TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998

SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL

REPORT No. 7

1Removal of the Parking Restriction on Dorset Road and Neilson Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

2Stop Signs on Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

3Removal of Traffic Calming Alternating Parking on Courcelette Road Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

4Extension of Speed Limit Regulations and Stopping Controls on New Sectionsof Aylesworth Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

5Parking Prohibition on Terraview BoulevardWard 14 - Scarborough Wexford

6Traffic and Parking Concerns on Vradenberg Drive at Vradenberg Junior Public School Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

7Stop Control on Ben Stanton Boulevard at Ben Alder Drive Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

8Stop Sign on William Kitchen Road at Progress Avenue Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

9School Crossing on Keeler Boulevard atBrooks Road Public School Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

10Proposed Stop Controls in New Development South of Lawrence Avenue, East and West of Port Union Road Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

11Traffic and Parking Concerns on Goldhawk Trail at Agnes MacPhail Public School Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

12Community School Status for the Bendale Park Community Association Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

13Tam Heather Country Club Extension of Agreement Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

14Ontario Municipal Board DecisionMaywin C. Reynolds, 204 Bellamy RoadWard 15 - Scarborough City Centre

15Ontario Municipal Board Appeal - Group Homes

16Ontario Municipal Board Hearing John and Bernadette Hughes, 24 Parkcrest Drive Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

17Status Report - Abandoned CP Rail Spur Corridor Lawrence Avenue to South of Canadian Road (West of Warden) Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

18Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97017 First Warden Shopping Centres Limited, 800 Warden Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

19Official Plan Amendment Application P97025 Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97063 Saul Goldberg, 2815 Kingston Road Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

20Official Plan Amendment Application P97020 Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97052 Petro Canada, 70 Guildwood Parkway Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

21Official Plan Amendment Application P97011Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97031 Ontario Hydro - Warden Avenue and Metropolitan RoadWard 14 - Scarborough Wexford

22Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98015 Mondeo Developments Incorporated 740 Ellesmere Road, Dorset Park Community Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

23Official Plan Amendment Application SP98008 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98013 Kopas Management & Development Incorporated 565 Kennedy Road - Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

24Official Plan Amendment Application SP98003 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98005 Knob Hill Farms Limited, South-East Corner of Eglinton Avenueand McCowan Road - Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

25Official Plan Amendment Application SP98006 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98014 Goodman Phillips & Vineberg on Behalf of Her Majesty The Queen (First Gulf Group Developments Limited) Hwy 401 & Kennedy Road Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

26Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97054 Proposed Plan of Subdivision T97016Zaph Avenue Holdings Limited, Zaph Avenue South of Highway 401 Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

27Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97058 2351 Kennedy Road Incorporated 2351 Kennedy Road Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

28Official Plan Amendment Application P97023 Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97057 574780 Ontario Limited, 8119 Sheppard Avenue East Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

29Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97061 Juhan Holdings Incorporated 5739, 5741, 5743 and 5745 Finch Avenue East Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

30Request for Direction, Minor Variance Appeal 3173763 Canada Incorporated East Side of Warden Avenue, North of Metropolitan Road Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

31Part Lot Control Exemption Application SPL98003 Blueblood Developments Incorporated, Bridlegrove Drive,Castlethorpe Drive and Storebridge Drive Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

32Part Lot Control Exemption Application SPL98004 Carma Developers Limited, Bar Harbour Squareand Freeport Drive - Port Union Village Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

33Preliminary Evaluation Report P97024/Z97062 - Paul Viaros, 381-383 Birchmount Road Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

34Request for Fence By-law Exemption Mary Graham and Steve Duriancik, 109 Phyllis Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

35Request for Fence By-law Exemption Mark and Louis Tojici, 84 Wexford Boulevard Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

36Request for Fence By-law Exemption Kenneth Evans, 2 Senator BoulevardWard 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

37City-Owned Property on Danforth Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

38Other Items Considered by The Community Council

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 7

OF THE SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL

(from its meeting on July 22, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998

1

Removal of the Parking Restriction on

Dorset Road and Neilson Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June3, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To investigate the feasibility of removing the 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday parking restrictions on Dorset Road and Neilson Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $100.00 (approximate) funds associated with the removal of these parking restriction signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the parking regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded; and

(2)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The existing No Parking, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday parking restrictions were originally installed in 1996 at the request of the Home and School Association for Fairmount Junior Public School, and the principal of the school. Adult students attending English As A Second Language classes were regularly parking on both sides of Dorset Road, Harewood Avenue, and Neilson Avenue. Our observations revealed that most of this on-street parking occurred on Dorset Road and Neilson Avenue near Sloley Road. As a result, a questionnaire was sent out to residents which revealed support for following recommendations:

Dorset Road-No Parking, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on both sides between Sloley Road and Earl Road

Neilson Avenue-No Parking, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on the west side from 120 metres south of Sloley Road to Earl Road

Harewood Avenue-No restrictions.

These restrictions were ultimately supported by Scarborough Council and installed.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Fairmount Junior Public School is on Sloley Road that is found south of Kingston Road between Brimley Road and Cathedral Bluffs Drive. Dorset Road and Neilson Avenue are residential roads that run north/south near the school.

We have recently been informed that English As A Second Language classes are no longer offered at this school and, therefore, the same on-street parking situation no longer exists. We have also been advised by Councillor Ashton's office that the majority of residents of both streets support the removal of these parking restriction signs.

Conclusions:

We recommend that the No Parking, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday restrictions be removed from both Dorset Road and Neilson Avenue.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Environment, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

DorsetBothSloley Earl 7:00 a.m. to

RoadRoadRoad6:00 p.m.

Monday to

Friday

NeilsonWest120 metres southEarl 7:00 a.m. to

Avenueof Sloley RoadRoad6:00 p.m.

Monday to

Friday

2

Stop Signs on Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June29, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To investigate the need to install stop signs on the roads intersecting Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,200.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the stop signs is available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72240.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the stop signs identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the request of Councillor Altobello, on behalf of a resident of Leyton Avenue, Road and Traffic Services investigated the need for stop signs on roadways intersecting Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue are residential roadways located in the community to the north of Danforth Avenue and east of Pharmacy Avenue. The majority of intersections in this area have existing stop signs indicating the right-of-way. It is recommended to include the remaining streets intersecting Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue in an effort to provide area uniformity in controls and define the right-of-way. The installation of stop signs at these locations will not require the trimming or removal of any trees.

Conclusions:

The installation of stop signs on the streets intersecting Leyton Avenue and Patterson Avenue are recommended to improve safety by providing area uniformity as well as defining the right-of-way at these intersections.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Compulsory Stops"

Regulation to Be Enacted

Column 1Column 2

IntersectionStop Street

Ardell Avenue andArdell Avenue

Leyton Avenue

Ardell Avenue andArdell Avenue

Patterson Avenue

Newport Avenue andNewport Avenue

Leyton Avenue

(south intersection)

Newport Avenue andNewport Avenue

Patterson Avenue

Noganosh Road andNoganosh Road

Leyton Avenue

Prairie Drive andPrairie Drive

Leyton Avenue (south intersection)

Prairie Drive andPrairie Drive

Leyton Avenue (north intersection)

Prairie Drive and Prairie Drive

Patterson Avenue

3

Removal of Traffic Calming

Alternating Parking on Courcelette Road

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June29, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To investigate the need to remove the alternating parking on Courcelette Road and replace it with the previous erected parking restrictions.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the parking restriction signs is available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

The $1,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the removal of the pavement markings is available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72440.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the parking restriction signs identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the parking restriction signs identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Road and Traffic Services received a petition representing 110 of the 150 residences (73 percent) on Courcelette Road requesting that the alternating side parking restrictions installed in 1997 be removed, and the signed restrictions that were in place prior to these restrictions be reinstalled. Associated with this change is the removal of the pavement markings (i.e., pinch points and sections of centre line) on Courcelette Road that were installed as part of a phased traffic calming plan in the "East Beaches" community.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Courcelette Road is located in the "East Beaches" community which is in the extreme southwest corner of the former City of Scarborough. During the past several years, Road and Traffic Services staff and former Councillor Harvey Barron have been working with area residents to address concerns with regard to speeding and traffic volumes in the community. As a result of numerous public meetings with the community, a consensus was established to proceed with the first phase of a traffic calming plan. Alternating parking and pavement marking plans (i.e., pinch points) were installed on Fallingbrook Road, Courcelette Road, Blantyre Avenue, Victoria Park Avenue and Queen Street in 1997. These measures were recently removed on Blantyre Avenue at the request of the residents of that street.

Specifically, on Courcelette Road, on-street parking areas would alternate between the east and the west side of the street. This arrangement prevented all of the parking from being lined up on one side of the road. Approximately twenty on-street parking spaces in total were removed at the pinch point locations in order to provide a safe transition zone between the staggered parking areas.

After experiencing the modest on-street parking reduction, however, the majority of residents on Courcelette Road now prefer that the parking restrictions return to those that were in place prior to the traffic calming plan. The previous restrictions were as follows:

(1)No Parking Anytime on the east side of Courcelette Road; and

(2)No Stopping, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on the east side abutting Courcelette Public School.

Conclusions:

As it is the desire of the majority of residents of Courcelette Road, and as it will not impact safety, we can support reverting the parking restrictions back to the same restrictions posted prior to 1997 and removing the pinch point pavement markings.

Contact Name:

Steven T. Kodama, Assistant Director, Transportation,

Works and Emergency Services, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7148, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: kodama@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

Courcelette BothQueenKingston Anytime

RoadStreetRoad

Appendix 2

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

CourceletteEastQueenKingstonAnytime

RoadStreetRoad

4

Extension of Speed Limit Regulations and

Stopping Controls on New Sections

of Aylesworth Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July2, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, subject to adding thereto the following new Recommendation No. (4) and renumbering the remaining Recommendation accordingly:

"(4)the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, continue to review complaints respecting speeding in this area and report the results to The Scarborough Community Council;"

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July 2, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To extend the 40 kilometre per hour speed limit and to establish the need for stop controls on all intersecting roadways on the new sections of Aylesworth Avenue, east and west of Kennedy Road.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $700.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of speed signs and stop signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72240.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the speed limit identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the speed limit identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted;

(3)the stop signs identified in Appendix 3 of this report be rescinded;

(4)the stop signs identified in Appendix 4 of this report be adopted; and

(5)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Road and Traffic Services received a request from an area resident for all-way stop controls at the intersections of Haslam Street and Aylesworth Avenue, and Preston Street and Aylesworth Avenue due to speeding. Also requested by other residents were stop signs northbound on both Haslam Street and Preston Street at Aylesworth Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Aylesworth Avenue is located north of Kingston Road, between Birchmount Road and Midland Avenue. Recently, Aylesworth Avenue immediately east and west of Kennedy Road, was extended to the road allowance of Kennedy Road and residential homes were constructed on the north side of the new section of road. We should mention that Aylesworth Avenue does not intersect with Kennedy Road.

The extension of this road has created three new "T" type intersections, Haslam Street and Preston Street at Aylesworth Avenue, to the west of Kennedy Road, and Phillip Avenue at Aylesworth Avenue, to the east of Kennedy Road. In addition, the original sections of Aylesworth Avenue east and west of Kennedy Road are by-lawed and posted as a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit, with exception to the new extensions. In accordance with establishing area uniformity in traffic controls, it will be necessary to include the new extensions of Aylesworth Avenue and post them as 40 km/h speed limit through to the Kennedy Road road allowance.

At both the intersections of Aylesworth Avenue and Haslam Street, and Aylesworth Avenue and Preston Street traffic volumes are extremely low. In fact, the maximum peak hour traffic volume recorded for all approaches is only 33 vehicles, which is far short of the 350 vehicles per hour required to satisfy the all-way stop control warrant.

Despite the fact that the warrant for all-way stop controls are not achieved, northbound stop controls are recommended on Haslam Street and Preston Street at Aylesworth Avenue. A northbound stop control is also warranted on Phillip Avenue at Aylesworth Avenue. This location already contains the appropriate by-law to accommodate this sign.

Conclusions:

Although all-way stop controls are not warranted, a northbound stop control is recommended on Phillip Avenue, Haslam Street and Preston Street, at Aylesworth Avenue to clearly define the right-of-way and for area uniformity. In addition to these stop signs, the extension of the 40 kilometre per hour speed limit on Aylesworth Avenue east and west of Kennedy Road is required to maintain area uniformity in traffic controls.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"40 kilometre per hour Speed Limit"

Regulation To Be Rescinded

HighwayFromTo

Aylesworth Preston Highview

AvenueStreetAvenue

Aylesworth Midland Phillip

AvenueAvenueAvenue

Appendix 2

"40 kilometre per hour Speed Limit"

Regulation To Be Enacted

HighwayFromTo

Aylesworth Highview West Limit of

AvenueAvenueKennedy Road

Aylesworth Midland East Limit of

AvenueAvenueKennedy Road

Appendix 3

"Through Streets"

Regulation To Be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2

HighwayFromTo

AylesworthNorth Limit ofWest Limit of

AvenueHighview AvenuePreston Street

Appendix 4

"Through Streets"

Regulation To Be Enacted

Column 1Column 2

HighwayFromTo

AylesworthNorth Limit ofWest Limit of

AvenueHighview AvenueKennedy Road

5

Parking Prohibition on Terraview Boulevard

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June30, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To address the need for an additional parking prohibition on Terraview Boulevard, east of Victoria Park Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $200.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the parking prohibition signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the parking regulation identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the parking regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Road and Traffic Services received a request from Councillor Mike Tzekas to extend the parking restriction on Terraview Boulevard, east of Victoria Park Avenue. The current restriction prohibits parking on both sides of Terraview Boulevard, between Victoria Park Avenue and Shandon Drive. The request was to extend the parking prohibition on the south side of the road further east to the intersection of Amberley Drive.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Terraview Boulevard is located immediately south of the MacDonald Cartier Freeway/Highway 401, between Victoria Park Avenue and Pharmacy Avenue. The existing parking restrictions on Terraview Boulevard prohibit parking at all times on both sides of the road between Victoria Park Avenue and Shandon Drive.

These parking restrictions were installed to deter on-street parking generated by an apartment building complex located on the east side of Victoria Park Avenue, south of Terraview Boulevard. Staff have conducted investigations during regular working hours and observed the occasional vehicle parked on Terraview Boulevard just east of the current limit of the parking prohibition. It would seem probable that the apartment complex may generate an increase demand in the evenings and on weekends.

Conclusions:

We recommend extending the parking prohibition on the south side of Terraview Boulevard from Shandon Drive to Amberley Drive to deter parking in this area.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

TerraviewBothVictoria ParkShandonAnytime

BoulevardAvenueDrive

Appendix 2

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

TerraviewNorthVictoria ParkShandonAnytime

BoulevardAvenueDrive

TerraviewSouthVictoria ParkAmberleyAnytime

BoulevardAvenueDrive

6

Traffic and Parking Concerns on Vradenberg Drive

at Vradenberg Junior Public School

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June29, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To address the need for parking/stopping restrictions on Vradenberg Drive adjacent to Vradenburg Junior Public School.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $500.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of these parking and stopping restriction signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the parking regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a telephone conversation between Principal Richard McLaren of Vradenburg Junior Public School and Road and Traffic Services staff, school related traffic/parking conditions were examined.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Vradenberg Drive is a residential collector road located south of Sheppard Avenue between Pharmacy Avenue and Warden Avenue. A 40 kilometre per hour speed limit is posted on this road and appropriate school area signs exist warning motorists of the presence of children in the area. A walkway provides access from the community to the south side of the road, opposite the school. Along both sides of the road, parking is restricted between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday.

Traffic Operation Studies

Traffic studies were conducted on Monday, February 23, 1998 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. The results of these observations are shown in the following tables.

This table shows that most parents/guardians prefer to park directly abutting the school grounds, despite the existing "No Parking, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restrictions. Also, as shown by this table, some motorists choose to park on the 'opposite' side of Vradenberg Drive. This practice of parking on both sides of the street, even if it is only a couple of vehicles at a time, congests the roadway and restricts regular through traffic.

