1190882 Ontario Limited, commented on the merits of the application. During his submission Mr. Upton indicated that a meeting had been held with Councillor Flint and the ratepayer associations to explain the revisions. Many of the concerns raised were site plan issues and those would be further addressed at the site plan review stage. Mr. Upton further indicated that the applicant concurred generally with the recommendations contained in the staff report with the exception of Recommendation 2.3 requiring that the maximum number of dwelling units shall be 141, of which a minimum of 25% of the units shall be affordable units.

Mr. Tim Sheeres, 23 Donwoods Drive, spoke in opposition to the application and was particularly concerned with the height of the proposed development and the additional traffic that would it generate. Mr. Sheeres further indicated that in the event approval was granted, the height limit should be restricted to seven storeys.

Ms. Pamela Spence, 4 Donwoods Grove, spoke on her behalf and on behalf of Wayne Long, Chair, Development Committee, York Mills Valley Association. She indicated that Mr. Long had four major concerns dealing with the height and size, siting of the building, traffic and the transfer of density from the Shell property to the subject property. Ms. Spence further indicated that she was concerned about the increased traffic that would occur on her street as a result of this development. She also requested that consideration of this project be deferred until the height, density issue and traffic solutions can be worked out.

Mrs. Marjorie Kidd, 7 Campbell Crescent, supported the application and was of the opinion that the proposed development would be preferable to the eyesore the residents have been living with for a number of years. While she recognized that the issue regarding access to Campbell Crescent would be dealt with at a later date, she would prefer a ruling at this time that it not be used as an access to the building site.

Dr. John Relton, 6 Old Yonge Street, spoke in support of the application.

Ms. Morag Fitzgerald, 9 Campbell Crescent, expressed her concerns with the application which were with respect to the building height, access to the building, landscaping and the general appearance of the building. Ms. Fitzgerald suggested that the building height be lowered; that significant traffic calming techniques be implemented and landscaping and exterior conformity be provided which would best meet the needs of the entire community.

Mr. Ying Hope, 75 York Mills Road, Suite 203, concurred with the opposition expressed by the previous speakers. During his submission he indicated that he was particularly concerned with the size, height and bulk of the project. In his opinion, the development, as submitted, is not in keeping with the area and would establish an undesirable precedent for the future use of 45 York Mills Road. He concluded by requesting a review by the planners of 45 York Mills Road and the York Mills Study undertaken and endorsed by North York Council in 1991 with a view to restricting the height and density.

Mr. J. Burford, 245 Old York Mills Road, spoke in opposition to the application. He was particularly concerned about the building mass; the floor areas being excluded from the Gross Floor Area calculation and the height and additional superstructures proposed. He requested that the City land sale, density transfer and additional superstructures not be allowed and that the areas within the building be included in the calculation of Gross Floor Area. In concluding he suggested that the Official Plan be seen as a maximum and not as a minimum.

Ms. Barbara Anderson, 32 York Ridge Road, indicated that she was opposed to the application and her primary objections were with respect to the height, increased traffic and the precedent this development would set for the future development of 45 York Mills Road.

(Copies of the schedules, draft official plan amendment and draft zoning by-law amendment referred to in the foregoing report are on file in the office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

--------

Councillor Feldman declared his interest in the foregoing matter in that he lives in the vicinity of the subject lands.

7

Community Festival Event - Philippine Centennial Commission,

Canada Chapter - Pistahan Filipino

(Philippine Fiesta) - June 26, 27 and 28, 1998 -

Mel Lastman Square - North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends that the festival being held by the Philippine Centennial Commission, Canada Chapter, be declared a community festival event.

The North York Community Council submits the following memorandum (May 11, 1998) from Jaye Robinson, Interim Lead, Special Events:

On June 26, 27 and 28, 1998 there will be a Philippine Festival highlighting cultural activities on Mel Lastman Square. The Special Events Office has approved the event and is aware of the organization's intentions of obtaining a Special Occasions Permit to sell beer on Mel Lastman Square.

The Special Events Office has met with the organizing committee and is satisfied that the event will be produced in a professional manner and will be very successful. I respectfully submit this memorandum requesting your approval.

8

Community Festival Event - Caribbean Sunfest 1998 -

Trade & Culture Events - July 17 to July 19, 1998 -

Mel Lastman Square - North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends that Caribbean Sunfest 1998 be declared a community festival event.

The North York Community Council submits the following memorandum (May 7, 1998) from Jaye Robinson, Interim Lead, Special Events:

On July 17^th to July 19^th, 1998 inclusively, there will be a Caribbean Sun Fest highlighting cultural activities on Mel Lastman Square. The Special Events Office has approved the event and is aware of the organization's intentions of obtaining a Special Occasions Permit to sell beer on Mel Lastman Square.

The Special Events Office has met with the organizing committee and is satisfied that the event will be produced in a professional manner and will be very successful. I respectfully submit this memorandum requesting your approval.

9

Community Festival Event - The Ferrari Club of America

(East and Central Canada Region) - June 11, 1998 -

E.T. Seton Park - 770 Don Mills Road - Don Parkway

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends that the outdoor event being held by the Ferrari Club of America be declared a community festival event.

The North York Community Council submits the following communication (April 28, 1998) from Mr. Randolph S. Paisley, Concours Chairman:

I am the Concours Chairman for the Ferrari Club of America (East and Central Canada Region). The Club is holding an outdoor event for 500 people on June 11, 1998, in the E. T. Seton Park at 770 Don Mills Road, behind the Ontario Science Centre. We have full access to the washroom facility in the Science Centre.

The event runs from 7:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. Beer and liquor will be served from 11:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. We will have a buffet brunch in the Science Centre from 12:00 noon - 2:00 p.m. and we will also serve soft drinks and alcoholic refreshments in the outdoor park at other times.

We have our permit from the Metro Parks and Culture Department and approval from the Health Department. We are applying for a liquor permit.

Please contact myself to advise of any regulations we must be aware of.

10

40KM/H Speed Zone - Roanoke Road - Don Parkway

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May14, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To extend the existing 40 km/h speed zone on Roanoke Road, east of Underhill Drive, from the easterly limit of Monarchwood Crescent to a point 120 metres easterly thereof.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the installation of the reduced speed zone are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that By-law No. 31878 of the former City of North York be amended to implement a 40 km/h speed zone on Roanoke Road, from the easterly limit of Underhill Drive to a point 120 metres east of the easterly limit of Monarchwood Crescent.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the request of the local residents, this department investigated the level of safety for pedestrian/students and the rate of speed of motor vehicles on Roanoke Road, east of Monarchwood Crescent. Based upon our investigation, it was noted that westbound motorist, while approaching the 40 km/h speed zone adjacent to the St. Catherine Catholic School, were travelling at speeds in excess of the 50 km/h speed limit. It was also observed that there is walkway to the east of Monarchwood Crescent which connects Caronport Crescent and Roanoke Road.

Currently, between Monarchwood Crescent and Underhill Drive, the posted speed limit is 40 Km/h. East of Monarchwood Crescent, the speed limit is 50 km/h.

Discussion:

Based upon the current policy for the implementation of reduced speed zones on a roadway adjacent to schools, and the presence of the walkway to the east of Monarchwood Crescent, the extension of the existing 40 km/h speed zone, east of Monarchwood Crescent, would increase the level of safety for pedestrians/students on Roanoke Road.

Conclusions:

In view of the above, this department would support an amendment to By-law 31878.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, at 395-7484.

11

Traffic Management Plan - Glenbrook Avenue -

North York Spadina

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

This report addresses the results of the test traffic calming measures on Glenbrook Avenue, approved by North York Council on May 14, 1997, with respect to their effectiveness in improving traffic safety, in accordance with the Traffic Calming Policy.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the action resulting from the approval of this report are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendations:

1.that the traffic management plan, previously approved by North York Council for a test period, be removed; and

2.that staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department and the Toronto Police Service monitor traffic conditions on Glenbrook Avenue and take any appropriate remedial action to address traffic safety.

Council Reference/Background/History:

North York Council at its meeting of May 14, 1997 by Resolution No. 97-11 adopted Clause 2 of Transportation Committee Report No. 11 dated April 29, 1997. This report recommended a six month test of the traffic management plan proposed for Glenbrook Avenue by the Traffic Work Group and supported by staff. In accordance with the Traffic Calming Policy, staff were also directed to report back to Council regarding the effectiveness of the test in improving traffic safety.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

On July 15, 1997 the Transportation Department completed the installation of a program to test the traffic calming measures recommended by the Glenbrook Traffic Work Group and supported by the residents, as presented to them at a public meeting, and approved by North York Council.