This table also shows that some motorists choose to use both the school parking lot and the turning loop to pick-up/drop off their children. It was evident that staggered activity times at the school (e.g., daycare start times before regular school classes) helped to alleviate the parking demand.

It was noted that several vehicles made three-point-turns in front of the school. Road and Traffic Services is concerned that motorists making "three-point turns" in a school area, add to the congestion.

Pedestrian Observations - Vradenberg Drive

Road and Traffic Services staff also recorded the volume and location of pedestrian crossings by the school on Vradenberg Drive. The following tables show these observations:

These tables reflect typical patterns of pedestrians passing to/from both schools during the respective admission and dismissal hours. In addition, although not shown on these tables, many pedestrian movements were associated to those vehicles waiting along side the school and therefore, these pedestrians did not cross Vradenberg Drive. It should also be stressed that, throughout our observations, no conflicts were recorded between any pedestrian and motorists.

Collision History:

In addition to the studies outlined above, Road and Traffic Services conducted a three-year collision review of the this area (1996, 1995 and 1994) that revealed that only two collisions have been reported during this time period.

Both of these collisions occurred in 1994. The first of these involved a 21 year old bicyclist striking a stopped vehicle. Thankfully only minimal injuries were sustained by the bicyclist who was later charged. The remaining collision in 1994 involved one motorist failing to yield the right-of-way. No charges were laid in this collision. Further analysis is not warranted at this time because neither of these collisions could have been prevented with normal traffic management devices.

Conclusions:

Some alterations to the existing on-street parking restrictions along Vradenberg Drive can make them more consistent with changes at other schools. Specifically, installing "30 Minute Parking, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Monday - Friday" signs along the school/north side of the road such that vehicle passengers can directly access the school without having to cross in front of through traffic. This recommendation will provide sufficient room for approximately 14 private vehicles to park temporarily.

Altering the remaining "No Parking, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" restriction opposite the front of the school to show the new restriction of "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m, Monday - Friday". This new restriction is recommended to discourage temporary parking on this side of the road.

We have spoken with the Toronto Police, Community Programs Support Unit who have indicated that due to the relatively low pedestrian crossing volumes at this location, a school safety patrol program is not required. This program is first required to facilitate the installation of a School Crossing.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

VradenbergBoth76.25 metres 112.85 metres7:00 a.m. to

DriveWest offurther west6:00 p.m.

Lowcrest BoulevardMonday to

Friday

Appendix 2

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

VradenbergSouth 76 metres west113 metres further8:00 a.m. to

Driveof Lowcrest west4:00 p.m.

BoulevardMonday to

Friday

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4Column 5

Maximum

Period

HighwaySideFromToTimes or DaysPermitted

VradenbergNorth 76 metres113 metres8:00 a.m. to30 minutes

Drivewest offurther4:00 p.m.

LowcrestwestMonday to Friday

7

Stop Control on Ben Stanton Boulevard at

Ben Alder Drive

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June30, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To investigate the need to install a northbound stop sign on Ben Stanton Boulevard at Ben Alder Drive.

Funding Sources Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $150.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of this stop sign are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72240.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the stop sign identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2)the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the request of a resident of Benshire Drive, Road and Traffic Services investigated the need for a northbound stop sign on Ben Stanton Boulevard at Ben Alder Drive.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The intersection of Ben Stanton Boulevard and Ben Alder Drive is located in the community to the north of Lawrence Avenue, and to the west of Bellamy Road North. Staff have conducted traffic investigations and determined that due to reduced sight lines at this "T" type intersection, a northbound stop sign is now warranted to indicate the right-of-way. The installation of this stop sign will not require the trimming or removal of any trees in the area of the sign.

Conclusions:

The installation of a northbound stop sign on Ben Stanton Boulevard at Ben Alder Drive will improve traffic operation at the intersection by defining the right-of-way.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city,scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Compulsory Stops"

Regulation To Be Enacted

Column 1Column 2

IntersectionStop Street

Ben Stanton Boulevard andBen Stanton Boulevard

Ben Alder Drive

8

Stop Sign on William Kitchen Road at Progress Avenue

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July6, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To extend the Through Street status on Progress Avenue in order to place a stop control on William Kitchen Road.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $150.00 (approximate) funds, associated with the installation of the stop sign are available in the Roads and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72240.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the stop signs identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the stop signs identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

With the development of the new William Kitchen Road, providing access onto Progress Avenue, staff investigated the need to install a southbound stop sign to clearly define the right-of-way at this intersection.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

William Kitchen Road is to provide access between Kennedy Road and Progress Avenue, immediately south of Highway 401. At present, direct access between these two roads is not provided as construction of the road is not yet completed, however, limited access to the Lansing Buildall store is provided.

Traffic control signals were recently installed where William Kitchen Road intersects Kennedy Road. Traffic control signals are also proposed at the intersection of Progress Avenue and William Kitchen Road and staff are negotiating with the property owner on the northwest corner of this intersection to close a driveway in order to safely accommodate traffic movements at this intersection. In the meantime, a stop sign is recommended to control traffic.

Conclusions:

A southbound stop sign on William Kitchen Road is recommended to improve safety prior to installation of traffic control signals at Progress Avenue.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Through Streets"

Regulation to Be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2

HighwayFromTo

Progress East Limit ofWest Limit of

AvenueMidland AvenueMarkham Road

Appendix 2

"Through Streets"

Regulation to Be Enacted

Column 1Column 2

HighwayFromTo

Progress East Limit ofWest Limit of

AvenueKennedy RoadMarkham Road

9

School Crossing on Keeler Boulevard at

Brooks Road Public School

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June30, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To address the need for parking/stopping restrictions on Keeler Boulevard in the vicinity of the proposed School Crossing at Brooks Road Public School.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $400.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of these stopping restriction signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the parking regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a meeting with the Toronto Police, Principal Bruce Daley of Brooks Road Public School and Road and Traffic Services staff, the feasibility of installing a regulation School Crossing, along with the complimentary No Stopping Anytime restrictions was examined. Furthermore, adjustments to the School Bus Loading Zone was investigated.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Keeler Boulevard is a residential collector road located north of Military Trail and east of Neilson Road. A 40 kilometre per hour speed limit is posted on this road and appropriate school area signs exist warning motorists of the presence of children in the area. Currently, parking is permitted for a period of 30 minutes along the south/school side of the road while stopping is restricted during the weekdays on the opposite/north side. This signing is consistent with the new standard in the Scarborough district. An efficiently operating school turning circle exists at this school.

There are to be a number of changes on Keeler Boulevard in front of Brooks Road Public School in the 1998/1999 school year. A school safety patrol will be established at this school to assist children crossing Keeler Boulevard at Tweedrock Crescent. In order to accommodate this program, Road and Traffic Services will be installing a regulation School Crossing on the east side of this intersection.

Along with the installation of the School Crossing, to ensure good sight lines for the patrollers and pedestrians crossing at this location, it is necessary to restrict stopping on either side of the crossing. However, by restricting stopping in this area, we will be reducing the size of the existing School Bus Loading Zone. This is of concern to Mr. Daley as in the new school year, the number of school buses providing service to Brooks Road Public School will increase significantly.

As such, it was discussed and agreed upon by all parties involved that the School Bus Loading Zone could be shifted and enlarged to a location west of the existing location. The remaining section on the south side where the School Bus Loading Zone previously existed will be signed as No Stopping Anytime. This restriction will further enhance sight lines in this area. Ample permitted parking for up to 30 minutes will continue to be allowed west of the parking lot entrance.

Conclusions:

Adjusting and enlarging of the School Bus Loading Zone as well as the installation of No Stopping Anytime restrictions on either side of the proposed School Crossing will increase safety and accommodate the school busing demands in the 1998/1999 school year at Brooks Road Public School.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Investigations,

Works and Emergency Services, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681, E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4Column 5

Maximum

Period

HighwaySideFromToTimes or DaysPermitted

KeelerSouth 42 metresEdenmills8:00 a.m. to30 minutes

BoulevardWest ofDrive4:00 p.m.

David(EastMonday to

DriveIntersection)Friday

Appendix 2

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

KeelerSouth 42 metres WestTweedrockAnytime

Boulevardof David DriveCrescent

(East Intersection)

KeelerNorth15 metres East15 metres WestAnytime

BoulevardTweedrock CrescentTweedrock Crescent

(East Intersection)(East Intersection)

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4Column 5

Maximum

Period

HighwaySideFromToTimes or DaysPermitted

KeelerSouth TweedrockEdenmills8:00 a.m. to30 minutes

BoulevardCrescentDrive4:00 p.m.

(East(EastMonday to

Intersection)Intersection)Friday

10

Proposed Stop Controls in New Development

South of Lawrence Avenue, East and West of Port Union Road

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July6, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To establish the right-of-way at various intersections within the new residential developments south of Lawrence Avenue, east and west of Port Union Road

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,600.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the stop signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72240.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the stop sign identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the stop signs identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Staff investigated the need for stop controls to define the right-of-way at various intersections in the new residential developments south of Lawrence Avenue, east and west of Port Union Road.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Two new residential developments are currently under construction in the areas south of Lawrence Avenue, east and west of Port Union Road. As is the policy of Road and Traffic Services, intersections within new developments are investigated for the need of defining the right-of-way. In respect to the development east of Port Union Road, the developer has installed stop controls during the construction phase at all intersections. Therefore, we have included all of these controls in our recommendations.

The development to the west of Port Union Road has not been signed by the developer. Based on staff investigations all roadways intersecting Bridgeport Drive will require stop controls, as well as the intersection of Seabreeze Lane at Portsmouth Drive.

Conclusions:

These stop controls will improve the traffic operation in these communities by defining the right-of-way at the identified intersecting roadways.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton

Supervisor, Traffic Investigations, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Compulsory Stops"

Regulation to Be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2

IntersectionStop Street

Duthie Street andDuthie Street

Port Union Road

Appendix 2

"Through Streets"

Regulation to Be Enacted

Column 1Column 2

HighwayFromTo

BridgeportSouth Limit ofNorth Limit of

DriveLawrence AvenueLakeridge Drive

Port UnionSouth Limit ofSouth Limit of

RoadLawrence AvenuePort Union Road

"Compulsory Stops"

Regulation to Be Enacted

Column 1Column 2

IntersectionStop Street

Bridgeport Drive andBridgeport Drive

Lakeridge Drive

Elsbury Lane andElsbury Lane

Marine Approach Drive

Elsbury Lane andElsbury Lane

Provincetown Drive

Marine Approach Drive andMarine Approach Drive

Bridgend Street

Provincetown Road and Marine Approach Dr.Provincetown Road

Seabreeze Lane and Portsmouth Dr.Seabreeze Lane

Shoalhaven Drive and Bridgend StreetShoalhaven Drive

11

Traffic and Parking Concerns on Goldhawk Trail at

Agnes MacPhail Public School

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June29, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To address the need for parking/stopping restrictions on Goldhawk Trail adjacent to Agnes MacPhail Public School.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $350.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of these parking and stopping restriction signs are available in the Road and Traffic Services 1998 Budget, Account No. 20000-70200-72260.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the stopping regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a telephone conversation between Principal Wayne Hamilton of Agnes MacPhail Public School and Road and Traffic Services staff, school related traffic/parking conditions were examined.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Goldhawk Trail is a residential collector road located north of McNicoll Avenue between McCowanRoad and Brimley Road. A 40 kilometre per hour speed limit is posted on this road and appropriate school area signs exist warning motorists of the presence of children in the area. Along both sides of the road, "No Stopping, 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" restrictions are posted.

Traffic Operation Studies

Traffic studies were conducted on Monday, February 9, 1998 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. The following table shows that most motorists, when given an option, choose to park on-street along the north side of Goldhawk Trail in front of the school.

This table shows that parents/guardians choose to ignore the existing "No Stopping, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restrictions on both sides of Goldhawk Trail. However, there was a greater tendency for most parents/guardians to park directly abutting the school grounds while fewer motorists parked on the south or opposite side of the road. By changing the by-law on this street to allow temporary school side parking, we are attempting to maintain two lanes of travel through this area and increase pedestrian/motorist safety.

Other traffic observations in this area, shown on this table, indicate that no buses parked in front of the school during either the morning or afternoon pedestrian activity times. It should also be noted that while the parking lot was also used by some motorists, it is the responsibility of the school to manage the access of this portion of their property.

Pedestrian Crossing Observations

Road and Traffic Services staff also recorded the volume and location of pedestrian crossings by Agnes MacPhail Public School. Fortunately, no conflicts were recorded between any pedestrians and motorists during our studies. The following tables show our observations:

These tables reflect typical patterns of pedestrians passing to/from both schools during the respective admission and dismissal hours. Although not shown on these tables, many pedestrian movements were also associated to those vehicles waiting along side the school and, therefore, these pedestrians did not cross Goldhawk Trail.

Most of the pedestrian crossings were occurring at the all-way stop intersection of Goldhawk Trail at Hutchcroft Avenue. The occasional mid-block crossings occurred when pedestrians were generated by motorists parked on the south side of Goldhawk Trail. Again, most importantly, no conflicts between motorists or pedestrians were recorded during our study.

Collision History

In addition to the studies outlined above, Road and Traffic Services conducted a thorough three-year collision review by the school (1994, 1995 and 1996). Only two collisions were reported in this area of the school during this time. Both of these collisions occurred during non-school hours and involved nothing beyond minor property damage. Given the nature of these driver error collisions, additional analysis is not required at this time.

Conclusions:

Some alterations to the existing on-street parking restrictions along Goldhawk Trail can make them more consistent with changes at other schools. Specifically, installing "30 Minute Parking, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Monday - Friday" signs along the school/north side of the road directly in front of the school such that private vehicle passengers can directly access the schools without having to cross in front of through traffic. This recommendation will provide sufficient room for approximately 8 private vehicles to park temporarily.

Altering the "No Stopping, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" restrictions on the south side of Goldhawk Trail to show the new restriction hours of "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m, Monday - Friday". The new restrictions hours are recommended because it will make them more consistent with many other recently altered signs in school areas in the Scarborough District.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Investigations

Works and Emergency Services, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-7844, Fax: 396-5681, E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

__________

Appendix 1

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

Goldhawk BothPondtail DriveHutchcroft 7:00 a.m. to

Trail(East Avenue 6:00 p.m.

Intersection) Monday to

Friday

__________

Appendix 2

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4

HighwaySideFromToTimes or Days

GoldhawkSouthPondtail Hutchcroft 8:00 a.m. to

TrailDrive Avenue 4:00 p.m.

(EastMonday to

Intersection)Friday

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1Column 2Column 3Column 4Column 5

Maximum

Period

HighwaySideFromToTimes or DaysPermitted

GoldhawkNorthPondtail 78 metres 8:00 a.m. to30 minutes

TrailDrivefurther 4:00 p.m.

(EasteastMonday to

Intersection)Friday

12

Community School Status for the

Bendale Park Community Association

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation, Scarborough:

Purpose:

Since 1970, the former City of Scarborough has supported and encouraged the efforts of community associations and their efforts in respective neighbourhoods. By awarding certain deserving associations with Community School status their efforts are maximized through the effective use of the local public school. The former Scarborough Board of Education is an integral partner in this initiative.

Funding Sources:

Funding in the amount of $600.00 for this specific program is already included in the 1998 budget process in Account No. 26000-40500-62621-123.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Bendale Park Community Association be approved for Community School status; and

(2)the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation, Scarborough, be authorized to proceed with the necessary arrangements to support the Bendale Community Association.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The former City of Scarborough has always been supportive of community groups and their untiring efforts to make Scarborough a better place in which to live. Community Associations across the city enable residents to participate in programs that would not normally be available without their involvement. Community Associations with Community School status afford an even greater range of programs for local residents.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Staff believe that support of community associations is a very necessary responsibility. Our communities are made stronger and more viable with their contributions. Their efforts enrich the lives of community residents in many ways.

Conclusions:

Community School status allows the local association to do more for their community residents.

Contact Name:

Terry James, Community Services Supervisor

Telephone: (416) 396-7408 Fax: (416) 439-0098

Facsimile: 396-5399

Mr. Mike Marks, President of Bendale Park Community Association, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

13

Tam Heather Country Club

Extension of Agreement

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To seek approval to extend the current interim agreement with the Tam Heather Country Club for the period June 29, 1998 to June 30, 1999.

Funding Sources:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the current interim agreement with the Tam Heather Country Club be extended from June29,1998 to June 30, 1999;

(2)the facility continue to be operated at no additional operating cost to the City; and

(3)the financial report for the 1997-98 season be reported to the Community Council in September.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The former City of Scarborough acquired the Tam Heather Country Club in 1994 and has been operating the facility in partnership with the Club since that date under the authority of an "interim" operating agreement which directs that the Club be responsible for the operating costs of the facility.

The operating agreement has been renewed on a year-to-year basis and expired June 28, 1998.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The Club entered into the 1997-98 season with a previous year operating deficit of $13,893.00 which became a budget obligation for the new season.

Preliminary year-end results indicate that the Club succeeded to operate in the 1997-98 season with revenues of $830,031.00 and an operating surplus estimated at $8,214.00 before consideration of the prior year deficit. These amounts need to be reviewed and verified and full details will be reported to the Community Council in September.

Conclusions:

The Board of Directors of the Club is working very hard to satisfy the terms of the agreement and has presented a 1998-99 budget which reflects appropriate actions to continue to operate the facility on a break-even basis, and staff is supportive of the Board's continued operation of the facility. Staff will continue to monitor the financial results and will review all long term implications for this partnership to succeed.

Contact Name:

Rick McMulkin

Director, Recreation Facilities and Community Services

Telephone: 396-7398

Facsimile: 396-5399

Councillor Doug Mahood declared his interest in the foregoing matter in that his parents are members of the Tam Heather Country Club.

(Councillor Mahood, at the meeting of City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause, in that his parents are members of the Tam Heather Country Club.)

14

Ontario Municipal Board Decision

Maywin C. Reynolds, 204 Bellamy Road

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July8, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise of the Memorandum of Oral Decision of the Ontario Municipal Board with respect to the above-noted matter and in accordance with the Board's Decision, to place the subject property, 204 Bellamy Road, under site plan control.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council enact the attached by-law to place 204 Bellamy Road under Site Plan Control.

Background:

The former Scarborough Council, on January 23, 1996, considered a staff report recommending a rezoning application to permit a maximum of 40 m² (430 square feet) of the basement of the residence to be used for personal service shops limited to a beauty parlour and a hairdressing salon. At the same time, Council had before it a By-law to enact Site Plan Control for the property in the event Council approved the rezoning. Council refused the application and the applicant subsequently appealed Council's decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.

The Law Department appeared before the Board in support of Council's decision and on September26, 1997, the Ontario Municipal Board approved the rezoning application, and a copy of the Board's Memorandum of Oral Decision and Amendment to Memorandum of Oral Decision are attached. The Board's Order for the rezoning is contingent on the City passing a Site Plan Control By-law for the property in the form attached. The Board's Order regarding the zoning will come into effect upon Council's passage of this by-law.

A Site Plan Control Application has been submitted for the property and is supported by Planning staff in order to ensure the efficient location of parking for the commercial use and safe vehicular access from the property to Bellamy Road.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski, Director, Planning and Administrative Tribunal Law

Phone: (416) 396-7739, Fax: (416) 396-4262,

15

Ontario Municipal Board Appeal - Group Homes

City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, struck out and referred this Clause to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for consideration.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1)direct that the Ontario Municipal Board appeal by the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto respecting Group Homes be withdrawn;

(2)request the Ontario Municipal Board to defer the hearing on the appeals filed by TheCatholic Childrens' Aid Society and The St. Leonard's Society of Metropolitan Toronto, with respect to Group Homes, in order for the City of Toronto to establish a position respecting these appeals; and

(3)adopt the recommendation contained in the following report from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, subject to directing that the report to be submitted to The Urban Environment and Development Committee in the last quarter of 1998 be first submitted to The Scarborough Community Council to permit the Community Council the opportunity to forward its comments thereon to The Urban Environment and Development Committee.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July14,1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

To advise Scarborough Community Council of the status of the above-mentioned appeal.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that staff report on this item to the Urban Environment and Development Committee at a meeting in the last quarter of this year.

Comments:

Background

The Council of the former City of Scarborough passed a By-law on September 2, 1997, to increase the distance between group homes in Scarborough from 300 metres to 800 metres. The former Metro Council adopted a Motion (attached), at its meeting held on October 8 and 9, 1997 to appeal the Scarborough By-law to the Ontario Municipal Board primarily on the grounds that the By-law was contrary to the intent of the policies of the Metropolitan Official Plan.

Two other agencies have also filed appeals: The Catholic Children's Aid Society and TheSt.Leonard's Society of Metropolitan Toronto. The effect of the new distance separation on these agencies would be to further limit possible locations for new group homes and to make most existing group homes legal non-conforming uses, with attendant restrictions.

Each of the former municipalities had different rules for locating group homes. Now that we have amalgamated, it may be desirable to harmonize the regulations. This issue should be dealt with by the Executive Director of Urban Planning and brought to Council's attention through a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee, in the last quarter of 1998.

Contact Name:

Susan Filshie

Telephone: 396-4270, Facsimile: 396-4265

E-mail: filshie@city.scarborough.on.ca

--------

(Motion adopted by the former Metro Council,

at its meeting held on October 8 and 9, 1997,

referred to above.)

The Metropolitan Council at its meeting held on October 8 and 9, 1997, adopted, without amendment, the following Motion:

Moved by:COUNCILLOR ASHTON

Seconded by:COUNCILLOR LAYTON

"WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Scarborough passed By-law Number25225 (`the By-law') on the 2nd day of September, 1997, under Section 34 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13 as amended; and

WHEREAS the By-law amendment will change the minimum permitted distance separation between group homes, correctional group homes and residential care facilities from 300 metres to 800 metres; and

WHEREAS the implementation of an 800-metre separation distance between these facilities would result in approximately 52 of the existing 72 facilities in Scarborough being legal non-conforming uses;and

WHEREAS the status of legal non-conforming use means that additions or modifications to the property may require approval by the Committee of Adjustment and that if the group home use was to cease for any reason, the use would revert to residential; and

WHEREAS the implementation of an 800-metre separation distance will greatly reduce the number of locations for new facilities to locate in Scarborough; and

WHEREAS the intent of Metropolitan Official Plan policies is to allow for group homes to locate in residential areas and to provide for an equitable distribution of group homes and the City of Scarborough staff have indicated that the existing 300-metre separation has achieved this policy objective; and

WHEREAS Scarborough Property Standards staff have not received any complaints about group homes or correctional group homes in the last several years; and

WHEREAS the Acting Commissioner of Planning has appealed the passage of the By-law to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on the grounds that the By-law is contrary to the intent of the policies of the Metropolitan Official Plan;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Metropolitan Council confirm the action of the Acting Commissioner of Planning in filing an appeal and authorize the Metropolitan Solicitor and other appropriate staff to appear before the OMB to represent Metropolitan Toronto's interests on that appeal and any appeals or other matters that may be consolidated by the OMB, and to appeal any decisions, settle any issues and execute any related documents."

16

Ontario Municipal Board Hearing

John and Bernadette Hughes, 24 Parkcrest Drive

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1)direct the City Solicitor to request the Chairman of the Ontario Municipal Board to request Chairman Hubbard to clarify her decision to deal more fully with the evidence and argument presented by the City and the residents respecting this matter; and

(2)direct that the City Solicitor be authorized, following consultation with the Ward Councillors, if he is not satisfied with the response of the Ontario Municipal Board, to request a re-hearing.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July16,1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To advise of the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board Decision with respect to the above noted matter.

Recommendation:

For information.

Background:

John and Bernadette Hughes applied to the former City of Scarborough for permission to sever lands known as 24 Parkcrest Drive into two building lots. The owners also applied to the Committee of Adjustment for variances with respect to minimum lot frontages and lot areas.

The refusal of the severance application by the Scarborough Planning and Buildings Committee and the refusal of the minor variance application by the Committee of Adjustment were appealed by the owner to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Representatives of the Law Department and the Planning and Buildings Department attended at the Ontario Municipal Board on May 26, 1998 in support of the Planning and Buildings Committee and Committee of Adjustment refusals of the subject applications.

After considering the evidence presented, the Board in a decision issued on July 13, 1998, copy attached, allowed the appeals and approved the application to sever the land and granted the minor variance application on the basis that the proposal is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood and represents efficient use of land and municipal services.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski, Director, Planning and Administrative , Tribunal Law

(416) 396-7739, (416) 396-4262 Fax Number

17

Status Report - Abandoned CP Rail Spur Corridor

Lawrence Avenue to South of Canadian Road

(West of Warden) Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1)direct the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to report to TheScarborough Community Council on City Council's expressed interest in the potential use of the abandoned corridor for bicycle trail purposes; and

(2)direct the City Solicitor to report to The Scarborough Community Council, in camera, on the ability of the City to expropriate these lands.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July14,1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

As requested by the Scarborough Community Council at its meeting on June 24, 1998, this is a status report with respect to a portion of the abandoned CP Rail Spur corridor running north from Lawrence Avenue to South of Canadian Road (west of Warden Avenue).

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Scarborough Community Council receive this report.

Council Reference:

Scarborough Council, at its meeting on September 7, 1994, considered CP's proposal to dispose of this corridor, and requested CP to offer the lands to the abutting homeowners. As well, Toronto Council, at its July 8, 1998 meeting, considered a report from the Urban Environment and Development Committee entitled: "Consultant's Study - Inventory of Cycling Trail Opportunities in Rail and Hydro Corridors" which identified the subject corridor as one of many corridors with potential for utilization as a bicycle trail, and recommended, amongst other things, that "the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be authorized to protect opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian trails in rail and hydro corridors wherever possible through the development approval process and secure implementation where appropriate."

Discussion:

SALE TO ABUTTING HOMEOWNERS

At the request of Scarborough Council, CP Rail has been trying to sell the abandoned spur line corridor to the abutting residential property owners on the east side of Ellington Drive. The corridor is currently designated and zoned for industrial uses and Official Plan and Zoning amendments would be required before the land could be severed and sold. (CP would have preferred to sell to the abutting industrial property owners to the east, since this approach would have involved fewer transactions and would not have required Official Plan and Zoning amendments.)

Scarborough Council's preference that the property be sold to the homeowners was based on Community wishes expressed at several Community meetings. In a letter dated May 8th, CP Rail advised that they have only been successful in signing up approximately 49 percent of the 103 abutting residential owners to purchase and sale contracts. It would appear that for many of the homeowners, the price being asked by CP Rail outweighs their conceptual support for acquisition of the corridor lands.

The largest number of the purchase offers apply to lands in the northern half of the subject corridor. Even in this section of the corridor, however, there are significant gaps in the potential sale pattern. Since it would be inappropriate for the City to approve any severance and sale which would leave segments of the Corridor land-locked, the arrangements presented by CP Rail to date cannot be supported. CP Rail officials, in consultation with Councillor Tzekas, intend to continue their efforts to convince additional homeowners to submit purchase offers. It is anticipated that the results of this further effort will be known by the end of the summer. Unless CP Rail is able to secure a sufficient number and pattern of purchase offers to ensure that no land locked parcels are created, and to represent good planning in all other respects, the CP initiative will continue to be unsupportable.

CP Rail, anticipating a positive outcome to its sales initiative has asked the City for assistance in obtaining the necessary Planning Approvals. If this circumstance arises, Scarborough Community Council and Toronto Council can decide whether or not to waive the application fees when considering the Preliminary Evaluation Report for Official Plan, Zoning, and Consent applications filed by CP Rail. Although contrary to normal procedure, Planning staff can process the applications to this stage despite the non-payment of fees.

CYCLING TRAIL OPPORTUNITY

During Scarborough's discussions with respect to the disposition of the abandoned CP Rail Corridor, the possibility of a cycling trail was discussed, but not pursued. The adjacent community was divided, at best, on the issue of whether or not it wanted to see a cycling trail passing behind their back yards. More recently, Toronto Council has expressed interest in the potential use of this Corridor for bicycle trail purposes. The Corridor itself is long and narrow with limited inlet/outlet opportunities, raising concerns about public safety on such a trail. Given its length, configuration and context; a bicycle trail in this corridor would perhaps have stronger merit as a transportation route than as recreational trail.

Accordingly, it would be appropriate for the Urban Planning and Development Services Department, in consultation with Recreation and Real Estate staff, to investigate and report further regarding the desirability and feasibility of establishing a cycling trail in the abandoned CP Rail Corridor, between Lawrence Avenue and Canadian Road. This information is required to provide input to Scarborough Community Council's consideration of the planning approvals required by CP Rail in connection with its efforts to sell portions of the corridor to abutting homeowners. To properly address this issue it will be necessary to consider how a bicycle trail in this segment of the Corridor might contribute to a future network of bicycle trails in the broader area. Developing a better understanding of the priority for bicycle trail development in this corridor will also provide useful input for consideration, in the Fall, of the City's 1999 budgets for property acquisition, trail development, and trail operation.

Conclusions:

It is important that an assessment of desirability and preliminary feasibility be undertaken so that the City can determine whether or not it wishes to pursue development of a cycling trail in this corridor. Staff of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department will report further on this issue to ensure that Scarborough Community Council is fully aware of cycling trail opportunities and priorities when dealing with planning applications with respect to the abandoned spur line property. As well, staff of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department will continue to liaise with CP Rail with respect to its disposal of the abandoned spur line corridor north of Lawrence Avenue and keep Scarborough Community Council apprised of status changes.

Contact Name:

Edward S. Watkins, P.Eng., MCIP, RPP

Manager of Community Planning, Scarborough, West Section.

18

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97017

First Warden Shopping Centres Limited, 800 Warden Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 18, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted, subject to adding thereto a new Recommendation No. (3), as follows:

"(3)direct that the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, report further, through the Site Plan process, to The Scarborough Community Council, on any opportunities for mutual sharing of parking between the Embers Restaurant and First Warden Shopping Centres Limited."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

The subject property was formerly owned by Sears Canada and is currently being developed with a Wal-Mart retail store. The lands are presently zoned "Office Uses Zone - Holding" (OU - H), permitting 31,560 square metres (339,700 square feet) of office uses and 12,100 square metres (130,000 square feet) of commercial uses to be developed. A further 18,000 square metres (194,000 square feet) of office uses and 13,025 square metres (140,200 square feet) of commercial uses are subject to removal of the H.

The application is seeking to remove the Holding Provision (H) from the Zoning By-Law as it applies to the permission for the additional commercial space. If approved, this will permit the property to be developed with 25,125 square metres (270,500 square feet) of retail, restaurant, financial institution and service uses.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1)amend the Employment Districts Zoning By-Law No. 24982 (Golden Mile) to partially remove the Holding Provision (H) from the zoning for the property on the west side of Warden Avenue, south of Eglinton Avenue, known municipally as 800 Warden Avenue, increasing the commercial permission from 12,100 square metres (130,000 square feet) to 25,125 square metres (270,500 square feet) under the existing Office Uses Zone (OU); and

(2)authorize such unsubstantive, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-Law as may be necessary to give effect to this resolution.

Background:

As part of the Golden Mile Land Use Review, the lands were rezoned in June, 1996 to delete a number of Performance Standards which hindered the potential redevelopment of the property. However, as no transportation or servicing information was supplied by Sears, Scarborough Council implemented a Holding Provision (H) in the By-Law for the property. In June of 1997, Scarborough Council further amended the By-Law partially removing the H to increase the commercial permission on the site from 7,435 square metres (80,000 square feet) to its present 12,100 square metres (130,000 square feet).

Scarborough Council also instituted a Transportation System Improvement (TSI) Charge in June 1997 for all rezoning applications in the Golden Mile seeking to implement the new commercial uses provided for through the land use review. This charge ensures that the necessary capital improvements are adequately provided by the appropriate owners/applicants and equitably financed by all benefiting parties. In September of 1997, Sears Canada entered into and registered on title an agreement to pay the TSI Charge, and this agreement was assumed by First Warden Shopping Centres upon the purchase of this property.