These measures consist of 'pinch points' and 'intersection dividers' as detailed on Appendix A. Several other types of traffic control measures were suggested by the community and reviewed by the Work Group including speed humps, turn restrictions, bicycle lanes/walkway, and continuous police enforcement. For a variety of reasons, as reviewed by the community during the process, these were rejected as viable options for the management of traffic on Glenbrook Avenue.

Throughout the test period the department monitored traffic, responded to residents concerns and made modifications to the measures as deemed appropriate. Numerous complaints were received regarding the aesthetics of the planters used to simulate the ultimate traffic calming measures. No functional or safety concerns were determined to exist by the department and snow clearing, roadway maintenance, garbage collection and emergency services were carried out throughout the test with no effect on service or safety.

Traffic speeds and volumes were recorded throughout the test which indicated that average speeds were reduced by 12.6 %. While 24 hour vehicle volumes were also reduced by at least 275 vehicles over 1996 data, this reduction cannot be directly attributed to traffic calming.

Throughout the implementation of the traffic management plan, the policy for evaluation and monitoring of traffic calming was followed. The plan was presented to the residents and approved by the affected residents prior to implementation of the test. Upon completion of the test a direct mail questionnaire was sent to the residents of Glenbrook Avenue where they were requested to vote on the permanent installation of the test. A total of fifty questionnaires were sent out and only nineteen were returned, of which 8 were in favour and 11 were against a permanent installation of the traffic calming concept.

Conclusion:

Based on the results of the response to the questionnaire, Councillor Moscoe has communicated with the residents of Glenbrook Avenue and determined it appropriate to remove the test traffic management plan.

Contact Name:

Michael J. Frederick, Director of Operations, 395-7484.

(A copy of Appendix A referred to in the foregoing report is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

12

Boulevard Leasing Cafe - La Fontina Restaurant -

85 Kincourt Street - North York Humber

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To determine the appropriateness of the applicant, La Fontina Restaurant, to lease a portion of the municipal boulevard for the purpose of operating an outdoor café.

Source of funds:

No departmental funds are required as all associated costs for the boulevard café are the responsibility of the applicant.

Recommendations:

It is our recommendation that the application to lease a portion of the boulevard at 85 Kincourt Road be approved, subject to the following conditions:

1.no permanent structure be erected on the boulevard;

2.an anchored portable railing be placed around the proposed café area;

3.that the applicant enter into an agreement to indemnify and save harmless the City of Toronto from any action, claim, damage or loss whatsoever arising from the issuance of the licence or the use to be provided or anything done or neglected to be done in connection with the said use; and

4.the provision of $2,000,000.00 (two million dollars) of liability insurance, naming the City of Toronto as co-insured.

Council Reference/Background/History:

In accordance with Boulevard Leasing Policy for the former City of North York, staff has reviewed the application to lease a portion of the municipal boulevard.

Discussion:

A review of the site has indicated that sufficient space is available within the municipal boulevard

to accommodate this request. The location applied for does not create either a pedestrian impediment or sight obstruction. The boulevard café will occupy an area of approximately 41 m² and will be setback 2.3 metres from the municipal roadway.

The leasing fee, based upon the 1998 road allowance leasing rates as established by the City of Toronto, North York District, Finance Department, will be obtained from the applicant prior to the enactment of the lease agreement.

Conclusions:

I would therefore recommend that the above application to lease a portion of the municipal boulevard be approved.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, at 395-7484

13

Traffic Management Plan - Dane Avenue -

North York Spadina

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

This report addresses the results of the test of traffic calming measures on Dane Avenue, approved by North York Council on May 14, 1997.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with this report are included within the department's 1998 operating budget.

Recommendations:

1.that the traffic management plan previously approved by North York Council, for a test period, be removed;

2.that staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department implement three speed humps, in accordance with Council Policy, for a test period;

3.that staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department continue to work with the residents of Dane Avenue during implementation of the test; and

4.that staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department report back to Council, within six months after implementation, on their effectiveness in controlling vehicle speeds.

Council Reference/Background/History:

North York Council, at its meeting of May 14, 1997 by Resolution No. 97-11 approved a six month test of the traffic management plan proposed by the appointed traffic work group and supported by staff. In accordance with the Traffic Calming Policy, staff were directed to report back to Council regarding the effectiveness of the test in improving traffic safety. Residents have subsequently requested that the test be removed and speed humps implemented.

Comments and/or Discussions and or Justification:

On July 15,1997 the Transportation Department completed the installation of a program to test the traffic calming measures recommended by the Traffic Work Group and supported by the residents, as presented to them at a public meeting, and subsequently approved by North York Council.

These measures consisted of four sets of "chicanes" and a median "gateway", just east of Dufferin Street. Several other types of traffic control measures were suggested by the community and reviewed by the Work Group, such as stop signs, turn restrictions, reduced speed limits, continuous police enforcement and a pedestrian crossover. For a variety of reasons, as reviewed by the residents during the process, these were rejected as viable options for the management of traffic. "Speed humps" were not considered as an option at that time as they were not allowed for use within the Traffic Calming Policy.

Throughout the test period the department monitored traffic, responded to residents' concerns and made modifications to the measures as was deemed appropriate. Numerous complaints were received regarding the aesthetics of the planters used to simulate the ultimate traffic calming measures. No functional or safety concerns were determined to exist by the department and snow clearing road maintenance, garbage collection and emergency services were carried out throughout the test with no effect on service or safety.

Traffic speeds and volumes were recorded throughout the test and indicate that volumes have remained consistent while vehicle speeds were reduced by as much as 10%, as a result of the traffic calming measures.

Throughout the implementation of the traffic management plan, the policy for the evaluation and monitoring of traffic calming was followed. The plan was presented and approved by the affected residents prior to implementation of the test. Upon completion of the test a direct mail questionnaire was sent to the residents of Dane Avenue where they were requested to vote on the permanent installation of the plan. The results of the questionnaire determined that 18.5% of the affected residents indicated their consensus for the permanent installation of the plan, 18.5% requested modifications , while 37.0% requested the test be removed with no further action.

Former Councillor Frank Di Giorgio, at that time, requested that the temporary gateway remain. At a recent meeting of the residents held by Councillor Moscoe, the residents have requested that this gateway be removed permanently and that three speed humps be implemented as a six month test.

Conclusions:

North York Community Council at its meeting of May 14, approved a report which recommended that when speed humps are selected as a traffic calming measure they be installed in accordance to the stipulations of the Traffic Calming Policy. This approach has been followed with respect to this request and speed humps are deemed an appropriate measure to address vehicle speeds and traffic safety for Dane Avenue

The cost to implement this traffic management plan as a permanent feature is $10,000.00, which will cover the cost of the test.

Contact Name:

Michael J. Frederick, Director of Operations, 395-7484

14

Turn Restriction - Barber Greene Road - Don Parkway

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To remove the existing "No Left Turn" restriction for westbound motorists on Barber Greene Road, at the first driveway west of Don Mills Road.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the removal of the turn restriction and signs are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

This department recommends that Schedule XV of By-law No. 31001, of the former City of North York, be amended to delete the "No Left Turn" restriction for westbound traffic on Barber Greene Road at the first driveway access west of Don Mills Road.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Currently, westbound traffic on Barber Greene Road is prohibited form accessing the most easterly driveway access associated with the commercial property on the southwest corner of the Barber Greene Road/Don Mills Road intersection.

Discussion:

As a result of the recent permanent closure of the driveway access, which was part of a development agreement between the property owner, Chrysler Canada Limited, and the former City of North York, traffic can no longer utilize the access.

In view of closure of the driveway, the current signing and by-law are no longer required, and as such, should be removed and deleted.

Conclusions:

This department supports the removal of the westbound left turn restriction on Barber Greene Road, at the first driveway west of Don Mills Road.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, 395-7484

15

School Bus Loading Zone - Bannerman Street -

North York Humber

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To create an on-street School Bus Loading Zone on the east side of Bannerman Street, adjacent to the St. Fidelis Separate School.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the installation of the School Bus Loading Zone are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that By-law No. 30358, of the former City of North York, be amended to permit the installation of a School Bus Loading Zone on the east side of Bannerman Street, from a point 37 metres north of the northerly limit of Rustic Road to a point 20 metres northerly thereof.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Currently, stopping is prohibited from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday to Friday, on the east side of Bannerman Street, and from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday to Friday on the west side of Bannerman Street. The school is presently utilizing an on site area for the loading and unloading of children attending the school.

Discussions:

Staff of this department have been advised by the Parent Safety Program Steering Committee and Principal Victor Viggianni of St. Fidelis Separate School, that the existing on site loading zone is not operating efficiently. Principal Viggianni has advised that numerous conflicts arise between the bus operation and the vehicles driven by parents picking up their children. To improve traffic operations and to reduce these conflicts, a school bus loading zone should be provided on Bannerman Street.

The St. Fidelis Separate School is one of two schools that participates in the Parent Safety Program, which was recently initiated by the Toronto Police Service, 31 Division.

Conclusions:

In view of the above, this department would support the request to install a school bus loading zone on the east side of Bannerman Street.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Traffic Operations, at 395-7484

16

All Way Stop Control - Doon Road at Highland Crescent -

North York Centre South

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To install an all way stop control, to improve pedestrian and motorist safety, at the intersection of Doon Road at Highland Crescent

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the installation of an all way stop control are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Schedules XVIII and XIX of By-law No. 31001, of the former City of North York, be amended to require traffic to stop on all approaches to the intersection of Doon Road at Highland Crescent.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Although Doon Road is the minor street at the intersection with Highland Crescent, Doon Road traffic is provided with the right of way through the intersection. While this is not unique in itself, Doon Road is actually the intersecting roadway at the 'T' type intersection.

As the free flow traffic on Doon Road is required to turn either right or left at Highland Crescent, this irregular right of way control creates driver and pedestrian confusion and uncertainty.

Discussion:

Currently, eastbound and westbound traffic on Highland Crescent is required to stop for southbound traffic at Doon Road.

Observations by a member of staff have indicated that the majority of the motorists approaching the intersection are hesitant, as traditionally, vehicles on the through street are not required to relinquish right-of-way to vehicles on the single leg approach. In this instance, although southbound motorists on Doon Road have the right-of-way, they are yielding to traffic on Highland Crescent. This activity is creating an unsafe situation for both motorists and pedestrians entering this intersection.

Conclusions:

To increase motorist and pedestrian safety, this department supports the installation of an all way stop control at the intersection of Doon Road at Highland Crescent.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, 395-7484

17

Stopping Prohibitions -

Connaught Avenue and Lariviere Avenue -

North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To prohibit stopping from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., on both sides of Connaught Avenue, between Yonge Street and Lariviere Avenue, and Lariviere Avenue, from the south limit of Lariviere Avenue to Patricia Avenue.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the installation of the stopping restrictions are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Schedules VIII and IX of By-law No. 31001, of the former City of North York, be amended to prohibit stopping between the hours of 8:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m., on both sides of Connaught Avenue, between Yonge Street and Lariviere Avenue, and of Lariviere Avenue, between the south limit of Lariviere Avenue and Patricia Avenue.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Currently, parking is prohibited on both sides of Connaught Avenue, west of Yonge Street, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday. Parking is prohibited at any time on the east side of Lariviere Avenue, south of Patricia Avenue. Parking is permitted for maximum periods of up to three hours on the west side of Lariviere Avenue, south of Patricia Avenue.

This department has reviewed the complaints of numerous local residents regarding vehicles continually parked on Connaught and Lariviere Avenues. Based upon information provided by the residents, these vehicles are apparently generated by activities associated with the Basic Funeral Home which is located on the northwest corner of Yonge Street and Connaught Avenue. Vehicles are frequently parked on both sides of the road, and in some instance have blocked access to the driveways of local residents.

Discussion:

To improve traffic operations and reduce the inconvenience experienced by residents of Connaught Avenue and Lariviere Avenue, stopping, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., should be prohibited.

Conclusions:

In view of the above, this department would support an amendment to the parking/stopping regulations on Connaught Avenue and Lariviere Avenue.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, at 395-7484

18

Parking Prohibition Amendments -

Hobart Drive - Seneca Heights

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To prohibit parking on the west side of Hobart Drive, between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, from 50 Hobart Drive to Van Horne Avenue.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the installation of the parking restrictions are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Schedule VIII of By-Law No. 31001, of the former City of North York, be amended to prohibit parking between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on the west side of Hobart Drive, from the south limit of No. 50 Hobart Drive to the north limit of Van Horne Avenue.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Currently, parking is prohibited from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on both sides of Hobart Drive, from Seneca Hill Drive to the south limit of No. 51 Hobart Drive. Between No. 51 Hobart Drive and Van Horne Avenue, parking is prohibited at any time on the east side of the road and restricted to a maximum of three hours on the west side of Hobart Drive.

At the request of local residents, this department had requested the Toronto Police Service, Parking Enforcement Unit, to provide enforcement of the three hour parking limit on the west side of Hobart Avenue, north of Van Horne Avenue. Staff of the Parking Enforcement Unit advised that despite on-going enforcement, illegal parking continues on Hobart Drive. In this regard, they suggested that parking be prohibited on the section of Hobart Drive where parking is currently permitted for up to a maximum of three hours.

Discussion:

The installation/extension of the existing No Parking, 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, prohibitions on the west side of Hobart Drive, north of Van Horne Avenue, would reduce the inconvenience experienced by residents caused by continuous long-term daily parking.

Conclusions:

In view of the above, this department would support the recommendation to further prohibit daytime parking on Hobart Drive.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, at 395-7484

19

Temporary Road Closure - Logandale Road -

North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Transportation, North York Civic Centre:

Purpose:

To temporarily close Logandale Road, to accommodate an annual street party.

Source of funds:

All costs associated with the temporary closure of Logandale Road, excluding the $50.00 application fee, are included within the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendations:

That the appropriate by-law be enacted to grant permission for the temporary road closure of Logandale Road, on Wednesday, July 1, 1998, from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., subject to the applicant's compliance with Procedural By-Law No. 27433 of the former City of North York.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Similar events have been conducted at this location for the past year, without incident.

Discussions:

This department has received no objections from any affected Departments and agencies, subject to the following condition from the Fire Department:

• The applicant shall insure that the area to be barricaded off is clear of parked vehicles and obstacles that would interfere with the movement of fire department vehicles, in the event of an emergency, and that personnel be readily available to remove the barricades in order not to impede the movement of the fire department vehicles should an emergency occur. Further, the organizers of the event be made aware that should an emergency arise within the involved area, it could well interrupt the program as planned.

Conclusions:

In view of the foregoing, this department supports the temporary closure of Logandale Road as requested by the applicant.

Contact Name:

Mr. Michael Frederick, Director of Operations, 395-7484

20

Encroachment - Apotex Inc. - Ormont Drive, Garyray Drive,

Weston Road - Underground Utility -

North York Humber

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May13, 1998) from the Deputy Commissioner of Public Works, North York Civic Centre; that the proposal respect the FCM model agreement; and that the agreement be negotiated through the local councillors.

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council's authority to enter into negotiations toward an agreement with Apotex Inc. to permit the installation, ownership and maintenance of underground fibre optic conduits by Apotex Inc. within the Public Road Allowance at various locations.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the City be authorized to enter into negotiations with Apotex Inc. toward an agreement to permit the installation, ownership and maintenance of underground fibre optic conduits within the public road allowance at various locations; and

(2)the appropriate City officials report back to Council upon conclusion of the negotiations.

Background:

Apotex Inc. is in the process of upgrading their communications system in the Weston Road and Finch Avenue area among its various buildings and they are requesting permission to install, own and maintain underground fibre optic cables and conduits within the road allowance. Currently the conduits and some cables are in place and were installed by Bell Canada in early 1998 by Permit No.CP 00755. The conduits and cables are presently owned and maintained by Bell Canada. If approved, Apotex Inc. would make the arrangements to have the exclusive ownership transferred to them from Bell Canada. Future installations and road crossings will be necessary to complete this project.

The Apotex Inc. buildings involved in the communication network in this application are located at 440 Garyray Drive, 4100 Weston Road, 400 Ormont Drive, 150 Ormont Drive and 150 Signet Drive.

The existing and proposed works within the Road Allowance as requested by Apotex Inc. is as follows:

a)road crossing on Ormont Drive along west side of Weston Road and within public boulevard on Weston Road;

b)road crossing on Ormont Drive just east of Weston Road and within public boulevard on Ormont Drive and east side of Weston Road;

c)road crossing on Ormont Drive from 150 Signet Drive to 400 Ormont Drive;

d)road crossing on Ormont Drive from south side of Ormont Drive;

e)road crossing on Signet Drive along north side of Ormont Drive;

f)road crossing on Signet Drive along south side of Ormont Drive;

g)road crossing on Garyray Drive from south side to 440 Garyray Drive;

h)public boulevard along north side of Ormont Drive from 400 Ormont Drive to 150 Ormont Drive; and

i)public boulevard along south side of Ormont Drive from 150 Signet Drive to south side of 150 Ormont Drive.

Currently, the former City of North York has no agreements with any private companies to install, own and maintain private installations within the Public Road Allowance. Request for such services are provided by utility companies like Bell Canada, Consumers Gas, Toronto (North York) Hydro and Rogers Cablesystems. However, the former City of Toronto has allowed private installations within the public road allowance and has treated such arrangements as encroachments.

This Department has identified several issues such as liability, cost recovery, location of services, etc. which would have to be negotiated in an agreement with respect to private installations.