A Site Plan Control Application has been entered into and registered on title for the first phase redevelopment of the property. An 11,920 square metre (128,300 square foot) Wal-Mart retail store is presently under construction and is anticipated to be open in August. As conditions of approval, the applicant is providing a new signalized intersection on Warden Avenue and will register an easement on title providing continuous public access between Warden Avenue and Lebovic Avenue; the new public street under construction on the westerly property line of the site. The attached Figure1 illustrates the location of this new road and the recent development applications in the Golden Mile.

The current application is not seeking to remove the Holding Provision (H) on the remaining office uses permission. Should the applicant wish to remove this Holding Provision in future, an additional rezoning application to City Council would be required.

Conclusion:

With the TSI Charge agreement in place, and the provision of the signalized intersection on Warden Avenue and the full opening of Lebovic Avenue between Eglinton Avenue and Comstock Road expected to occur shortly, City Council can be satisfied as to the availability of appropriate improvements and/or funds to provide the transportation system capacity necessary to accommodate the level of commercial uses permitted in the By-Law. No other servicing concerns were identified through the technical review of the application.

Contact Name:

Neil Cresswell, MCIP, RPP

Senior Planner

(416) 396-4927

(416) 396-4265 Fax

Cresswel@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of Council, the following communication (July 7, 1998) received from Mr. Russel White, Plans Analyst, The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority:

We acknowledge receipt of the above noted notice of intention and offer the following comments.

TRCA staff do not object to removal of the holding designation, however, we note that the site is within the Golden Mile Subwatershed Study boundary. This study calls for a comprehensive look at Stormwater Management quality control for all infill development within the study limits. In light of this, future development of this site is dependant on the applicant partaking in a comprehensive solution for Stormwater Management for the Golden Mile Area.

We trust that this information is of assistance. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.

Mr. Phillip Wong, representing First Warden Shopping Centres Limited, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendation.

19

Official Plan Amendment Application P97025

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97063

Saul Goldberg, 2815 Kingston Road

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 25, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted.

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July 22, 1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Cliffcrest Community Secondary Plan and the Cliffcrest Community Zoning By-law, for the lands located at the south-west corner of Kingston Road and Eastville Avenue as shown on Figure 1, to accommodate a three storey building with commercial units at the street level and 16 residential units on the second and third floors.

The Official Plan Amendment proposes to change the existing Highway Commercial designation to Commercial Mixed Use. The Zoning By-law Amendment proposes to change the zoning from 'Highway Commercial' to 'Neighbourhood Commercial' with an exception to permit residential dwelling units.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Official Plan:

amend the Cliffcrest Community Secondary Plan, with respect to the property located on the south-west corner of Kingston Road and Eastville Avenue, known municipally as 2815Kingston Road, being Part of Lots 7, 8, 9 & 10, Registered Plan M-475, as shown on Figure 1 as follows:

(1)remove the Highway Commercial designation and replace it with a Commercial Mixed Use designation; and

(2)add the following Numbered Policy:

Southwest Corner of Kingston Road and Eastville Avenue

The Commercial Mixed Use designation shall permit a maximum of 87 residential units per hectare and a maximum overall density of 1.9 times the lot area. Retail Commercial uses are provided for as a Primary Use.

(B)Zoning By-law:

amend the Cliffcrest Community Zoning By-law Number 25265 as amended with respect to the property located on the south-west corner of Kingston Road and Eastville Avenue, known municipally as 2815 Kingston Road, being Part of Lots 7, 8, 9 & 10, Registered Plan M-475, as shown on Figure 1 as follows:

(1)remove the 'Highway Commercial' zoning and replace it with a 'Neighbourhood Commercial' zoning;

(2)add the following development standards:

(a)gross floor area for commercial shall not exceed 1,205 m² (12,970squarefeet) and must be contained entirely on the ground floor;

(b)total gross floor area shall not exceed 3 505 m² (37,730 square feet);

(c)maximum 16 residential units;

(d)minimum 1.2 parking spaces per residential unit;

(e)maximum height of 3 storeys;

(f)minimum south side yard setback 5 metres (16 feet); and

(g)exempt this property from the requirement for a 1.5 metre landscape strip abutting the adjacent single family residential; and

(3)add an exception to permit dwelling units and prohibit Automobile Service Station; and

(C)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

The site has a lot area approximately 1,915 m² (20,613 square feet) with a Kingston Road frontage of approximately 52 metres (170 feet) and an Eastville Avenue frontage of approximately 37 metres (121 feet). The property is currently vacant and was used as overflow parking during the recent redevelopment of the Canadian Tire store to the north. Prior to this, the site was occupied by the White Star Motel until its demolition in 1996.

The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a mainstreet style three storey building with approximately 1,110 m² (11,950 square feet) of commercial space at the street level and 16 residential units on the second and third floor (Figure 2). All residential units are two storeys in height with the living room, dining room and kitchen on the second floor and either two or three bedrooms and a private outdoor courtyard on the third floor. A total of 57 parking spaces are provided below the building and are accessible directly at grade from Eastville Avenue as both Eastville Avenue and the site drop about a storey in grade through the depth of the property.

The lands are subject to Site Plan Control and a Site Plan Control Application (S98029) has been submitted in conjunction with the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications.

The property at the south-east corner of Kingston Road and Eastville Avenue contains an existing two storey building which has recently been redesignated to Commercial Mixed Use to accommodate residential units on the second floor. The Zoning, which was already 'Neighbourhood Commercial', was modified to allow dwelling units.

The property to the west is designated and zoned 'Highway Commercial' and contains a Mister Transmission outlet and a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant. To the north is the recently redeveloped Canadian Tire store which is also designated and zoned 'Highway Commercial'. Directly south of the property is an approximately 4.6 metre (15 foot) wide City owned right of way which is grassed and contains a sanitary sewer line. South of this right of way are single family dwellings.

A Preliminary Evaluation Report was before Scarborough Community Council on February 18, 1998 at which time it directed staff to convene a Community Information Meeting and to bring these applications back to Scarborough Community Council during the second quarter of 1998 for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act.

Comments:

(1)The Community Information Meeting was held on April 8, 1998 and was attended by Councillors Altobello and Ashton, City staff and approximately ten members of the community. The community response was generally positive but some issues were raised. Subsequently, those who attended the first meeting were invited to attend two more meetings to address these specific issues. Two community members attended the second meeting and one neighbour was in attendance at the final meeting.

(2)In response to concerns raised at the community meetings, the architect has; modified the facade treatment to break up the massing of the building (Figures 3, 4 and 5), removed the third floor rear balconies and all the balconies on the front of the building and provided a balance of two and three bedroom units thus increasing the size of the private residential courtyards.

(3)On March 23, 1998, a letter was received from Mr. Kevin Brillinger, the owner of the property at 2803 Kingston Road expressing concerns regarding visibility of, and access to, Mister Transmission which is located on his property. He also expressed concerns regarding traffic, parking and the removal of the setbacks required by the current 'Highway Commercial' zoning. Mr. Brillinger was informed that this proposal meets the City's parking standards and is in keeping with the form of redevelopment recommended for this area in the Kingston Road Study. He was invited to attend all three community meetings but did not appear at any.

(4)The applicant has agreed to be financially responsible for an ornamental trellis to be constructed on the parkette at the apex of the Canadian Tire property, directly to the north. This trellis was originally proposed by the Landscape Architect for the Canadian Tire site but was not able to be included as part of the final site plan.

(5)The application was circulated to various technical review agencies, none of which expressed concern for the proposed mixed use development. The former Metropolitan Toronto Transportation Department requested an approximate 1.2 metre (5 foot) road widening and an adjustment to the building and parking south of this new property line. Boulevard landscaping in keeping with Metro standards was also requested. The development has been modified to meet these requirements.

(6)In order to meet the parking standards, the applicant is unable to provide the standard 1.5metre (5 foot) wide landscape strip required when Commercial abuts Single Family Residential uses. Instead the applicant has agreed to provide landscaping on the 4.6 metre (15 foot) wide City owned right of way, and a wooden fence along the south side of this right of way (Figure 2). Both the neighbours directly to the south and the Works and Environment Department are prepared to accept this arrangement.

Conclusions:

This proposal takes a property that has a been a neighbourhood concern for years and provides a development which will be a strong asset to the community. In keeping with the vision, endorsed by the Council of the former City of Scarborough through the Kingston Road Study, this proposal will continue the efforts to revitalize this area through the strengthening of its mainstreet character. The development will result in new business and residential opportunities within the KingstonRoad/St. Clair Avenue node while remaining in keeping with the scale and character desired for this community.

Contact Names:

Peter Swinton, Acting Senior PlannerJayne Naiman, Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-7025Phone: (416) 396-7040

Fax: (416) 396-4265Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: swinton@city.scarborough.on.caE-Mail: naiman@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communications (July 6, 1998) and (March 23, 1998) from Brillinger Investments Limited, Jerome Etkin Limited:

July 6, 1998

We are the owners of the commercial property at 2803 and 2799 Kingston Road immediately west of the subject property. Two highway commercial compatible tenants, a Mister Transmission franchise location and Kentucky Fried Chicken location are situated on the property. We have previously written to the planners on this file registering our opposition to both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications (copy enclosed).

The intent of this proposal seems to be to force a change in the existing zoning to conform with a vision for this area that is not compatible with the adjoining property. The properties at 2803 (Mister Transmission) and 2799 (Kentucky Fried Chicken) Kingston Road were developed in accordance with the Highway Commercial Zoning requirements for the area. All the appropriate setbacks from Kingston Road and sign by-law requirements have been observed.

The proposal to abandon the Highway Commercial zoning impacts our property adversely in two ways.

1.By permitting a building with a zero front yard setback and basically a lot line to lot line side yard setback the Mister Transmission building and sign will effectively be completely blocked off to west bound traffic. Access is already restricted and this will create a tremendous hardship for our tenant. The height and forward location of the proposed building will also dwarf the existing garage structure making it difficult for this retail outlet to be noticed at all from any direction.

2.The zoning change adversely affects the commercial nature intended by the Highway Commercial Zoning. This block was designated for commercial uses to serve the neighbourhood and passing motorists. The type of uses that may be attracted to the proposed development will not be compatible with the existing uses on the block. There is the potential for severe parking and traffic hazards when there is no provisions for parking for the commercial components of the proposal.

We believe this proposal does not fully take into account the intent of the original zoning for this area of Kingston Road nor does it acknowledge the serious impact on the existing businesses that comply with the current zoning and by-laws.

We wish to be notified immediately if the Scarborough Community Council recommends in favour of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications and the proposal is forwarded to Toronto City Council. This is also our written request to be advised if the proposed Official Plan Amendment is adopted to protect our right to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board.

We have not determined whether a representative will attend the meeting July 22, 1998 or not.

March 23, 1998

We are the owners of the property at 2803 Kingston Road, immediately west of the proposed development property. An initial review of the proposal raises concerns the development will affect our property and the businesses situated there.

Here are some of the issues that arise:

1.Visibility and Access

The effect of the street front development will completely shield the existing Mister Transmission location from westbound traffic. The island in Kingston Road already makes access difficult. The new structure will also block off the pylon sign situated at the northeast corner of the property set back from the property line.

2.Traffic and Parking

We have concerns there will be insufficient parking for the proposed density. The combination of four (anticipated) commercial enterprises and 16 residential units will generate significant traffic. The curb lane will likely become congested and may be converted to restricted parking to serve the businesses. It will be difficult for customers and guests of the residents to locate the parking in the rear.

3.Setbacks

The elimination of set backs required by the current HC zoning not only impacts our property's visibility to the westbound traffic but also raises a technical concern. The site plan shows a portion of the proposed building immediately adjacent to the foundation of our building. We have concerns our property could be damaged or the foundation of the building undermined in the course of construction.

We want to be on record opposing both the Official Plan Amendment P97025 and Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97063. Kingston Road is a major artery and important commuter route justifying the existing HC zoning.

The proposed development is incompatible with the existing businesses on this block and will be detrimental to ongoing operations. The existing HC setbacks must be maintained.

Mr. Paul Anderson, representing the applicant, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendation.

Councillor Brian Ashton also reported to Community Council the receipt of a verbal request from Ms.M. Cunningham, an area resident, requesting deferral of this application.

20

Official Plan Amendment Application P97020

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97052

Petro Canada, 70 Guildwood Parkway

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 26, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends:

(1)that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted, and the Public Meeting under the Planning Act be concluded;

(2)that the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be directed to bring forward the Site Plan Control Application to the meeting of The Scarborough Community Council scheduled to be held on September 16, 1998;

(3)that the Bills to enact the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments not be presented to City Council for approval until the Site Plan is approved by the Community Council;

(4)that the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, be directed to report to The Scarborough Community Council on transportation issues in this area, i.e., access to and impact on the Guildwood Parkway; and

(5)that the Ward Councillors, in conjunction with staff, form a Community Working Committee to work with the applicant toward a high quality of landscaping and building design structure.

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

The applicant proposes to amend the Official Plan - Guildwood Community Secondary Plan and the Guildwood Community Zoning By-law as it pertains to the vacant Petro Canada gas station property, at the north-west corner of Guildwood Parkway and Rowatson Road, by redesignating the site from Highway Commercial Uses to Medium Density Residential, and by rezoning the site to permit the development of 15 residential townhouses.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Official Plan:

amend the Guildwood Community Secondary Plan with respect to the property located on the north-west corner of Guildwood Parkway and Rowatson Road, by deleting the Highway Commercial designation and substituting a Medium Density Residential (RM) designation and by adding a density of 55 units per hectare (23 units per acre);

(B)Zoning By-law Amendment:

amend the Guildwood Community Zoning By-law Number 9676, as amended, with respect to 70 Guildwood Parkway, being Lot 15, Concession D, by deleting the current Highway Commercial (HC) zoning and substituting a Multiple Family Residential Zone as follows:

(1)Permitted Use: Multiple Family Residential;

(2)maximum 15 residential dwelling units;

(3)minimum building setback 4 metres (13 feet) from the street line of Rowatson Road, except that the door to the garage shall be set back a minimum of 5.7 metres (19 feet) from the street line. The space in front of the garage may be used for parking;

(4)minimum building setback, 6 metres (20 feet) from the street line of Guildwood Parkway;

(5)minimum side yard building setback for a row of townhouses, 2 metres (6.5feet) from end wall to side lot lines;

(6)maximum height 3 storeys;

(7)an attached garage shall be erected with each dwelling unit;

(8)a refuse storage room shall be provided on the site and be enclosed by at least four walls and a roof; and

(C)authorize any unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments as may be required to carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

(1)Site Statistics

Site area:0.27 hectares (0.7 acres)

Frontage - Rowatson Road:41.5 metres (136 feet)

Guildwood Parkway:50 metres (165 feet)

Number of dwelling units proposed:15 townhouses

Proposed residential density:55 units per hectare (23 units per acre)

Proposed intensity of development:0.7 times the site area

Building coverage:33 percent

(2)The subject site is vacant and it was previously occupied by a Petro Canada service station which has been demolished and the underground gasoline tanks have been removed. The site is bounded by one and two-storey single-family dwellings on the north, fourplexes to the east, low rise apartments and the Guildwood Plaza to the south, and a nursing home to the west. The land to the west containing the Extendicare Nursing Home is designated High Density Residential and zoned for apartments at a density of 75 units per hectare (30 units per acre). There are no trees of any significance on the subject property.

(3)The Petro Canada site is designated Highway Commercial Uses in the Official Plan, permitting only service stations, automotive service centres, restaurants, hotels and motels.

(4)The land is zoned Highway Commercial and permits Day Nurseries, Automobile Sales, service and maintenance uses excluding auto body repair and/or auto-wrecking yards, Funeral Homes, Fraternal Organizations, Hotels and Motels, Places of Worship, Professional and Business Offices, Recreational Uses, and Specialized Commercial Uses. The land is under site plan control. An application for site plan approval (S97161) has been submitted indicating how the applicant proposes to develop the land with 15 townhouses.