Conclusion:

Provided that these issues can be addressed to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and City Solicitor in an agreement to be negotiated between Apotex Inc. and the City, this Department would have no objection to allowing Apotex Inc. to own, install and maintain their communication plant within the road allowance as an encroachment.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Stan Bertoia, P. Eng., Director of Engineering

Tel. No. (416) 395-6235

21

Sidewalk (East Side) - Shermount Avenue from

Glencairn Avenue to Hillmount Avenue -

North York Spadina

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May13, 1998) from the Deputy Commissioner of Public Works, North York:

Purpose:

To request $7,000.00 funding for the construction of a sidewalk on the east side of Shermount Avenue from the south limit of 713 Glencairn Avenue to Hillmount Avenue.

Source of Funds:

From the 1998 Capital Budget Item for new sidewalk construction (North York).

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1.the City construct a sidewalk on the east side of Shermount Avenue from the south limit of 713 Glencairn Avenue to Hillmount Avenue at an estimated cost of $7,000.00 financed from the 1998 Capital Budget Item for new sidewalk construction (North York);

2.that the construction of the above sidewalk be co-ordinated with sidewalk construction requirements of Site Plan Control Application No. UDSP-98-035, Glencairn Baptist Church; and

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

Background:

Glencairn Baptist Church has applied for Site Plan Control Application No. UDSP-98-035, for the construction of a new church at 713 Glencairn Avenue. A condition of Site Plan approval includes the construction of a sidewalk on the east side of Shermount Avenue from Glencairn Avenue to the south limit of the site. Councillor Moscoe has requested that the sidewalk be extended to Hillmount Avenue to complete the sidewalk for that particular City block.

City staff have reviewed Councillor Moscoe's request to extend the sidewalk on Shermount Avenue and have determined that a sidewalk can be constructed on the east side of Shermount Avenue from the south limit of the development at 713 Glencairn Avenue for a length of 50m to Hillmount Avenue. As there is a row of mature trees on the boulevard, it is proposed to construct the sidewalk behind the trees. The estimated cost of construction for the sidewalk extension is $7,000.00 which can be funded from the 1998 Capital Budget item for new sidewalk construction (North York).

Contract Name and Telephone Number

Stan Bertoia, P. Eng., Director of Engineering

Tel. No. (416) 395-6235

22

Retaining Wall and Sidewalk Extension -

Glazebrook Avenue - North York Centre South

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May13, 1998) from the Deputy Commissioner of Public Works, North York:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to grant funding approval for the construction of a retaining wall and sidewalk on Glazebrook Avenue from Glenavy Avenue to the existing sidewalk approximately 35 metres east.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

1998 Capital Budget item for new sidewalk construction (North York).

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1.the retaining wall and sidewalk on Glazebrook Avenue be constructed at an estimated cost of $25,000.00 financed from the 1998 Capital Budget item for new sidewalk construction (North York); and

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

Background:

A development located at 1830 Glazebrook Avenue and containing 14 semi-detached houses fronting Glazebrook Avenue, received Site Plan approval on August 27, 1997. A condition of Site Plan approval required that the owner of the development to pay for the installation of a City sidewalk along Glazebrook Avenue from Bayview Avenue to the westerly limit of the development. The new sidewalk ends at about mid-block leaving a gap between Glenavy Avenue and the westerly limit of the development.

It is proposed to extend the sidewalk to Glenavy Avenue; however, because of a severe grade change, a retaining wall is also required to be constructed adjacent to the proposed sidewalk and along the westerly limit of the development. It is proposed that a precast decorative block wall tie into retaining wall of the same type being constructed on private property along the westerly limit. The decorative wall, within the public road allowance, would be owned and maintained by the City if the sidewalk extension to Glenavy Avenue is constructed.

In the event the sidewalk is not approved by North York Community Council, a portion of the retaining wall would still be required to be constructed within the road allowance at the westerly limit of the development to accommodate the grade change. The retaining wall would then be considered an encroachment and would require approval by North York Community Council by the applicant to enter into an encroachment agreement in accordance with current Council policy.

The estimated costs to install the sidewalk and retaining wall is $25,000.00 and can be funded from the 1998 Capital Budget item for sidewalk construction (North York).

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Stan Bertoia, P. Eng., Director of Engineering

Tel. No. 416-395-6235

23

Pylon Sign - 3338 Dufferin Street -

North York Spadina

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(a)the following report (May 19, 1998) from the Chief Building Official/Building Commissioner be received; and

(b)the application to erect a ground sign at 3338 Dufferin Street, as submitted, be approved as a minor variance from the sign by-law.

Purpose:

Evaluate and make recommendations concerning a request by Mr. R.E. Christie for a variance from the sign by-law to permit a double sided ground sign to overhang onto City owned property.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1)The request be denied as a minor variance from the sign by-law.

Council Reference/Background/History:

In a letter dated April 9, 1998, R.E. Christie is requesting permission to erect a double sided ground sign having a sign area of 96 square feet near the south east corner of the building at 3338 Dufferin Street (Across the road from Yorkdale Mall). Although the base of the sign will be located on private property the sign face itself will cantilever over Public Property thereby contravening section 3.7.1. of Sign By-law No. 30788.

Section 5.2.2.2. of Sign By-law 30788 permits one ground sign on private property on an inside lot in a commercial zone provided that the sign does not exceed a sign area of 1 square foot for every one foot of frontage. Since the east elevation of the site has a length of approximately 109 feet the sign area would comply with the provisions of the sign by-law if it were wholly placed on private property.

The applicant contends that due to the zero lot line condition on the east elevation fronting on Dufferin Street, facia signage is not visible to southbound traffic and a pylon sign, which would solve the dilemma, cannot be built wholly on private property.

Conclusions:

As the sign encroaches approximately 7 feet onto public property and will be oriented to overhang a pedestrian sidewalk, the variance, in our opinion, is not minor and the sign would have a negative impact on the surrounding area. The intent of the sign by-law would not be served by the erection of this sign and therefore we recommend that this request be denied as a minor variance from the sign by-law.

----------

The North York Community Council reports having also had before it a communication (May 11, 1998) from Ms. Stacey Scribner, Director, Store Development, The Great Canadian Bagel, in support of this application, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

24

Committee of Adjustment - UDCA-98-16 - Custodia Rizzo - 31 Kirby Road - Request for Staff Attendance at the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing - North York Humber

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends, as requested by Councillor Mammoliti, the attendance of staff of the North York Planning and Transportation Departments at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing of this application be approved.

(May 21, 1998) from Councillor George Mammoliti forwarding a memorandum from the Acting Commissioner of Planning and City Solicitor, advising that it would be appropriate for staff to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing of this application in order to defend the Committee of Adjustment's decision and uphold the by-law.

25

Letter of Understanding - Public Access to Duncan Mill

Greenbelt During Bayview Glen Day Camp

Hours of Operation

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.

The North York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to report back to the North York Community Council on the MacMarmon Foundation's actions with regard to the treatment of wildlife in this area.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (May 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to inform the North York Community Council of the understanding that has been reached between the Parks and Recreation Division of the City of Toronto and the MacMarmon Foundation (Bayview Glen School), as outlined in Appendix I, in order to give residents full access to the Duncan Mill Greenbelt.

Funding Sources:

There are no financial implications.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Letter of Understanding regarding the April 14, 1997 License Agreement to operate Bayview Glen Day Camp at Duncan Mill Greenbelt be adopted as outlined in Appendix I;

(2)discussions be undertaken with officials of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Bayview Glen School, and the Parks and Recreation Division to consider watercourse initiatives on the Don River East affecting Duncan Mill Greenbelt; and

(3)appropriate City officials be directed to carry out all things necessary thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

In September of 1997, North York Council directed that the License Agreement to operate Bayview Glen Day Camp in the Duncan Mill Greenbelt, Resolution No. 97-11, adopted by Council on May14, 1997, be reopened for negotiations between the licensee and community to find a solution for residents to pass through the parkland, while at the same time, protecting the safety of the children who attend the day camp. It was further directed that a member of the community be part of these negotiations.

Discussion:

Parks and Recreation officials conducted a series of discussions with Bayview Glen School camp officials, individual community residents, and held a public meeting on May 4, 1998, in order to determine an appropriate course of action to recommend to North York Community Council in this matter.

Residents expressed concern about the restrictions for daytime access to this parkland, while at the same time recognizing the day camp officials' concern regarding the safety of the children while playing in the valley land.

With the cooperation of Bayview Glen School, the Parks and Recreation Division was successful in reaching agreement with school officials regarding the day camp use of these valley lands, while at the same time giving full access to the area by community residents.

During the course of these discussions, officials of the Toronto Region Conservation Authority requested the opportunity to cooperate with the Parks and Recreation Division and Bayview Glen School in considering watercourse restoration initiatives on the Don River East affecting the Duncan Mills Greenbelt.