(5)On March 4, 1998, Scarborough Community Council considered a Preliminary Evaluation Report on these applications and directed staff to convene a community information meeting, with notice to be provided within the area bounded by Kingston Road to the north, Prince Philip Boulevard to the west, Catalina Drive to the south and Livingston Road to the east. Notice was also to be given to the Community Association and posted at the local Library and the neighbourhood grocery store.

Community Council also directed that the applicant be advised to amend the Official Plan Amendment Application P97020, to replace the request for High Density Residential with Medium Density Residential. This would best reflect the reduction of the proposed townhouse units from 17 to 15 that resulted from discussions between City staff and the applicant. The applicant complied with this request.

The Public Meeting was targeted to take place prior to the summer recess.

(6)The Community Information Meeting was held on April 21, 1998. Approximately 446 notices were sent to property owners and tenants within the expanded area of circulation directed by Scarborough Community Council. Approximately 20 people were in attendance including the local Councillors, the applicant and his architect. Comments and concerns raised can be summarised as follows:

The proposed density is too high. Reduce the number of units to 10 or 12.

Fourplexes would be acceptable;

The proposed development should be of high quality;

The Guildwood Parkway/Rowatson Road intersection/entrance to plaza are of concern because currently there are traffic and turning problems;

Pavement marking on Guildwood Parkway need to be repainted;

Need to widen Guildwood Parkway;

Car access and on-site parking need to be considered;

Will there be enough parking on site for residents and visitors? Residents in the area are getting parking tickets in front of their houses (3 hour parking restriction applies);

The proposal would be a positive addition once density and traffic problems have been addressed;

Information required on other development options for the site and their economic impact;

Proposed development will impact on existing parks facilities;

There may be an environmental problem on the site from the (removed) gasoline tanks. Is there an environmental report?

There may be water pressure problems on abutting residences on Rowatson. The 15proposed units will impact on the existing water pressure.

Comments:

This revised proposal would implement the City's objectives to encourage the redevelopment of older Highway Commercial properties (typically vacant gas station sites and used car lots) to a more appropriate land use and built form. This proposal would introduce new housing stock at an appropriate scale to provide a transition from the predominantly single-family residential neighbourhood to the north, to the more intensively built forms as one approaches Guildwood Parkway. The proposed townhouses would complement the existing built form of the fourplexes on the east side of Rowatson Road and the low rise apartments on the south side of Guildwood Parkway. Furthermore, the proposal would provide for the gradation of densities from the High Density Residential designated lands along the east and north side of Guildwood Parkway (the Extendicare property), to the fourplexes on the east side of Rowatson Road.

The Medium Density Residential designation of the Official Plan provides for a variety of dwelling unit types including townhouses, low-rise apartments and other such projects, to a maximum height of four-storeys and a maximum net density of 100 units per hectare (40 units per acre). In addition, the Official Plan provides for single and semi-detached dwelling unit forms within this designation.

Because the site is located near the business centre of the Guildwood Community and is surrounded by High Density and Medium Density designated lands on three sides, the proposed density of 55units per hectare (23units per acre) is considered appropriate for the development of this site and would provide for an appropriate form of housing, while at the same time it would remove the Highway Commercial designation.

The applicant proposes to market the development with seven street townhouses on Rowatson Road and eight condominium townhouses with an access lane off Guildwood Parkway, as shown on the Figure to the right.

Also, the revised plans provide a 6 metre (20feet) setback from the Guildwood Parkway street line, to accommodate extensive landscaping and to ensure a "front yard" treatment along this important facade. The private open space between the two rows of townhouses is also proposed to be landscaped. These pleasant landscaping features would significantly enhance the development and provide a pleasant streescape on Guildwood Parkway.

Because of the tight configuration of the site and to ensure that the high quality landscaping features proposed to best achieve the objectives of the City and the applicant, planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed 15 townhouse development can be best accommodated as a condominium, rather than the proposed mix of condominium and freehold options. The condominium form of tenure would best ensure the continuous viability and maintenance of the landscaping and design features proposed for this development.

City staff and the applicant have reviewed a number of development options for this site, including options for underground parking and various other development configurations. The current proposal represents a feasible and economically viable development for the site. The proposed 15 townhouse units would have the potential to contribute a positive design image to the community. Staff will continue to work with the applicant and the community through the site plan process to ensure a high quality housing proposal will be provided on the site, in keeping with the "executive style" of development in the Guildwood Community.

The applicant proposes to provide an attached garage with each dwelling unit and also has provided a parking space in front of each garage. This parking arrangement is considered adequate for this development, as it provides for two parking spaces for each dwelling.

The application was circulated to technical agencies and departments for their comments. There were no comments or objections raised to the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments by the reporting agencies.

Planning staff have investigated the concerns raised at the Community Information Meeting regarding traffic problems at the plaza exit across from this site and also the water pressure concern in the vicinity of this application. According to our transportation staff, the proposed 15 townhouses can be expected to generate seven vehicle trips in the morning peak and eight in the evening peak, in total. According to Works Department traffic counts for 1991 and 1995, traffic volumes generated on Guildwood Parkway west of Livingston Road, have reduced over the four year period and the most recent volumes are considered to be very light for a 4-lane roadway. The projected traffic volumes to be generated by the proposed development would not have a significant impact on traffic in this area. Morning and evening peak hour trips generated from this development, would not impact on shopping trips to the plaza, which are generally spread throughout the day.

Works Department staff report that the pavement marking program is well under way, and this area should be completed in the near future.

With respect to the water pressure concerns, City staff have investigated the pressure on the water main in this area and report that the average static pressure was 62 to 64 psi, which is the normal water pressure in the system. It is very unlikely that there will be any noticeable difference to the residual water pressure in the area as a result of the addition of 15 new residential water services.

Petro Canada has undertaken to carry out the environmental decommissioning of the site, to meet the MOEE residential guidelines, only upon successful rezoning of the property. The work will be undertaken under the supervision of an environmental consultant. Upon completion of decommissioning, the applicant's environmental consultants will scrutinize the engineering reports and will issue a statement of clean up of the site.

The applicant has also submitted detailed environmental reports for the removal of the gasoline tanks that took place in 1993-1994.

Conclusions:

The proposed Official Plan Amendment and rezoning of this land for the development of 15 town houses, will provide for the redevelopment of a vacant gas station site near the business centre of the Guildwood Community. The proposed development will provide for intensification and will introduce new housing stock at an appropriate scale, consistent with the former City of Scarborough Council's direction to provide for the redevelopment of the site with townhouses. The proposal will also provide for the removal of the Highway Commercial zoning. I therefore recommend that Scarborough Community Council support the request to amend the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law for this development.

Contact Name:

Aristotle Christou, Senior Planner

(416) 396-5228, Fax No. (416) 396-4265, christou@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 7, 1998) from Mr. John V. Langley, FRAIC:

I bring to your attention the following:

At the Public Meeting held on April 21, 1998 the presentation showed 17 units. It is gratifying to see this has been reduced to 15. The Community suggested a continuation of the fourplexes is a solution which would marry in better with the single to one and half storey dwellings on Rowatson and would allow 12 units on site.

The major concern is still the traffic. In the 10 years that I have been resident here I am not aware of any in depth traffic count being made on Guildwood Parkway west of Livingston. Also, contrary to the report, there has been an increase in the morning and evening traffic during the last few years west of Livingston. The proposed development will have an impact on the traffic in this area and particularly in the evening when the occupants of units 8 to 15 will have to make a U-turn at the already hazardous turn to Rowatson. There is a lot of afternoon and evening traffic coming west to the shopping centre that turns at the Rowatson junction. The statistics provided by the Works Department seems low in that it seems to infer that of the 30 potential adults (and perhaps more with young adults) only 7 will be involved in the peak traffic period. This does not seem to be the pattern on Rowatson.

I was under the impression that a side yard for this type of development had to be 8 ft. to the property line rather than 6 as covered in the report. Does this allow sufficient space in the event of fire or does the fire truck back in off Guildwood Parkway?

The comment regarding 'proposed' landscaping between the two rows of housing should be changed, i.e., top of page 5, second line '...townhouses will be landscaped'. The recommendation regarding condominium form of tenure is extremely valid as it will be essential that this landscaping be maintained.

There is no mention in the report of the concern with school buses using Rowatson and the impact they may have on the proposed development.

Mr. John V. Langley appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and brought to the attention of the Members his comments contained in the foregoing communication.

Mr. Vahe Kouyoumdjian, representing the applicant, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendations.

21

Official Plan Amendment Application P97011

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97031

Ontario Hydro - Warden Avenue and Metropolitan Road

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 19, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted, subject to the following amendments to Recommendation No. (4) under "(B) Zoning By-law":

(1)delete Item (c) "Financial Institutions" and renumber the remaining recommendations accordingly; and

(2)add the following words to the end of (j): "the dispensing of fuel to be limited to propane", so that Recommendation No. (4) under (B) Zoning By-law shall now read as follows:

"(4)providing that prior to the removal of the Holding Provisions (H) from the zoning, only the following uses shall be permitted:

(a)Day Nurseries;

(b)Education and Training Facilities;

(c)Industrial Uses;

(d)Offices;

(e)Personal Service Shops;

(f)Places of Worship;

(g)Recreational Uses;

(h)Retail Stores (excluding take-out restaurants); and

(i)Vehicle Service Garage and/or Vehicle Service Station limited to facilities and services provided only to vehicles directly associated with the primary industrial function of the property; the dispensing of fuel to be limited to propane;"

(3)add a new Recommendation No. (6), as follows:

"(6)Education and Training Facilities shall not be permitted in this Mixed Employment Zone."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Ellesmere Employment District Secondary Plan and the Employment Districts Zoning By-law (Ellesmere) from Ontario Hydro Corridor and Public Utilities to General Employment and Mixed Employment Zone (ME) respectively, including provision for limited Vehicle Service and Repair Uses. The applications affect the vacant former Ontario Hydro corridor lands located on the east side of Warden Avenue, south of Metropolitan Road, as shown.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council amend the Ellesmere Employment District Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law, as amended, with respect to the lands located on the east side of Warden Avenue, south of Metropolitan Road, being former Ontario Hydro transmission corridor lands known municipally as Part of Lot 32, Concession 2, by:

(A)Official Plan

(1)deleting the Ontario Hydro Corridor designation and replacing it with a General Employment Uses designation; and,

(2)adding the following Numbered Policy:

"East of Warden Avenue, South of Metropolitan Road

Vehicle Service and Repair Uses are permitted, provided they are limited to facilities and services provided only to vehicles directly associated with the primary industrial function of the property."

(B)Zoning By-law:

(1)deleting the "Public Utilities" (PU) zoning and adding "Mixed Employment - Holding" (ME - H) zoning;

(2)deleting Exception No. 301;

(3)adding the following development standards:

(a)gross floor area of all buildings minus the gross floor area of all basements shall not exceed 0.40 times the area of the lot;

(b)maximum gross floor area of restaurants, including take-out restaurants, shall not exceed 510 square metres (5,500 square feet);

(c)retail stores, financial institutions, personal service shops and restaurants shall only be located within 140 metres (460 feet) of the Warden Avenue streetline;

(d)vehicle parking or storage for a Vehicle Service Garage shall be prohibited in all street yards;

(e)maximum combined gross floor area for a Vehicle Service Garage and Vehicle Service Station: 370 square metres (4,000 square feet);

(f)minimum street yard setback: 3 metres;

(g)minimum rear yard setback: 7.5metres;

(h)minimum side yard setback: 3 metres; and

(i)the provisions of the By-law shall apply collectively to the land, notwithstanding its future division into two or more parcels.

(4)providing that prior to the removal of the Holding Provisions (H) from the zoning, only the following uses shall be permitted:

(a)Day Nurseries;

(b)Education and Training Facilities;

(c)Financial Institutions;

(d)Industrial Uses;

(e)Offices;

(f)Personal Service Shops;

(g)Places of Worship;

(h)Recreational Uses;

(i)Retail Stores (excluding take-out restaurants); and

(j)Vehicle Service Garage and/or Vehicle Service Station limited to facilities and services provided only to vehicles directly associated with the primary industrial function of the property;

(5)providing that the Holding Provision (H) used in conjunction with the Mixed Employment (ME) zone shall be removed in whole or in part by amending By-law when Council is satisfied as to the acceptability of mutual access arrangements between the various uses on the property and/or the abutting property at 1575Warden Avenue, as well as the acceptability of the proposed Site Plan, to adequately accommodate vehicle access from and egress to Warden Avenue;

(C)designate the property as a Site Plan Control Area; and

(D)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

The subject applications have been submitted for Ontario Hydro by Goodman and Carr, Solicitors, on behalf of North American Realty Acquisition Corp. (CentreCorp), which is purchasing this portion of the corridor subject to obtaining necessary planning approvals for development of the lands. The corridor from Lawrence Avenue to McNicoll Avenue was declared surplus to Ontario Hydro's needs in March, 1996 and has not carried electricity in over a decade.

The subject lands comprise approximately 2.6 hectares (6.4 acres) with a frontage of 90.8 metres (298feet) on Warden Avenue, an average width of 61 metres (200 feet) and depth of 430 metres (1,410 feet). Adjacent uses include a mix of industrial, vehicle sales, service station and industrial commercial uses, with the CP rail line at the eastern extremity of the property. To the west across Warden Avenue are single family dwellings having reversed frontages on Warden, and a further portion of the same surplus Ontario Hydro corridor being sold separately.

The applications propose 510 mē (5,500 square feet) of commercial uses, currently in the form of two free-standing restaurants, on the front portion of the property and 7 432 mē (80,000 square feet) of industrial use on the rear. The proposed industrial use consists of a catering (food preparation) business (Meal Makers Ltd.) with associated kitchen facilities, offices and storage to service independently owned and operated mobile vending ("coffee") trucks, as well as banquet halls, clubs and similar customers. Meal Makers currently operates from a number of facilities across the City and is seeking to consolidate its operation in one location. The proposal includes 80 indoor overnight parking spaces for the vending trucks, together with 339 mē (3,648 square feet) of vehicle refuelling, washing and minor maintenance space for those vehicles. The indoor parking is also required to enable weather protected loading of the vending trucks, primarily during the early morning hours.

An application for Consent to sever the property (B97055) into three parcels for the two restaurants and the industrial use has also been submitted as indicated on Figure 2. In order to meet the Zoning By-law requirement for frontage on a public street for the rear industrial parcel, the plan identifies an extension of the parcel (Part C) between the two parcels to be retained. All parcels would enjoy mutual easements as indicated by the proposed driveway access.

The Council of the former City of Scarborough on September 16, 1997 considered a Preliminary Evaluation Report on the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications and directed the normal processing of the applications with the Public Meeting targeted for the first quarter of 1998. The Council also directed initiation of an Official Plan Amendment to amend Schedule "C", the Roads Plan of the former City of Scarborough, to add a new road linking the eastern terminus of Metropolitan Road southerly to Warden Avenue through Continental Place, in part across the rear of the subject lands. Statutory Notice has been issued in that regard for a Public Meeting to consider the amendment (W98009), scheduled on this agenda.

The proposed development concept is indicated on Figure 3. Revisions to the concept originally submitted include deleting one of two northerly restaurant pads, reducing the size of the restaurant on the southerly parcel to be created, and enlarging the proposed industrial building. The property is not currently designated as a Site Plan Control Area, and a Site Plan Control Application has not been submitted to date.

The adjacent Shell Canada property at 1575 Warden Avenue is currently the subject of a Site Plan Control application to permit site redevelopment with an enlarged kiosk including convenience retail sales. Staff review of that application is nearing completion for the purposes of final approval.

The subject lands were not included by the former City of Scarborough Council last year in Official Plan Amendment 1001 which added an Open Space designation to much of this surplus Ontario Hydro, and are not subject to ongoing proceedings in that regard before the Ontario Municipal Board.

The Official Plan currently designates the subject lands Ontario Hydro Corridor, providing for the primary transmission of the public utility, with limited secondary uses permitted which include parking lots, walkways, bikeways, gardening plots and recreational uses. Similarly, the lands are currently zoned Public Utilities (PU) permitting public utilities, pipelines and horticulture.