Conclusion:

Following extensive discussions with interested and concerned parties, a workable compromise has been reached.

Contact Name:

Gary W. Stoner, Deputy Commissioner

Parks and Recreation Telephone: 395-6190

----------

The North York Community Council reports having also had before it an e-mail communication (May25, 1998) from Mr. Peter Honor, addressed to Councillor Minnan-Wong, requesting that the community be consulted before any further use of this greenbelt is undertaken by the MacMarmon Foundation and that the Foundation's actions with regard to wildlife in this area be monitored by the Animal Control Division, North York, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

(A copy of Appendix I referred to in the foregoing report is on the file in the Office of the City Clerk, North York Civic Centre.)

Councillor Shiner, Seneca Heights, declared his interest in the foregoing matter in that his child attends a school in the area.

(Councillor Shiner, at the meeting of City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause, in that his son attends a school in the immediate area.)

26

Community Festival Event - All Saints Greek Orthodox Church -

Greekfest 98 - July 3, 4 and 5, 1998 -

Mel Lastman Square - North York Centre

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends that Greekfest 98 being held by the All Saints Greek Orthodox Church be declared a community festival event.

The North York Community Council submits the following memorandum (May 26, 1998) from Jaye Robinson, Interim Lead, Special Events:

On July 3, 4 and 5, 1998 there will be a Greekfest highlighting cultural activities on Mel Lastman Square. The Special Events Office has approved the event and is aware of the organization's intentions of obtaining a Special Occasions Permit to sell beer and wine on Mel Lastman Square.

The Special Events Office has met with the organizing committee and is satisfied that the event will be produced in a professional manner and will be very successful. I respectfully submit this memorandum requesting your approval.

27

Damaged Sod - 2 Northgate Drive,

Off Whitley Avenue Flankage -

North York Spadina

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(1)the appropriate City Officials be directed to replace the damaged sod at this location; and

(2)the local councillor meet with the appropriate City Officials to determine how they can reduce the cost.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (February 10, 1998) from the Commissioner of Public Works which was deferred on April 1, 1998 and subsequently brought forward at the request of Councillor Moscoe:

Purpose:

The residents of #2 Northgate Drive have requested that the Department replace the boulevard sod off Whitley Avenue because it is full of weeds and it is dying.

Source of Funds:

There are approximately 220 square metres of sod to be restored at a cost of $2,209.55. The necessary funding can be provided from the approved Operating Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that no immediate action be taken at this time. The Department has already replaced the sod on this boulevard on two occasions. The condition of the boulevard sod will be reviewed this summer to determine the extent of damages, and if necessary, the appropriate Department Officials will be authorized, after inspection, to take necessary action to give effect thereto. An attempt to restore the sod by means of fertilization or spot restoration, can be considered.

Council Reference/Background History:

A memorandum dated September 5, 1997 was received by this Department, from former Councillor Frank Di Giorgio, on behalf of the property owner, regarding the poor sod replacement and to have it repaired. The Department replied by memorandum dated October 20, 1997, from the Public Works Commissioner, Alan Wolfe, P. Eng., advising him that the sod had been replaced twice, first by the contractor in 1994, as part of the water main cement mortar lining program and secondly by the district crews as part of the Overlay Road Rehabilitation Program. Under both cases the Department relied on the resident to maintain the sod, once it was placed.

On October 15, 1997, a letter was submitted to former Councillor Frank Di Giorgio, from the property owner, Mr. Joe Speranzioso, advising him that he had attempted to maintain the grass once it was resodded two years ago, but that the lawn had died and was full of weeds. He was unhappy with the Department's decision and requested that the grass be fixed.

On January 16, 1998, a memorandum was received by this Department, from the Committee Secretary of the Clerks Department, advising to submit a report to the Community Council.

Comments and/or Discussions and for Justification:

During construction a contractor is obligated by their warranty period of two years to ensure that the sod will survive and grow. After that period, the Department relies on the property owners to maintain the boulevard sod. The two year period, has always been more than a sufficient time frame, to determine any deficiencies.

Conclusions:

In view of the Department's policy with respect to contractor warranty periods and the practice of relying on residents to maintain the boulevards fronting or flanking their properties, it is advised that no action be taken.

28

Other Items Considered by the Community Council

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, received this Clause as information, subject to, notwithstanding subsection 128(5) of the Council Procedural By-law:

(1)the following resolution by Councillor Filion embodied in Item (p), entitled "Construction Noise By-law Violations - Investigations", being endorsed by City Council:

"WHEREAS the City has a by-law which prohibits construction noise before 7:00 a.m., after 7:00 p.m. and on Sundays; and

WHEREAS Councillors have received numerous complaints about builders who do not adhere to these by-laws; and

WHEREAS early-morning, evening and weekend construction noise greatly diminishes residents' rights to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes; and

WHEREAS our by-law enforcement section currently places the onus on residents to compile records, prepare evidence and testify in court in order to act against those breaking the by-law; and

WHEREAS such practices make sense in the case of barking dogs and other irregular noise but are clearly inappropriate in cases of repeated and predictable noise by-law violations from construction noise; and

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT inspectors be available to investigate construction sites for noise by-law violations prior to 7:00 a.m., after 7:00 p.m. and on Sundays where there are complaints of repeated violations which could be readily documented by staff;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Solicitor report back on what other measures, such as a bond which would be forfeited upon conviction for violation of a noise by-law, to discourage developers from blatantly ignoring city by-laws.";

(2)amending Item (w), entitled "Pay Parking - Residential Areas - All North York Community Wards", by deleting the words "concurred with" and substituting in lieu thereof the word "endorsed"; and

(3)adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that, in presenting resolutions to Council for adoption, the City Clerk use the words 'endorse' or 'support', instead of the word 'concur'.")

(a)1998 Environment Awards of Merit.

Councillor Berger welcomed students and staff from Chaminade College School, Grenoble Public School, St. Paschal Baylon School and the Toronto Herschel School, winners of the 1998 School Environment Awards of Merit.

The North York Environment Committee created these awards to recognize North York schools and students for their efforts to create a clean, green and healthy environment.

Each school made presentations of their winning projects. Councillor Berger, on behalf of the Members of Council, congratulated the winners of the 1998 Environment Awards of Merit.

Councillor Berger, assisted by Mayor Lastman and the local Councillors, presented each school with a scroll. Later this year a tree will be planted in each school's name in a North York park of its choice.

(b)Proposed Amendment to Low Lot By-law No. 7273 - Lots 799 and 800, Plan M-108 (Between 446 and 466 Bedford Park Avenue) - North York Centre South.

The North York Community Council reports having deferred consideration of the Draft By-law to amend the City of North York By-law No. 7273, as amended, to its next meeting scheduled for June 24, 1998.

(i)Clause 29 embodied in Report No. 4 of the North York Community Council, as adopted by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on April 16, 1998;

(ii)Draft by-law to amend the City of North York By-law No. 7273 for the public meeting; and

(iii)(May 19, 1998) from Steve Lewis, spokesperson for a number of residents on Bedford Park Avenue, in opposition to the proposed amendment to Low Lot By-law No. 7273.

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

Mr. Steve Lewis, 461 Bedford Park Avenue, who spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment to lift Low Lot By-law No. 7273 from Lots 799 and 800. His primary concerns were with respect to possible drainage and flooding problems and liability in the event damage occurs to his property as well as other properties on Bedford Park Avenue.

Mr. Phil Drozinka, 466 Bedford Park Avenue, who outlined his objections to the proposed amendment to Low Lot By-law No. 7273. He was particularly concerned about the negative impact on property values of surrounding properties and the liability issue.

Mr. David Dolman, 467 Bedford Park Avenue, who was also in opposition to the proposed amendment to the Low Lot By-law No. 7273 and who indicated that he concurred with the comments of the previous speakers.

Mr. John Andriano, agent on behalf of the property owner of Lots 799 and 800, who spoke in support of the proposed amendment to lift Low Lot By-law No. 7273 from the lots in question.

Mr. Sam Roth, 446 Bedford Park Avenue, who spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment to the Low Lot By-law No. 7273.

Mr. Benjamin Schultz, Architect, on behalf of the property owner of Lots 799 and800, who clarified certain aspects with respect to the type and size of dwelling that could be constructed on the subject lands.

(c)Official Plan and Zoning Amendment Application UDOZ-94-34 - T.W.S. Developments Limited - 797 Don Mills Road - Don Parkway.

The North York Community Council reports having deferred consideration of the following report to its next meeting scheduled for June 24, 1998 and that it be considered as a continuation of the public meeting on that date at 2:20 p.m.:

(April 23, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, reporting on an application to permit the residential conversion of the existing vacant office building located at the southeast corner of Don Mills Road and Eglinton Avenue East (Mony Life Building) and submitting recommendations with respect thereto.

(d)Draft Discussion Paper on the Roles and Responsibilities of Community Councils.

The North York Community Council reports having recommended to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team that:

(1)the Ontario Legislature be petitioned on an urgent basis to amend Bill 103 by deleting the current subsection 8(4) and substituting a provision substantially as follows:

8(4)The City Council may, by by-law, assign to a Community Council, with respect to the part of the urban area that it represents, any function that City Council may carry out in respect of that part of the urban area; and

8(4.1)Without limiting the generality of subsection (4), the City Council may assign to a Community Council the authority to make recommendations for by-laws which recommendations, subject to subsection (7), oblige the City Council to act under subsection (6); and

this resolution be circulated to the other Community Councils in the City of Toronto;

(2)the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be requested to develop a model whereby the Community Councils would have budgets which could be used for discretionary spending to reflect local priorities, such budgets to be calculated on a per capita population basis;

(3)the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to report on how heritage issues such as the designation and preservation of heritage properties can be dealt with by Community Councils;

(4)there be staff from the Clerk's Department on site to service the Community Council exclusively;

(5)responsibility for the payment of Councillors' office expenses be transferred from the Clerk's Department to the Finance Department;

(6)a model be implemented whereby the City Council will deal with major issues such as of waste disposal, sewage treatment, water treatment, police, fire, etc., and that Community Councils be left to deal with community issues; and

(7)Community Councils determine their own procedural by-laws.

(i)(April 15, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the North York Community Council on April 1, 1998, deferred consideration of a notice of motion from Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, Don Parkway, and a report (January 30, 1998) the Solicitor, North York Civic Centre;

(ii)(May 7, 1998) responses from Reverend Billy Richards, Pastor, Christian Centre and Ms. Annette Ross, Secretary, Anthony Community Association to the questionnaire;

(iii)(undated) from Mr. Dale Anderson, President, York Condominium Corporation No. 32.

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

-Mr. Alasdair Robertson, Bayview/Cummer Neighbourhood Association;

-Ms. Midge Day, York Mills Ratepayers Association;

-Mr. Wallace Winter;

-Mr. Ken Dunsmore, Don Mills Residents Inc.;

-Mr. Geoffrey Geduld;

-Mr. Noble Norval Harris, People's Church;

-Mr. Lorne Berg and Ms. Ella Jackson, Black Creek Business Area, who filed a copy of their submission dated May 27, 1998;

-Mr. George Teichman, who filed a copy of his submission dated May 27, 1998, as well as a copy of the Position Paper on Community Council Powers dated September24, 1997;

-Mr. Eric Parker, Lawrence Park - Bayview Property Homeowners Association;

-Mr. Tim Higgins, South Armour Heights Ratepayers Association; and

-Ms. Rosemarie Brenwald.

(e)Ward Boundary Review Process.

The North York Community Council reports having recommended to the Urban Environment and Development Committee that:

(1)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to review the current municipal boundaries and recommend changes that iron out some of the minor boundary anomalies;

(2)Councillors be requested to submit suggestions for minor ward boundary changes and that the Commissioner of Urban Planning Development Services prepare a consolidated report to Council and that a public hearing be scheduled when the consolidated report comes forward;

(3)the report on boundaries also include information on the provincial and federal models for electoral redistribution commissions;

(4)staff take into account the population of the respective wards and attempt to keep the equalization of population while taking into consideration natural boundaries; and

(5)where appropriate, the Highway 401 be considered in areas for modifications of boundary lines.

(May 7, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that City Council at its Special Meeting held on April 28 and May 1, 1998, adopted, as amended, Clause 1 of Report No. A of the Urban Environment and Development Committee headed "Ward Boundary Review Process", viz:

"(8)Community Councils be requested to hold public meetings to invite the public's input on the matter of ward boundaries, ward division and governance, and report thereon through the Urban Environment and Development Committee."

(f)Sign By-law Variance Request - Trimark Trust - 5140 Yonge Street - North York Centre.

The North York Community Council reports having:

(1)referred the following report back to the Executive Director and Chief Building Official for further information; and

(2)requested that the local Councillors be notified when a request for a variance to the Sign By-law is to be placed on an agenda.

(May 19, 1998) from the Executive Director and Chief Building Official recommending that this request be considered for approval by Council in light of the variances, prohibitions and conditions alluded to therein.

(g)Preliminary Report - Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-98-09 - Peter Roh - 85 Steeles Avenue East - North York Centre.

The North York Community Council reports having received the following report and having authorized staff to schedule a community consultation meeting:

(May 11, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, reporting on an application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a business office (accounting office) as a home office within a portion of an existing single detached dwelling and recommending that the application be referred to the North York Planning Department to continue processing in the manner outlined in the report.

(h)Recommendation Report - Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-97-37 - Lopes Bros. Contracting - 1721 Jane Street - North York Humber.

The North York Community Council reports having received the following report and having authorized staff to schedule a public meeting:

(May 13, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, reporting on an application to amend the Zoning By-law to allow the existing one storey commercial building and parking lot which fronts onto Jane Street to be maintained and to develop the eastern portion of the property which fronts onto Hearne Avenue, with 2 semi-detached dwellings (4 units); and submitting recommendations with respect thereto.

(i)Recommendation Report - Zoning Amendment Application UDOZ-97-42 - Rita Malcolm - 27 Marshlynn Avenue - North York Humber.

The North York Community Council reports having deferred the following report to its next meeting to be held on June 24, 1998:

(May 13, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, reporting on an application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a commercial use (beauty salon) within a portion of the existing dwelling as a home business; and submitting recommendations with respect thereto.

(j)Notice Provisions for Official Plan Amendments - UD03-HOP - All North York Community Council Wards.

The North York Community Council reports having received the following report and having authorized staff to schedule a public meeting:

(May 12, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, reporting on the alternative notice procedure in the Official Plan which should be amended to permit a notice period of twenty days for "old" Planning Act applications, and to permit current applications submitted under Bill 29 to proceed with the statutory twenty day notice period; and recommending:

(1)that notice be given for a statutory public meeting to consider an amendment to the Official Plan to revise the Alternative Notice Procedure as described in the report.

(k)Recommendation Report - Zoning Amendment Application UDZ-97-32 - L & A International Management Inc. - William Carson Crescent - North York Centre South.

The North York Community Council reports having received the following report and having authorized staff to schedule a public meeting:

(May 14, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, reporting on an application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a six storey 134 unit apartment building on the east side of William Carson Crescent; and submitting recommendations with respect thereto.

(l)Temporary Public Parking Lot - Zoning Application UD52-97-01 - 4155 Yonge Street -North York Centre South.

The North York Community Council reports having received the following report and having authorized staff to schedule a public meeting:

(May 12, 1998) from Nick Spensieri, Toronto Parking Authority, requesting consideration of a two year extension of the temporary zoning for a paid parking facility at 4155 Yonge Street.

(m)Proposals Report - Development Concept for the Downsview Area Secondary Plan - North York Spadina.

The North York Community Council reports having:

(i)concurred with the following report (May 13, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, subject to recommendations (1) and (6) being amended to read as follows:

"(1)Council endorse the public circulation of the Development Concept attached to this report as the basis for preparing the Downsview Area Secondary Plan; and

(6)staff bring forward reports on applications UDOZ-97-28 (Heathmount A & E Corp.) and UDOZ-97-41 (Price-Costco Canada Inc.), and provide notice of the Statutory Public Meetings in co-operation with the respective Councillors; that no statutory public hearings be held until such time as the Federal Government has confirmed the establishment of the Downsview Trust; and that staff report to the next meeting of the North York Community Council on their ability to get a response from the Federal Government with regard to the Trust;";

(ii)requested that:

(1)(a)the Board of Trustees of the Mount Sinai Cemetery be made aware of the statement on page 5 of the planning report (May 1998) entitled "Development Concept for Downsview" and discussions with the Board be initiated to explore the extent to which a connection through their lands is possible and under what conditions; and

(b)meetings with the Cemetery board include the local Councillors;

(2)staff of the Cultural Affairs Division and the Urban Planning and Development Services Department report jointly on the means of incorporating public art into major projects and use as its basic model the public art requirements which have been applied to such major projects as:

(a)The Skydome;

(b)BCE Place; and

(c)Metro Hall;

(3)the public art requirements be incorporated into planning reports on all major projects;

(4)staff, as part of the secondary plan, initiate a separate study on how traffic from the de Havilland plant will be "redirected to the edges of the community" including a revised parking lot structure for the de Havilland plant;

(5)staff undertake a local traffic management study to develop a plan to prevent traffic infiltration into residential neighbourhoods east of the William R. Allen Road, and in so doing review the official plan designations of Wilson Heights Boulevard south of Sheppard and Faywood Avenue with a view to revising the status of these roads in the light of changed land use on the Downsview Base lands;