The current Official Plan and Zoning By-law provisions for the General Employment designation and Mixed Employment Zone (ME) respectively are set out on the attached Appendix.

Comments:

(1)Industrial operators are generally permitted fuelling and maintenance facilities to service their own vehicle fleets. The current proposal is somewhat unique in that these facilities are industrial in nature but intended to service independent vending truck operators being supplied by Meal Makers. Accordingly the proposal falls within the realm of auto-related service use.

The Council of the former City of Scarborough in 1995 limited auto-related service uses to specific suitable locations within certain employment districts, particularly where properties are accessible only from interior local streets. Within the Ellesmere Employment District, vehicle service uses, limited to vehicle service garages only, are permitted adjacent to the subject lands on properties fronting on Metropolitan Road. As well, the Industrial Commercial (MC) and Industrial District Commercial (MDC) zoning for abutting properties fronting Warden Avenue currently provides for the full range of vehicle sales, repair and service uses including autobody repair and painting.

In this context, it would be appropriate to accommodate the proposed ancillary fuel, wash and repair facilities on a limited basis within the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for the industrial use. Council may wish, however, to ensure such facilities do not expand and become accessible to the general public over time should the industrial operation cease, particularly as the proposed industrial parcel would retain access from Warden Avenue. I believe the appropriate treatment in this case would be to establish a numbered policy permitting limited "vehicle service garage" and "vehicle service station" uses serving the primary industrial use, allowing for the sale and installation of vehicle parts and accessories, maintenance and repair of vehicles, sale of fuel, and manual vehicle washing as presently proposed by Meal Makers.

(2)The applications have been circulated to the usual commenting agencies. Most have indicated no concerns, however Transportation staff have serious concerns with respect to site accessibility, particularly given traffic associated with the proposed restaurant uses. The proposed site access from Warden Avenue has been located at the southern extremity of the property to maximize separation from the Metropolitan Road intersection. South-bound left turns onto the site do not present a problem given the existing centre left turn lane on Warden.

There are concerns regarding traffic exiting the site turning left (south-bound) onto Warden, however, due to traffic volumes throughout the day and particularly the queuing of traffic associated with the traffic signals at Metropolitan Road. Staff have considered the option of limiting such movements during peak periods through signage and By-law restriction. Given documented traffic volumes on Warden in both directions during peak periods and the differing peak periods of various types of restaurants, including take-out restaurants, which generate higher traffic volumes by floor area than other uses, however, staff remain concerned that the potential for error in the judgement by drivers still attempting the south-bound exit during such peak periods presents an unacceptable risk. While the applicant has reduced the amount of proposed restaurant space in response, staff feel the only acceptable measure to accommodate traffic exiting the property is to physically limit such movements to north-bound exits only.

(3)Notwithstanding this proposed limitation, the applicant remains concerned about the ability to attract restaurant tenants, particularly fast-food operators who generally demand unrestricted site access/egress for customers during peak hours. The applicant advises that negotiations with the land owner to north to secure access to Metropolitan Road over 1615Warden Avenue have not been successful. The purchaser of the Hydro lands (CentreCorp) has, however, submitted a Mutual Access Agreement with Shell Canada to provide for a shared access over both properties. This arrangement is acceptable to staff, however it would be appropriate to apply a Holding (H) provision to any rezoning of the Hydro lands for restaurant and take-out restaurant uses to ensure finalization of such arrangements through the site plan and consent processes.

(4)Exception 301 of the Zoning By-law permits a parking lot on the subject lands adjacent to the rear of 25 Metropolitan Road. The applicant advises there are currently no arrangements in place for this purpose, and a parking lot in this location would interfere with the current site plan concept. It would therefore be appropriate to remove this permission in rezoning this property.

(5)The proposed lot division would render the industrial parcel a key-hole lot, which generally is not desirable from a planning standpoint. In this case the nature of the industrial operation does not rely on public visibility from Warden Avenue, and the City's initiative to identify a new road linking Metropolitan Road to Continental Place over the rear of the subject lands will in time provide enhanced alternative frontage and accessibility for the industrial use.

(6)Should the subject applications be approved, it would be appropriate to designate the subject lands as a Site Plan Control area in accordance with Council site plan policies.

(7)The development standards proposed in the Recommendations generally reflect those standards applicable to the abutting Industrial District Commercial (MDC) and General Industrial (MG) zones respectively. In view of the concerns regarding traffic generation, however, it is also recommended that restaurant space be capped at the level now proposed by the applicant. All other general provisions of the By-law, including parking requirements, would continue to apply.

(8)The subject lands are prominently located on Warden Avenue, close to Highway 401, and have substantial development potential. They are constrained, however, by a long, narrow and angular configuration, with limited street frontage in close proximity to the signalized intersection at Metropolitan Road. The context of this site lends itself to development with a variety of uses, as opposed to a single use such as purely office, retail or industrial.

The Official Plan provides that in rezoning the property for General Employment Uses, Council may limit retail and service uses to the front portion of the property, and the size of any individual use. This approach is desirable and is reflected in the Recommendations. As well, the Plan encourages vehicle circulation between projects and the use of common access points, as is currently provided for in both the proposed site plan and the site plan for the adjacent Shell property.

(9)Providing for an expanded range of employment generating uses on the front portion of the property and primarily industrial use on the remainder will provide enhanced service to this employment district and the travelling public, and would assist a growing local business to remain in the area. As this proposal would contribute substantially to the economic development objectives of this City, I am pleased to recommend the applications for your approval.

Contact Name:

Rod Hines, Principal Planner

Phone: (416) 396-7020

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: hines@city.scarborough.on.ca

APPENDIX 1

Existing Official Plan Polices for the General Employment Designation:

(1)Council may permit the following uses in areas designated for General Employment:

-industrial uses

-recreational use

-offices

-Community Facilities

-retail and service uses

-training and educational facilities

Uses which possess excessive noxious characteristics shall not be permitted. Upon the satisfactory elimination or reduction of noxious aspects, such uses may be permitted by rezoning without amendment to the Official Plan.

(2)In considering rezoning proposals in General Employment areas, Council shall have regard for:

-the impact on existing and planned commercial centres;

-compatibility with existing and planned adjacent uses;

-the adequacy of existing and planned municipal services and roads;

-the intent to encourage development of non-retail and non-service employment-generating uses; and

-the need to provide the local population with retail sales and services over and above those provided by traditional shopping centres.

(3)When zoning for retail and service uses in accordance with the above considerations, Council may:

-limit retail and service permitted to a proportion of built floor space for offices and industrial uses with the amount to be calculated on the portion of the property between the major road and the local road or the equivalent depth;

-limit retail and service uses to the portion of the property immediately abutting the major road;

-ensure that, where feasible, the amount of retail and service uses are matched by offices or industrial uses with in the area where retail uses are permitted;

-ensure that adequate on-site parking facilities are provided; and

-limit the size of any individual retail and service uses.

(4)Council shall promote a quality business image through site plan control by using the following guidelines:

-integrate signs with the building design and use permitted ground signs to promote a unified project image;

-encourage the intensity of development along the streetline to both create an attractive streetscape as well as a buffer from the industrial activities in the interior of Employment Districts, while respecting existing building locations;

-promote provision for vehicle circulation between projects and encourage common use of access points while providing for pedestrian amenities; and

-segregate the parking areas from shipping and receiving areas and screen both functions from street view.

Existing Zoning By-law Provisions for the Mixed Employment Zone (ME):

(a)Permitted Uses

-Day Nurseries,

-Educational and Training Facility Uses,

-Financial Institutions,

-Industrial Uses,

-Offices,

-Personal Service Shops,

-Places of Worship,

-Recreational Uses,

-Restaurants; and

-Retail Stores

(b)Supplementary Regulations

(i) All Uses shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed building.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 6, 1998) received from Mr. R. Wayne Burns, Shell Canada Products Limited:

Shell has no objection to the attached application but would ask to be sent a copy of the adoption of the Official Plan Amendment if it is adopted July 22, 1998.

Mr. Patrick Devine, Solicitor for the applicant, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendations.

22

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98015

Mondeo Developments Incorporated

740 Ellesmere Road, Dorset Park Community

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 26, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted.

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July 22, 1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Dorset Park Community Zoning By-law for the residentially zoned property at 740 Ellesmere Road, east of Birchmount Road, as shown on Figure 1. The request is for adjustments to the Zoning By-law to allow for a greater range of house designs.

The changes requested are as follows:

(1)to permit semi-detached dwellings in addition to the street townhouses currently permitted on the southerly portion of the subject site;

(2) increased building heights to permit a broader range of roof designs; and

(3) modified setback regulations pertaining to the block serviced by the rear laneway. These involve (a) changes to rear yard setbacks; and (b), for units with a breezeway connection between the dwelling and garage, reduction of the setback from the main wall of the dwelling to the garage, and permission for a common semi-detached breezeway.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Council:

(A)Zoning By-law:

amend the Dorset Park Community Zoning By-law No. 9508, as amended, with respect to the lands located at 740 Ellesmere Road, being Part of Lot 30, Concession 2 as follows:

"Additional Permitted Uses:(Applies only to the southerly portion of the site, shown hatched)

-Two-Family Dwellings";

Development Standards:

(1)maximum Height 11 metres (36 feet);

(2)minimum Rear Yard Setback - 12.5 metres for rear lane lots with dwellings having a connecting breezeway between the dwelling and garage;

(3)minimum of 6.4 metres from the main wall of the dwelling to the garage, for rear lane lots with dwellings having a connecting breezeway between the dwelling and garage or having detached garages;

(4)the lot line abutting the narrower street shall be deemed to be the rear lot line, except for corner lots (applies only to the lots abutting the rear lane);

(5)common semi-detached breezeways may be centred on the side lot line; and

(B)authorize such unsubstantive, technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law as may be required to give effect to this resolution.

Background:

Preliminary Evaluation

Scarborough Community Council on May 27, 1998, considered a Preliminary Evaluation Report requesting modifications to the existing single-family and street townhouse zoning on the Phase II lands of the Mondeo development. The request to conduct a public hearing to consider changes to the housing form, house design and building heights was endorsed and staff were directed to convene a Public Meeting prior to Council's summer recess, subject to staff negotiating with the applicant to ensure the highest quality design for the single and two-family dwellings (semi-detached dwellings.)

Holding Provision

In order to allow the developer flexible and timely Zoning By-law approvals for marketing purposes, while ensuring the development occurs in a controlled and orderly fashion, Scarborough Council applied a Holding Provision. Removal of the Holding Provision can only be recommended once the required subdivision agreement has been executed.

Comments:

Proposal

Mondeo Developments Incorporated (Mondeo) are proposing to rezone the subject site, as shown on Figures 1 and 2, in order to allow for a greater range of house designs. The application applies to the low density residential development within the interior of the Phase II lands and excludes the live/work units located along Birchmount Road (see Figure 2).

Dwelling Type

Mondeo is requesting permission for "semi-detached" homes in addition to the "townhouse" dwellings currently permitted on a portion of the subject site (south side of Street "B"- Figure 2.) The proposal will somewhat reduce the building massing on this block. The introduction of semi-detached/two-family dwellings would be compatible with the residential fabric that is being created in the remaining blocks of this development. The lot size and configuration would remain the same within the plan of subdivision, which has now received draft plan approval (by the former Metro Toronto Planning Department). The existing development standards will also remain unchanged with respect to the siting of the dwellings (as discussed below, an increase in the height of these units is also requested.)

It is appropriate to allow semi-detached dwellings as a permitted use, thereby giving the applicant the flexibility to construct either semi-detached or street townhouse units.

Building Height

In the Preliminary Evaluation report we advised that a height limit of 10 metres (33 feet) was requested for the single family dwellings, as well as the proposed semi-detached units. The applicant has now requested a building height of 11 metres (36 feet). The basis of the request is to allow the units to have more articulated and dramatic roof lines thereby creating a distinctive visual treatment to the overall development. This compares to a height limit of 12.5 metres (41 feet) for the existing (and under construction) town house development on the east side of Mondeo Drive.

It would be appropriate to increase the building height to allow this development the flexibility to achieve the highest possible standard with respect to building design.

Setbacks- Rear Lane Block - Units with Breezeways

As a result of changes to the proposed housing design and siting of the dwelling units, it is necessary to adjust the existing rear yard setback requirement of 15 metres (49 feet), and the required space of 7.5 metres (25 feet) between the dwelling unit and garage. Staff are satisfied that the proposed 12.5 metre rear yard setback will provide sufficient space to accommodate the garage and breezeway, while maintaining a separation distance of 6.4 metres (21 feet) between the garage and the rear of the dwelling unit for the required rear yard amenity space.

The applicant now proposes that the breezeway connection between the dwelling unit and garage be enclosed and linked at the garage. To achieve this, the zoning by-law must permit a dividing wall situated on the side lot line. This is similar to an existing standard in the Zoning By-law that allows a garage to have a common semi-detached wall along the lot line.

Setbacks- Rear Lane Block - Other Unit Types

The 15 metre setback requirement described above was intended to regulate the units with separate garages but was inadvertently applied to all dwelling unit types on this block. The existing standard of 15 metres (49 feet) would effectively prohibit development of some of the lots and would severely limit the range of dwelling unit styles which could be built overall. It is appropriate that these other dwelling units be regulated in accordance with the City's normal rear yard setback standard of 7.5metres. It should be noted that the units that have an attached garage at the rear of the dwelling unit and access from the rear lane have amenity space provided in the form of a deck above the garage. Larger setbacks on these lots would simply mean longer driveways and would make it more difficult to provide amenity space.

Conclusions:

The proposed changes include the housing type, changes to the building standards, and an increase in the height of the residential units. These changes slightly reduce the overall density of development, and provide the opportunity to create a more attractive building form and design. The existing regulations make it difficult to implement the present scheme of development. The recommendations presented in this report will facilitate the development of the Mondeo Community, while continuing to provide appropriate development standards. Therefore, staff support the request to introduce semi-detached dwellings on this portion of the development, adjustments to the zoning standards and setbacks, and the requested height increase.

Contact Name:

Bill Kiru, MCIP, RPP

Planner, Community Planning Division

(416) 396-7014

(416) 396-4265 Fax Number

kiru@city.scarborough.on.ca

Mr. John Dawson, Solicitor for the applicant, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendation.

APPENDIX "A"

CURRENT PLANNING STATUS

Existing Official Plan Provisions (Figure 4.12):

The subject lands are designated Commercial Mixed Use providing for a variety of residential, office, commercial, hotel and community facility uses, which may be developed in separate buildings or in multi-use buildings or projects.

A Numbered Policy in the Dorset Park Community Secondary Plan allows High Density Residential uses to a maximum density of 160 units per hectare (64 units per acre) based on the total site area, to a maximum of 1950 residential units. Medium Density Residential and General Employment uses are also provided for in addition to the Commercial Mixed Use designation under this numbered policy.

Existing Zoning By-law Restrictions (Figure 4):

The subject lands are zoned Single Family Residential (S), Street Townhouse Residential (ST), and Residential/Employment (RE). All zone categories are subject to a Holding Provision (H). An Exception in the By-law limits the permitted uses on the subject site to warehousing (wholly within an enclosed building) and two model homes prior to the removal of the holding provision. A further Exception, for the Block proposed for semi-detached dwellings, prohibits single-family and two-family dwellings.

23

Official Plan Amendment Application SP98008

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98013

Kopas Management & Development Incorporated

565 Kennedy Road - Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 23, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted.

Recorded vote:

Yeas:Councillors Balkissoon, Berardinetti, Kelly, Mahood - 4

Nays:Councillors Altobello, Ashton - 2

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Kennedy Park Community Secondary Plan from a Highway Commercial designation to a Medium Density Residential designation and to rezone the existing Highway Commercial (HC) Zone to a Multiple-Family Residential (M) Zone.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Official Plan:

amend the Kennedy Park Community Secondary Plan with respect to the lands at 565 Kennedy Road, being Lot 7, Registered Plan 3705, by deleting the existing Highway Commercial designation and replacing it with a Medium Density Residential designation;

(B)Zoning By-law:

amend the Kennedy Park Community Zoning By-law, as amended, with respect to the lands at 565 Kennedy Road, being Lot 7, Registered Plan 3705, as follows:

(1)Permitted Use: Multiple-Family Residential;

(2)one suite (individual dwelling unit) per 212 mē (2282 square feet) of lot area, to a maximum of nine (9) units;

(3)minimum front yard setback of 3 metres (10 feet);

(4) minimum setback of 3.6 metres (12 feet) from side street for buildings erected on corner lots;

(5)minimum side yard setback of 6.4 metres (21 feet);

(6)minimum rear yard setback of 1.5 metres (5 feet); and

(7)maximum building coverage of 50 percent of the lot area;

(C)Site Plan:

support the concept to permit conversion of the existing commercial plaza into nine (9) apartment units with 12 on-site parking spaces and associated out door amenity areas at 565Kennedy Road, as indicated on the drawing entitled 'Proposed Site Plan' (Figure 3) dated April 20, 1998, and 'Elevation Plans - Building 'A' (Figure 4) and 'Elevation Plans - Building 'B' (Figure 5) dated April 21, 1998, subject to the following conditions:

(1)all refuse is to be contained within the building;

(2)site lighting is to be constructed such that the angle of illumination does not extend

onto the public street;

(3)all mechanical and equipment located on the roof must be screened or integrated into the profile of the building to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, and change to the roof line as denoted on the drawing shall constitute a change to the site plan, which must have the prior written approval of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings;

(4)all work required by this agreement is to be completed within 2 years from the date

the agreement is registered on title; and

(D)authorize any unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law Amendment as may be required to give effect to this resolution.

Background:

(1)The City was approached by the applicant with the thought of converting an existing commercial development which has been struggling to attract tenants in the past years into a low rise, medium density housing project to serve the needs of the local residents. The land is designated Highway Commercial in the Kennedy Park Community Secondary Plan which provides commercial facilities to serve the travelling public in locations oriented towards a highway or arterial road. The land is zoned Highway Commercial which permits day nurseries, places of worship, automobile service stations, funeral homes, hotels and motels libraries and art galleries, limited retail shopping, professional and business offices, and recreational uses. The land is under site plan control.

(2)The proposed Medium Density Residential designation in the Kennedy Park Community Secondary Plan provides for a maximum net residential density of 50 units per hectare (20units per acre). It is intended that the Medium Density Residential designation provides for intermediate density for low rise accommodation for individuals and families with no young children. The proposed development would result in a net site density of 47 units per hectare (19 units per acre). The Medium Density Residential designation would be appropriate for this site. The proposal would provide the same Official Plan designation as the site opposite at the southeast corner of Kennedy Road and Summer Drive.

(3)The site is located on the east side of Kennedy Road opposite Pine Hills Cemetery. There are single-family dwellings to the north and east, and a used car sales business is located at the southeast corner of Kennedy Road and Summer Drive.

The subject property has frontages of approximately 38.2 metres (125.4 feet) and 42 metres (138 feet) on Summer Drive and Kennedy Road respectively. The 0.19 hectare (0.47 acre) site currently supports two existing one-storey commercial buildings having a total gross floor area of 772 mē (7768 square feet) with 18 on-site parking spaces. The commercial plaza is tenanted with a hair salon and a legal office while the remaining seven units have been vacant for an extended period of time.

(4)Community Council on April 29, 1998 adopted the recommendations contained in my Preliminary Evaluation Report dated April 20, 1998 and directed staff to convene a public meeting to consider these applications before the summer recess.

(5)A community information meeting was held by the Ward Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti on May 25, 1998 at Corvette Public School and five residents attended in support of the proposed development.

Comments:

(1)The current By-law's standards are applicable only to the existing commercial development on the subject property. The proposed development standards would recognize the existing building setbacks and size of the existing two buildings for multiple-family residential use.

(2)A Site Plan Control application has been submitted indicating the location of the two existing buildings, parking and landscaping areas (shown on Figure 3). An existing 1.8 metre (6foot) wooden fence would be maintained along the north and east property lines to ensure visual screening for the adjacent residential properties.

(3)The applications were circulated to all technical agencies and departments for their comments. There were no comments or concerns raised to the proposed applications and the redevelopment of the subject property.

Conclusions:

The proposal would be an excellent alternative to the commercial and auto related uses currently permitted on this site. The site has demonstrated a chronic failure to lease for commercial related uses. The proposal provides a unique alternative housing form in the Kennedy Park Community which fits well within the surrounding single and multiple-family residential uses. It would also provide an opportunity to convert an existing under-utilized commercial site with an attractive medium density residential housing project with a good presentation to Kennedy Road, as well as contributing a positive design image to the community.

The department very much supports this type of recycling of development to facilitate new housing stock, thereby contributing to the continued viability of this area by replacing failed commercial uses in the neighbourhood and bringing new investments into the area. The new occupants will also make use of the existing infrastructure and facilities already available in this area. This proposal will be a bench mark for future redevelopment of other under-utilized or failed commercial sites in the City. This is a unique opportunity for the City, and I strongly recommend this form of redevelopment for your consideration.

Contact Name:

Euken Lui, Planner

Phone 396-7015

Fax: 396-4265

Email: lui@city.scarborough.on.ca

Mr. Scott Dawson, representing the applicant, appeared before the Community Council and expressed support for the staff recommendation.

24

Official Plan Amendment Application SP98003

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98005

Knob Hill Farms Limited, South-East Corner of Eglinton Avenue

and McCowan Road - Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated July 6, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted, subject to adding the folllowing new Recommendations:

"(F)authorize that the Site Plan Control application be revised to restrict access to the Home Depot site to right-out, left-in from Landmark Boulevard;

(G)direct the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, to report further to The Scarborough Community Council on the Urban Design Guidelines that would apply to the landscaping on this site and to consult with the Cliffcrest Community Association on such Guidelines;

(H)direct the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, to undertake traffic studies to investigate speed and volumes of traffic on McCowan Road, south of Eglinton Avenue to Kingston Road, and at the intersection of McCowan Road and Eglinton Avenue before and after the Home Depot store opens for business, and report any remedial measures to The Scarborough Community Council for recommendation to City Council, and further, ensure that the community is involved in this process."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Eglinton Community Secondary Plan, the Employment Districts Zoning By-law (Knob Hill Employment District) and the Eglinton Community Zoning By-law, for the vacant lands occupying the south-east corner ofEglinton Avenue and McCowan Road, as shown on the adjacent map. The Official Plan amendment proposes to maintain the existing Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) designation, but through the addition of a Numbered Policy would permit retail commercial uses as a primary use. The By-law amendment proposes to delete the property from the Knob Hill Employment District and incorporate the lands into the Eglinton Community Zoning By-law and zone the lands for "Community Commercial" uses to permit a home improvement centre (the Home Depot) with a garden centre and an ancillary restaurant. Although the Public Notice described the applicant's proposed rezoning as "Highway Commercial", I am of the opinion upon further consideration that the "Community Commercial (CC)" zone would more appropriately implement the Official Plan designation.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Official Plan:

amend the Eglinton Community Secondary Plan, with respect to the property located at the south-east corner of Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road, being Part of Blocks A and B, Registered Plan M-172 and Part of Lot 22, Concession C, by adding the following Numbered Policy:

"South-East Corner of Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road

Within the Commercial Mixed Use designation as it applies to this land, retail commercial uses are permitted as a primary use.";

(B)Zoning By-law:

(1)amend the Employment Districts Zoning By-law Number 24982 (Knob Hill Employment District), as amended, by deleting the subject land located at the south-

east corner of Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road, being Part of Blocks A and B, Registered Plan M-172 and Part of Lot 22, Concession C, and incorporating it into the Eglinton Community Zoning By-law No. 10048, as amended;

(2)rezone the land by replacing the existing zoning with the "Community Commercial (CC)" zone and limiting the permitted uses as follows:

(a)Permitted uses:

-retail stores, personal service shops, restaurants;

-banks, business and professional offices; and

-open storage and display of goods ancillary to a retail store;

(b)maximum gross floor area of all buildings shall not exceed 0.30 times the lot area;

(c)minimum street yard setback 3 metres (10 feet). Patios, roof overhangs, canopies and supporting columns can be built to the street line;

(d)minimum 5.0 parking spaces per 100 square metres (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area for personal service shops and retail stores, including ancillary restaurants; and

(e)Non-Accessory Signs, except Marketplace Signs, shall not be permitted;

(C)resolve that no further notice is required regarding the change in the zone category from "Highway Commercial" to "Community Commercial (CC)" Zone;

(D)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution; and

(E)prior to the enactment of the Zoning By-law amendment, authorize that a Site Plan Control approval be granted by the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough; the agreement to be registered on title following the Zoning By-law coming into effect.

Background:

Site Context and Planning Controls

The site forms part of lands along Eglinton Avenue, between Midland Avenue and Bellamy Road, which were the subject of an extensive land use and urban design review, "New Opportunities: AStudy of Eglinton Avenue", in the early 1980's. The study was prompted by a widely recognized need to rejuvenate Eglinton Avenue, one of the main arterial roads characterized by monotonous parking lots and garish looking, outdated strip commercial plazas. On the basis of the study's recommendations, Council adopted a number of Official Plan policies aimed at promoting a wide range of uses which would be conducive to greater pedestrian activity at the street, support public transit and encourage redevelopment of the lands within the study area.

Since the Study's adoption, a number of projects have been approved along Eglinton Avenue. These include: a townhouse complex on the north side of Eglinton Avenue, between Brimley and McCowan Roads, a residential/commercial redevelopment on the north side of Eglinton Avenue, east of Danforth Road, and two residential/office/commercial developments on the south side of Eglinton Avenue at McCowan Road, and Bellamy Road North respectively. To date none of these projects have been constructed.

Lands on the north side of Eglinton Avenue, across from the site, and the properties immediately to the east, accommodate commercial/industrial businesses. Two high rise apartment buildings occupy the west side of McCowan Road, and a nine storey apartment building with offices and commercial at the lower levels, is proposed at the south-west corner of Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road. To the south, the site is bounded by the CN railway.

The Official Plan designates the lands Commercial Mixed Use permitting High Density Residential uses, Office Uses, Hotels, Service Stations and Community Facilities. The Eglinton Community Secondary Plan incorporates a number of policies to guide development along Eglinton Avenue, to create a vibrant attractive streetscape promoting pedestrian-oriented activity and high usage of transit facilities. The applicable policies do not permit commercial uses as a primary use.

The site is zoned Industrial Zone (M), Industrial Commercial Zone (MC) and Industrial District Commercial Zone (MDC) permitting industrial, offices, educational and training facility uses, recreational uses, places of worship, day nurseries, vehicle service stations, mechanical or automatic car washes, restaurants, barber shops, financial institutions, building supply and lumber yards, electric light fixture sales, furniture and home appliance sales and services, floor covering and drapery sales, paint and wallpaper sales, and vehicle repair garages with vehicle sales operations.

A community information meeting was hosted by staff on March 11, 1998. The area of notification included over 2,000 assessed persons. Approximately 80 residents attended the meeting. Following presentations by staff and the project consultants, residents expressed their concerns and comments on the existing traffic problems in the area and the anticipated additional traffic that would be generated by the new store. In summary, the residents feel that the proposed signalized intersection at the site entrance and Torrance Road will further exacerbate traffic infiltration into the neighbourhood north of Eglinton Avenue.

On April 1, 1998, Scarborough Community Council endorsed a Preliminary Evaluation Report and directed the Planning and Buildings Department to target a Public Meeting on these applications for the third quarter of 1998, subject to the applicant submitting a Site Plan Control Application and an updated transportation study. Council also requested that the submitted site/elevation plans address the transportation concerns pertaining to vehicular site access and on-site circulation, as well as provide for windows and access into the building along the Eglinton Avenue frontage which could be achieved by incorporating such uses as a restaurant along the Eglinton Avenue frontage resulting in a pedestrian-oriented, animated streetscape. The purpose of updating the transportation report was to address the concerns expressed at the community meeting regarding the impact the development will have on traffic movements within the community.

Comments:

(1)Eglinton Avenue is one of the major east-west thoroughfares in the City, spanning the eastern boundary of Scarborough to the Toronto International Airport. Given its function as a major access and one of the "main streets" in Scarborough, its appearance is critical in shaping an image of the surrounding community. The predominantly commercial development along Eglinton Avenue dates back to the 1950's and the early 1960's and is ready for rejuvenation. In approving the "New Opportunities" Study and the resulting Official Plan policies, Scarborough Council recognized a need to improve the appearance of the properties fronting onto Eglinton Avenue. However, since approval of the "New Opportunities" Study, the concept of "big box" warehouses accessible to the general public, emerged in Canada in the early 1990's. The Study as such did not consider this new commercial approach which continues to be a trend in retail and creates substantial employment opportunities.

Notwithstanding some past interest, the site has remained vacant. The Commercial Mixed Use designation provides for, and supports activities promoting intensive use of the public space, design improvements to buildings and the overall streetscape, to attract local shoppers and passers-by. The proposed development has the potential of becoming a catalyst for other development initiatives along Eglinton Avenue, including the construction of the approved projects. Thus, there are a number of applicable policies under the CMU designation that the proposed use could fulfill with the implementation of an appropriate site plan.

In considering the zoning category which implements the Official Plan policies, staff have concluded that the "Community Commercial (CC)" zone more appropriately reflects the nature of the proposed development, as this zone provides for a broad range of retail and service uses. These uses enhance the pedestrian-oriented activity along the street which is consistent with the CMU designation.

(2)In support of the proposed amendments, the applicant has submitted a Site Plan Control application which is the result of extensive negotiations between city staff and the applicant. The new building is accommodated on the westerly portion of the site, with a garden centre and servicing facilities located behind. Parking for 546 cars occupies the balance of the site.

In an effort to address Council's direction, the applicant has revised the typical floor layout of the Home Depot store by placing the store's office, a small traditional retail area and a restaurant along the Eglinton Avenue frontage. This approach provides for the provision of large windows and doors permitting direct pedestrian access to the store from the street. Staff are continuing discussions with the applicant with respect to the site plan details to achieve a development which will contribute to the rejuvenation of the Eglinton Avenue streetscape and attract more development to the area, while creating no negative impact on the adjacent businesses or the residential community. Discussions are ongoing regarding the landscape treatment of the corner of Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road. This detail will be resolved prior to final site plan control approval. To ensure that the site plan is implemented as agreed upon with the applicant, staff propose that the owner sign a Site Plan Control agreement prior to Council passing the Zoning By-law bill. Upon the owner entering into the agreement with the City, Council would then enact the Zoning By-law. This process will ensure that the City has control of the registration of the agreement. The agreement would be registered on title only after the zoning by-law amendment is in effect.

(3)The applications were circulated to various agencies, none which expressed opposition to the proposed amendments. Statutory Public Notice has been provided to all assessed persons within 120 metres (400 feet) of the subject land, as well as all individuals who requested to be notified of further meetings to consider the applications.

Canadian National Railway (CN) has indicated that any changes to the existing drainage pattern must be agreed upon with CN. CN has requested the owner to install and maintain a 1.83 metre (6 feet) high fence along the common boundary. In view of the proximity to the railway, the CN recommends that the new building be set back 30 metres (98 feet) from the property line and that a 2.5 metre (8 feet) berm be provided along the boundary. In addition, CN suggests that the owner retain a noise consultant to undertake an analysis of noise and vibration and implement appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects that may be identified.

While the south-east corner of the outdoor garden centre is located 42 metres (138 feet) from the south property line, the building is set back at least 65 metres (231 feet) from the railway right-of-way. Given the commercial nature of the project, the proposed distance in conjunction with a 2 metre (6.6 feet) earth berm and planting should be sufficient to mitigate the impact of the adjacent railway. The proposed treatment is similar to measures used on other sites abutting the railway line. The site plan control application has recently been circulated and we are awaiting comments from the Canadian National Railway. A higher berm could be accommodated on the site if requested, even though the building is set back a greater distance than required by CN.