(6)a comprehensive review of all parking on the Downsview lands be undertaken and an overall parking plan be integrated into the secondary plan;

(7)the Toronto Parking Authority report on the feasibility of accepting responsibility for building and managing all parking for both public and private recreational uses on the Downsview lands and applying the revenues generated from parking to public purpose including:

(a)low or no cost parking for public recreational activities;

(b)commuter parking at subway stations;

(c)commercial parking for existing retail strips; and

(d)the design of parking facilities that compliment the urban environment from both a design and environmental perspective;

(8)a major neighbourhood parks facility be incorporated into the City of Toronto owned lands east of the William R. Allen Road to serve both the recreational needs of the communities to the east and northeast and to serve as part of the development buffer for existing residential neighbourhoods;

(9)plans for the Transit Road extension be immediately discussed with the TTC and that Planning staff report on the following:

(a)the effect of using Transit Road as a major entry to the Technodome on bus operations of the Wilson Yard;

(b)the impact of Transit Road on the Wilson Subway station and Kiss and Ride facility;

(c)the effect on Wilson yard operations of extending Transit Road northward; and

(d)proposals for addressing any related TTC concerns;

(10)apart from the two anchor stores proposed for Block "H", staff report on measures that would:

(a)enhance the Wilson Avenue streetscape and encourage the continuation of a small retail orientation along Wilson Avenue;

(b)encourage the developer of Block "H" to incorporate the south Wilson station's parking lot into the site in order to build subway oriented retail into the development;

(c)make provisions for the relocation of commuter parking to the Downsview stations; and

(d)utilize the development of Block "H" as the catalyst for streetscape improvements along Wilson Avenue including a voluntary contribution from the developer towards the rehabilitation of the Wilson Avenue streetscape from Bathurst Street to Keele Street;

(11)similar voluntary contributions be encouraged from major commercial recreational developers toward the enhancement of the Wilson Avenue streetscape;

(12)discussions with respect to the covenants on the 30 hectare parcel of vacant land owned by Toronto on the southeast corner of Sheppard Avenue and the William R. Allen Road move to the political level and that the MP for the area be requested to meet with the Toronto Councillors representing the area and a representative from the Mayor's office including appropriate staff at all levels to discuss an arrangement that would respect the following principles:

(a)City of Toronto's objective to apply proceeds from the sale of these lands towards the Sheppard subway;

(b)a revenue sharing arrangement that would allow excess revenues generated from the sale of these lands to be applied towards the support of public recreational facilities on the Downsview lands; and

(c)an urban design that is compatible with the surrounding communities;

(13)staff to meet with the Downsview Community Arts Project and Downsview Collegiate and report on:

(a)the feasibility of developing an Arts Park project for either the Downsview green or other Downsview lands facilities;

(b)enhancing and extending other components of The Downsview Collegiate Arts Campus Studio projects onto the Downsview lands;

(c)incorporating "Arts Park" into the secondary plan; and

(d)securing the participation of developers in the studio and Arts Park project;

(14)the capacity of the road network serving the Technodome be maximized by the installation of an area wide SCOOT system provided as a requirement of approval of the Technodome

(15)the report entitled "Development Concept for Downsview" be revised as follows:

(a)Page 4 - Section (b) 1. headed "Key Planning Goals" - the last sentence to read as follows:

"Opportunities to enhance, restore or recreate natural physical processes, systems and features on the Downsview Lands, including watershed management of stormwater, wildlife habitat and renaturalized landscapes will be pursued with the input of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.";

(b)Page 5 - Planning Goal 2. to read as follows:

"Development of a unique and high quality built environment in a "park-like" setting which limits vehicle circulation through the parkland in order to minimize impact that successfully accommodates the constraints imposed by the physical characteristics of the lands and exploits the exceptional topography and vistas presented by them.";

(c)Page 9 - Item (b) in Section C headed "Key Transportation Goals" to read as follows:

"(b)Future road connections to the adjacent arterial network will be located and designed to minimize the potential for vehicles to infiltrate through the adjacent communities such as Grandravine Drive and Whitburn Crescent and shall provide the appropriate integration with the surrounding arterial road network to provide the adjacent communities with access to the Downsview Land's amenities.";

(16)staff to provide a report on the addition of the words "roads and parking lots" after the word "building" to Item (b) of the Section headed "Development Strategies" on Page 12 of the Development Concept for Downsview;

(17)the Transportation staff explore the possibility of a three million square foot Research/Technology Park and that the Transportation Master Plan in support of the Downsview Area Secondary Plan examine alternatives to accommodate a development of this size which operates on a 24 hour cycle, 7 days a week;

(18)the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services together with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with the low water pressure in Downsview as part of the re-development of the Downsview Base lands;

(19)the Federal Government be advised that the North York Community Council seeks assurances that sufficient funds will be generated through development to design and implement the park in consultation with the community, the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services;

(20)the Mayor to meet with the Prime Minister's Office with regard to the Federal Government's commitment for the park;

(21)the Transportation staff to work with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to develop a plan to manage storm water on these parking lots;

(22)up to 50 copies of the Development Concept for Downsview report be provided to each Councillor whose wards are affected for distribution to the public; and

(23)additional copies of the Development Concept for Downsview be made available to the public at a minimal cost.

A staff presentation was made by Thomas Keefe, Downsview Project Manager, Planning Department, North York Civic Centre.

A presentation was also made by Mr. Doug Allingham, totten sims hubicki associates, engineers architects and planners, on the Master Plan Transportation Study.

(i)Report (May 13, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Planning, North York Civic Centre, forwarding the Development Concept for Downsview report dated May 1998; and recommending that:

(1)Council endorse the Development Concept attached to this report as the basis for preparing the Downsview Area Secondary Plan;

(2)staff bring forward a secondary plan for the Downsview Area following additional public consultation and provide notice of the Statutory Public Meeting at the appropriate time;

(3)staff prepare a transportation Master Plan in support of the Downsview Area Secondary Plan and any environmental assessments for transportation works that may be required;

(4)the draft Downsview Urban Design Study, prepared by consultants Cochrane Brook, be received and staff be directed to consult further with the public and affected stakeholders and that once refined, the urban design principles be incorporated as part of the Downsview Area Secondary Plan;

(5)staff report back on the findings of the public open houses and meetings to be held on June 1, 9 and 11, and consult with the public, interest groups, affected agencies and others to secure input on the Development Concept and transportation Master Plan;

(6)staff finalize reports on applications UDOZ-97-28 (Heathmount A & E Corp.) UDOP-97-29 (Canada Lands Company Limited) and UDOZ-97-41 (Price-Costco Canada Inc.), and provide notice of the Statutory Public Meetings at the appropriate time;

(7)the Downsview Community Advisory Panel continue to meet with staff, City consultants and others as part of the continuing public consultation process of providing input to policies in the secondary plan and the refinement of implementation issues and development applications; and

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

(ii)Communication (May 13, 1998) from Mr. Stephen Glogowski, Project Director, Canada Lands Company, requesting an opportunity to present at video focusing on the large park being planned for the Downsview Lands by the Federal Government;

(iii)Communication (May 26, 1998) from Mr. J.M. Purnell expressing his objections to the specific development proposals being considered for the Downsview lands; and

(iv)Motion from Councillor Michael Feldman, North York Spadina.

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

-Mr. Tony Varone on behalf of the Balmoral Homeowners' Association;

-Mr. Vince Lombardi, President, Downsview Lands Community Voices;

-Mr. Scott Cavalier on behalf of DownsView International Campus of Technology Inc.; and

-Mr. Stephen Diamond, Solicitor, on behalf of Destination Technodome.

Mayor Lastman declared his interest on this matter as follows:

(i)as it relates to the City-owned lands at the southeast corner of the William R. Allen Road and Sheppard Avenue West, in that his younger son lives in the area; and

(ii)as it relates to Block "H", in that the applicant's solicitor is a partner at the same law firm as his older son, who is not a real estate lawyer and does not personally act on this file.

Councillor Li Preti declared his interest on this matter, as it relates to the city-owned lands at the southeast corner of Sheppard Avenue West and the William R. Allen Road, in that he owns a property in the vicinity.

(n)Community Festival Event - Club Epiphany - Summer Family Celebrations - June 28, July 19, July 26, August 2, August 3 and August 30, 1998 - 11 Arrow Road - North York Humber.

The North York Community Council reports having deferred the following communication to its next meeting to be held on June 24, 1998.:

(May 20, 1998) from Ms. Phyllis James, Managing Director, Club Epiphany, requesting permission to proceed with an application for a Special Events Permit from the Liquor Control Board of Ontario for a variety of events to be held on June 28, July 19, July 26, August 2, August 3 and August 30, 1998, at the outside area of their establishment.

(o)Proposed Policy for Renaming of Parks.

The North York Community Council reports having recommended to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee the adoption of the following report subject to the criteria proposed in section (d) contained therein being amended to read as follows:

"(d)the agreement of local residents in close proximity to the park shall be secured by means of a mail ballot over a defined area to be carried out by City staff;"

(May 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, recommending that the policy proposed therein be approved, as follows:

(1)Parks should generally be named on the basis of either the street or geographic area which most appropriately describes and identifies the location of the park.

(2)Where an exception is being considered and the naming of a park after an individual or group is being recommended, the following criteria should apply.

a)the contributions of the individual or group must be well documented and broadly acknowledged within the community;

b)the contribution of land or money by the individual or group for the acquisition of parkland should be deemed to be substantial;

c)a direct relationship should exist between the place of residence/activity of an individual/group and the park named;

d)the agreement of local residents in close proximity to the park shall be secured;

e)the agreement of the individual or next of kin in the case of deceased individuals, and of the duly elected senior representatives, in the case of groups, shall be obtained; and

f)name duplication, similar surrounding or cumbersome names should be avoided. Names which may be interpreted as an advertisement or being either discriminatory or connoting political affiliation must not be used.

(p)Construction Noise By-law Violations - Investigations

The North York Community Council reports having concurred with the following Notice of Motion by Councillor Filion:

WHEREAS the City has a by-law which prohibits construction noise before 7:00 a.m., after 7:00 p.m. and on Sundays;

AND WHEREAS Councillors have received numerous complaints about builders who do not adhere to these by-laws;

AND WHEREAS early-morning, evening and weekend construction noise greatly diminishes residents' rights to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes;

AND WHEREAS our by-law enforcement section currently places the onus on residents to compile records, prepare evidence and testify in court in order to act against those breaking the by-law;

AND WHEREAS such practices make sense in the case of barking dogs and other irregular noise but are clearly inappropriate in cases of repeated and predictable noise by-law violations from construction noise;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that inspectors be available to investigate construction sites for noise by-law violations prior to 7:00 a.m., after 7:00 p.m. and on Sundays where there are complaints of repeated violations which could be readily documented by staff;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Solicitor report back on what other measures, such as a bond which would be forfeited upon conviction for violation of a noise by-law, to discourage developers from blatantly ignoring city by-laws.

(q)Claim - Reimbursement for Damages During The Bridle Path Area Road Reconstruction - 77 The Bridle Path - North York Centre South.

The North York Community Council reports having deferred the following communication to a subsequent meeting:

(May 19, 1998) from Councillor Joanne Flint, North York Centre South, forwarding a request from the owner of 77 The Bridle Path for compensation for costs incurred as a result of damage to his sprinkler system by the contractor during the local improvements to The Bridle Path area last year.

(r)North York Citizen Appointments to the Task Force to Develop a Strategy on Issues to the Elderly.

The North York Community Council reports having appointed the following persons to the Task Force to Develop a Strategy on Issues to the Elderly:

Ms. Beverley McClelland; and

Mr. Boyd Hipfner.

Memorandum (May 22, 1998) from Councillor Joanne Flint, North York Centre South, seeking Council's endorsement to appoint Ms. Beverley McClelland as a citizen member to the Task Force to Develop a Strategy on Issues to the Elderly and advising that the Public Health Department (North York) also submitted the names of Dr. G.W. Carter and Mr. Boyd Hipfner.

(s)City Powers, Policies and Procedures Re: The Conversion to Condominium and Demolition of Rental Housing Before and After the Proclamation of the Tenant Protection Act.

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

(May 20, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the Urban Environment and Development Committee on May 19, 1998, forwarded to the Community Councils for review a copy of the report (May 1, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the communication (March 12, 1998) from the City Clerk containing recommendations being submitted to City Council on this matter for consideration on June 3, 1998.

(t)Sale of Density From 29 Lorraine Drive to 15-27 Lorraine Drive - North York Centre.

The North York Community Council reports having received the following communication pending a further report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services to the North York Community Council:

(May 21, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, struck out and referred to the North York Community Council for consideration Clause 8 of Report No. 5 of the Corporate Services Committee, headed "Sale of Density from 29 Lorraine Drive to 15-27 Lorraine Drive, File No. 98 (North York Centre - Ward 10)".

(u)Woburn Avenue - Proposed Sale of 198, Registered Plan M-108 - North York Centre South.

The North York Community Council reports having recommended to City Council that:

(1)the report (May 4, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding the subject matter be referred to the North York Community Council for consideration;

(2)real estate matters under $500,000.00, that are deemed by a Ward Councillor to be of special interest, be considered by the Corporate Services Committee and City Council at that Councillor's request;

(3)real estate matters under $500,000.00, of local significance, be considered by the Community Council and City Council at a Councillor's request;

(4)matters related to the potential sale of any property be reported to the respective Community Council for comment before being considered by the Corporate Services Committee; and

(5)the Council Procedure By-law be amended accordingly.

The North York Community Council reports, for the information of City Council, having requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to:

(a)notify all Councillors of all real estate related requests in their Wards and keep them informed of all ongoing negotiations; and

(b)advise Councillors of the details prior to the final conclusion of any transactions and before any reports are signed or the matter is considered by the Corporate Services Committee/Council.

(May 26, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the Corporate Services Committee on May25, 1998, directed that a copy of the report (May 4, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services on this matter be forwarded to the North York Community Council for comment thereon to the meeting of City Council scheduled to be held on June 3, 1998.

(v)Traffic Signal Light - Bayview Avenue at Tudor Gate - North York Centre South.

The North York Community Council reports having recommended to the Urban Environment and Development Committee the adoption of the following motion (May27, 1998) from Councillor Flint:

WHEREAS a minimum of 45,000 vehicles per day travel Bayview Avenue; and

WHEREAS the distance between Post Road and York Mills Road makes it impossible to achieve necessary gaps in traffic for vehicles from Tudor Gate/Wilket Road to exit the neighbourhood safely during peak hours; and

WHEREAS residents in the Tudor Gate/Wilket Road area have no other choice but to exit their neighbourhood by Bayview Avenue; and

WHEREAS it is unsafe to do so for most of the day and early evening due to the increase of traffic on Bayview Avenue; and

WHEREAS there exists technology to coordinate signal lights so that Bayview Avenue traffic is not impeded while residents exit their community with the assurance of a signal light; and

WHEREAS there exists technology that would allow the Bayview Avenue light to remain green in off hours except for 10 second changes to allow vehicles to exit the Tudor Gate/Wilket Road neighbourhood; and

WHEREAS there have been repeated requests by residents to the City to provide safe exit and entry to their neighbourhood; and

WHEREAS a centre left turn lane has helped those who enter the neighbourhood but has not achieved safe exit;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that a traffic signal light be installed on Bayview Avenue at Tudor Gate; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this light be activated in off-peak hours so as to allow a single vehicle to legally turn left onto Bayview Avenue; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that provision be made in the 1998 Transportation budget to cover the cost of installing this signal light.

(w)Pay Parking - Residential Areas - All North York Community Wards.

The North York Community Council reports having concurred with the following motion by Councillor Shiner:

WHEREAS the former City of North York's by-laws required minimum parking standards for all residential, commercial, industrial and all other uses;

AND WHEREAS these standards are meant to provide sufficient parking on site to support each use;

AND WHEREAS on occasion, property owners have started to charge for the use of the parking spaces provided on their property;

AND WHEREAS these properties sometimes are immediately adjacent to or in residential communities;

AND WHEREAS visitors attempting to avoid paying the parking charges often park on nearby residential streets causing traffic congestion and safety concerns;

AND WHEREAS this was not the intention of providing minimum parking on site;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services bring forward a report to North York Community Council on mechanisms available to ensure that charging for visitor parking in or near residential areas in the former City of North York is only permitted with Council's approval.

(Mayor Lastman, at the meeting of City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, declared his interest in Item(m) embodied in the foregoing Clause, entitled "Proposals Report - Development Concept for the Downsview Area Secondary Plan - North York Spadina," insofar as it pertains to:

(1)the City-owned lands at the southeast corner of the William R. Allen Road and Sheppard Avenue West, in that his younger son lives in the area; and

(2)Block "H," in that the applicant's solicitor is a partner at the same law firm as his older son, who is not a real estate layer and does not personally act on these files.)

(Councillor Li Preti, at the meeting of City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, declared his interest in Item(m) embodied in the foregoing Clause, entitled "Proposals Report - Development Concept for the Downsview Area Secondary Plan - North York Spadina," insofar as it pertains to the City-owned lands at the southeast corner of Sheppard Avenue West and the William R. Allen Road, in that he owns a property in the vicinity.)

Respectfully submitted,

MILTON BERGER,

Chair

Toronto, May 27, 1998

(Report No. 6 of The North York Community Council, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998.)