The Recreation, Parks and Culture Department has reviewed the Arborist Report and indicated that the existing trees are too small to meet the criteria under the Tree Protection and Conservation By-law. Notwithstanding, the proposed landscape plan incorporates a substantial number of the existing pine trees, especially along the McCowan Road frontage.

The Works and Environment Department has no concerns with respect to the proposed amendments. A stormwater management study will be required prior to final site plan control approval.

The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) has requested that the existing bus stop and shelter be relocated to the west of the proposed driveway on Eglinton Avenue.

(4)To successfully accommodate the proposed use on this site and integrate it within the surrounding community, a number of traffic control measures and road improvements will be implemented. The most important is the provision of lights at the main site entrance opposite Torrance Road. This intersection is an appropriate distance from the existing signalized intersection at Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road, and Eglinton Avenue and Bellamy Road. In conjunction with the new lights, minor widenings along Eglinton Avenue will be done to incorporate centre median islands on the east-west approaches to the site entrance. This change will necessitate the revision of the traffic pattern affecting the property at the north-east corner of Eglinton Avenue and Torrance Road by limiting the existing driveway off Eglinton Avenue to right turns only. The Home Depot Canada is finalizing an agreement with the affected owner. The proposed improvements are necessary to serve the project, but will also be beneficial to the existing and approved development in the area.

As a result of concerns expressed by staff and the residents, the vehicular access of Landmark Boulevard has been re-designed to allow passenger car traffic only. In the overall scheme, this entrance will serve as a secondary access to the site and used mostly by customers to the south. Also, moving the garden centre from the Eglinton Avenue frontage to the south of the building, eliminated the need for a second access of Landmark Boulevard to accommodate deliveries of landscape products to the garden area, that the applicant has previously proposed. All deliveries will be accommodated via the Eglinton Avenue access.

The traffic study and additional supporting material requested by the Metro Transportation staff is under review. Informal discussions with staff indicate that the Metro Transportation office finds the proposed traffic control measures to be satisfactory. It is anticipated that formal comments will be available by mid July, 1998. Upon receipt of these comments, a supplementary report may be issued if required. All transportation improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development will be made conditions of approval of the site plan control application.

Concern was expressed about the existing and future traffic infiltration into the neighbourhood north of Eglinton Avenue. In response to a resident's request in July 1996, the Works and Environment Department staff conducted an investigation of traffic infiltration on July 23, 1996. The study looked at all traffic using Torrance Road, Trudelle and Grace Streets to travel between Bellamy Road and Eglinton Avenue. During the a.m. peak hour 10 cars of a total 24 entering cars were "infiltrators". The popular infiltration route was southbound Bellamy to Grace to Cedar Brae and back to Bellamy Road North to get to Eglinton Avenue, with only one car using Torrance Road. During the p.m. peak hour six cars of a total 27 cars entering the neighbourhood were identified as "infiltrators". Two cars used Torrance Road and three used Bellamy Road to Grace Street to get to Bellamy

Road North. The 24 hour volume count on Grace Street shows that there is only 500 cars per day on the road. The study concluded that because of the low volume of by-pass traffic and the low total volume on Grace Street, additional traffic measures to restrict movement of traffic into the community was not warranted. The City transportation staff felt at that time that adding restrictions would have a greater impact on the travel patterns of residents than on the by-passers.

The current traffic study concludes that the addition of the Home Depot store will not negatively impact on this neighbourhood as only a relatively small portion of the market (about five percent) will use Bellamy Road North. Notwithstanding, the study suggests that with the installation of the traffic signals at Torrance Road, it would be easy to implement a north-south through traffic prohibition. Staff have reviewed this proposal and is of the opinion that it may be an unnecessary impediment to the local residents. As such, staff recommend that the situation be reviewed when the store is in operation and then, if required, implement this measure.

The applicant has also reviewed the proposed development with representatives of the ownership immediately to the east. The Home Depot Canada has agreed to share the Eglinton Avenue signalized entrance, provided the adjacent owner participates in sharing of the cost of the signal lights, if and when the property is redeveloped.

The applicant has proposed 546 parking spaces, providing for a parking ratio of 5.1 cars per 100 square metres of gross floor area. Based on the review of other similar projects incorporating "big box" retailing, staff support the parking standard of 5 spaces per 100square metres of gross floor area for all permitted uses.

(5)The development will also contribute to the local economy by generating growth in employment and assessment. The applicant has indicated that the proposed store would provide approximately 120 full time and 92 part time positions.

Conclusions:

The proposed development provides for a good use of the vacant site bounded by two arterial roads and a railway line. It will address the Official Plan policies aimed at revitalizing Eglinton Avenue and supporting pedestrian use of public streets.

Contact Name:

Anna Czajkowski, Senior Planner

Community Planning Division

Phone: (416) 396-7022

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: czajkows@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 22, 1998) from Ms. Susan Rosenthal, Barrister and Solicitor:

I act on behalf of Eglinton Bellamy Developments Inc., the owner of 2979 Eglinton Avenue East, which is immediately east of the subject development. My client is in the process of reviewing the revised proposal in detail, including a review of the traffic studies prepared with respect to same which we received yesterday. As well, my client has had discussions with your planning staff with respect to its concerns relating to the location of open storage and display of goods, screening of the development traffic and various transportation improvements required. My client continues to have concerns with respect to the development as proposed and wishes to continue its discussions with both the applicant and the planning staff to determine if said concerns can be addressed. In the interim, my client continues to reserve its right and opportunity to comment with respect to the application.

In addition to reserving our opportunity to further comment on the application, by this letter I would also request to be notified of the adoption of any official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment with respect to the above noted property.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 7, 1998) received from Mrs. Susanne Grant:

Both my husband (William Grant) and myself (Susanne Grant) are thoroughly pleased with the idea of a Home Depot going on the location.

Everybody that we have spoken to about it are also thrilled with the idea.

Also could you please let me know when the adoptions of the proposed Official Plan Amendment are approved.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communications (July 10, 1998) and (March 9, 1998) received from Mr. Brian Dick for Ms. Karen Fraser, Planner - Ontario, CN Engineering Services:

July 10, 1998

We have reviewed your letter dated 29 June 1998, regarding the above noted application and offer no objections providing our comments dated 9 March 1998 are addressed.

March 9, 1998

We have reviewed your letter dated 12 February 1998, regarding the above noted application and have the following comments:

1.The Owner must install and maintain at his own expense, a chain link fence of minimum 1.83 metre height along the mutual property line.

2.Any proposed alterations to the existing drainage pattern affecting Railway property must receive prior concurrence from the Railway and be substantiated by a drainage report to the satisfaction of the Railway.

In addition, rail noise, vibration and safety should be considered in the design of the development, to the satisfaction of the municipality. Appropriate mitigation measures should be included in the Zoning By-law Amendment. CN's current guidelines recommend that the acceptable protective measures for the land use proposed include the following:

1.A minimum 30 metre building setback from the railway right-of-way in conjunction with an earthen berm. The berm should be 2.5 metres above grade at the property line, having side slopes not steeper than 2.5 to 1, adjoining and parallel to the railway right-of-way with returns at the ends.

2.We recommend that the Owner engage a consultant to undertake an analysis of noise and vibration and to undertake appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from noise and/or vibration that were identified.

We would appreciate the opportunity to comment on any proposed modification prior to its adoption, and ultimately, we request notice of the Amendment being approved.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 6, 1998) from Mr. Doron Altman, Landmark Properties Inc.:

Landmark Properties Inc. acts on behalf of Crane Canada Inc. in all matters related to their distribution real estate in Canada.

Crane owns the property immediately adjoining the property which is subject to the above-mentioned applications, namely 2937 Eglinton Avenue East. While we welcome the proposed development by Home Depot, we are concerned that notwithstanding verbal assurances by Home Depot and their representatives that access to the Crane property will not be impaired or adversely affected by their plan, plans and documents were submitted to us on June 29, 1998, which regretfully are contrary to our understanding of Home Depot's plans.

The attached correspondence and plan describe the problem and our response, and are self explanatory.

Please take note that we object to any plan which will impair or adversely affect ingress and egress to and from the Crane property, which the property currently enjoys.

Please keep us informed of all matters related to the above-mentioned subject and address all relevant notices, etc. directly to the undersigned.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 7, 1998) from Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 999, under signature of Mr. Wayne Churchmuch, President:

We, the Board of Directors, M.T.C.C. #999, on behalf of greater than half of the majority of unit owners of 330 McCowan Road, list of names attached, object to the siting of the proposed building, and internal driveway configuration.

The proposed location on the site and the south driveway have a negative impact on the residents living on the west side of McCowan Road, Toronto/Scarborough, Ontario.

(A petition containing 334 signatures in opposition to the proposed access road entering/exiting off Landmark Boulevard, was attached to this communication, and the original thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 8, 1998) from Ms. Janet Cardno, area resident:

I am a resident and owner at 15 Torrance Road. My apartment faces Eglinton Avenue and the above noted lands. I am unable to attend the public meeting regarding the above noted lands but I am concerned about the changes that could result if a large commercial building is allowed to be built at the south-east corner of Eglinton Avenue and McCowan Road.

Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to point out some of my concerns and objections to this proposal:

-What consideration has been given to the additional traffic in the area? With the concrete islands that are currently in place and the railway bridge on McCowan Road, how are the Home Depots' customers going to access the store's parking lot? We do not need another set of lights in the area (Bellamy and McCowan are very close together at this point on Eglinton). This will only further frustrate drivers and slow down the flow of traffic (as it has done when the new light was installed between Warden and Pharmacy on Eglinton - an industrial/commercial area - traffic during rush hour in this area has been slowed down even further and has increased peoples' commuting time).

-Do we really need a Home Depot in this location? Scarborough currently has two (2) Home Depots, one of which is open 24 hours. There are currently three (3) Home Depots within a 10-15 minute drive from this location; two (2) of which I frequent on numerous occasions (I do not mind driving 10-15 minutes to get to a store that has what I want).

-Would this store be allowed to be open 24 hours? It is mainly a residential area and should stay that way. If I wanted to live across the street from a large retail/commercial store I would have purchased a home closer to one.

-Is this really a good location for such a store? Most of the immediate area is residential (except for the small commercial plazas along Eglinton Avenue). In the immediate area, located on three streets facing this lot, there are five residential apartment buildings, several of which are condominiums (taxpayers) and a new residential community has just been built south of the railway tracks adjacent to this lot. How many of these home owners (taxpayers) anticipated having such a large commercial building located so close to their home? I for one did not and I am sure there are many others in my neighbourhood who did not anticipate this!

-Eglinton Avenue is currently an extremely busy street and this area can be noisy at times with busses, trains, etc. What consideration has been given to the additional traffic, noise and fumes that will be caused by all of the Home Depot's customers, delivery/transport trucks, etc.? Do the residents really want the additional cars and large delivery/transport trucks with the extra noise, fumes, etc., in their neighbourhood? I certainly do not!

-If a Home Depot is allowed on this corner, I am sure there will also be a very large parking lot with lots of lighting and very few trees. An eyesore. there is already plenty of light from the street lights and the large billboards that have been allowed on the top of the buildings in the area. The amount of lighting in the area can be distracting at night (even from the eleventh floor).

-This land is currently undeveloped and is presently covered with grass, trees and bushes. It is one of the small, "green" spaces left in the area.

-There is a large "natural" pond on this property which I have seen children use for skating in the winter and I have seen ducks use during the spring and summer months. This does not happen in the ravine located down the street and it is certainly nice to see in the city.

-By allowing such a store in this location, I believe that it will:

-bring the value of my condominium/my home down;

-increase the amount of traffic in the area;

-increase the amount of noise and fumes in the area; and

-decrease my enjoyment of my home and my neighbourhood.

-By allowing a Home Depot in this location it will not enhance my neighbourhood nor will in enhance Scarborough in general. Scarborough's residents home shopping needs are currently serviced by other Home Depots (as mentioned above) and other stores which provide the same products.

-The only advantage Scarborough (or the "Mega City") will gain is the additional tax revenue which I do not believe out-weighs the disadvantages and inconveniences for the neighbourhood and current taxpayers.

When I purchased my condominium, I did not anticipate having such an eyesore located directly across the street from my home. Part of the "green space" that existed when I purchased my home has already been built on (a small residential community). I do not think that a Home Depot store is needed in this area nor do I believe that most of my neighbours want such a large commercial complex in our neighbourhood.

For the good of the existing neighbourhood, I strongly urge the Scarborough Community Council to reject this proposal.

As I am unable to attend the public meeting scheduled for July 22, 1998, kindly ensure that my concerns are forwarded to the Scarborough Community Council so that they can be taken into consideration before a decision is made.

I would also ask that a copy of the Committee's decision be mailed to my attention.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (June 30, 1998) from Mr. Rae MacDonald, area resident:

I am very unhappy to hear that Home Depot is planning to build another huge store across the street - I have lived on Torrance Avenue at least 16 years now and have always admired that vacant, little, wilderness area where the site is planned.

It is a perfect area for birds, ducks, frogs, all types of wild life, I am sure. Now what in hell do we need another ugly Home Depot type structure in there for.

Across the tracks was another beautiful wilderness area, but not any more; now we have ugly new housing, or whatever.

I used to go for walks through there, and it really felt like a small bit of country in the city. I guess big mega cities have to have big mega businesses to succeed today.

We do not need Home Depot in this spot. Leave it vacant, do not cut the grass, in other words; leave it alone. Scarborough does not have to look like other cities - be different - leave whatever wilderness areas we have, wilderness areas. These are my comments, perhaps not what many people like to hear, but this is the way I feel about it.

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

-Ms. Roslyn Houser, Solicitor for the applicant, expressing support for the staff recommendations; and

-Mr. Douglas Grigg, President, Cliffcrest Community Association, requesting deferral of this application because the community has not been fully advised of the potential impact of this proposal, particularly on traffic on McCowan Road. Mr. Grigg indicated that it is his understanding that the community is not against the development, but requests assurance from Community Council that Roads and Traffic staff will conduct a traffic study in the area.

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (July 28, 1998) from Mr. Steven A. Zakem, Aird & Berlis, Barristers and Solicitors, on behalf of Loblaw Properties Limited, requesting City Council to defer consideration of this matter to provide an opportunity to discuss the proposed change in designation for the subject site.)

25

Official Plan Amendment Application SP98006

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98014

Goodman Phillips & Vineberg on Behalf of Her Majesty The Queen

(First Gulf Group Developments Limited) Hwy 401 & Kennedy Road

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 25, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted.

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

Goodman Phillips and Vineberg, on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen has submitted applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for two parcels of Crown owned land. These parcels are surplus highway lands associated with the south east quadrant of the Kennedy Road/Macdonald Cartier Freeway Highway 401 interchange. The Official Plan amendment proposes to designate a portion of the lands (Parcel A) which are undesignated and shown as Highway 401 to Special District Commercial and rezone the lands from "Industrial" and "Industrial Commercial" to "Mixed Employment Uses". The applicant proposes to merge these parcels with the Kennedy Commons Limited lands and establish similar employment uses on these parcels.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Official Plan:

amend the Progress Employment District Secondary Plan with respect to the property being Part of Lot 22, Registrar's Compiled Plan 9945 located at the south east quadrant of the Highway 401/Kennedy Road interchange by establishing a Special District Commercial designation on lands currently undesignated and shown as the Macdonald Cartier Freeway Highway 401 and by adding existing Numbered Policy 10 of the Progress Employment District Secondary Plan to the designation as shown on Figure 1;

(B)Zoning By-law:

amend the Progress Employment District Zoning By-law with respect to the property being Part of Lot 22, Registrar's Compiled Plan 9945 located at the south east quadrant of the 401/Kennedy Road interchange as follows:

(1)delete the "Industrial" M zoning and the "Industrial Commercial" MC zoning as shown on Figure 2 and replace it with a "Mixed Employment" zone so the zoning of these two parcels merges with the existing "Mixed Employment" zone on the Kennedy Commons project and add the following development standards which are consistent with the Kennedy Commons project:

(a)maximum gross floor area for all uses: 46,450 square metres (500,000squarefeet);

(b)minimum 15 metre (50 foot) building setback from CN Rail property line;

minimum 3 metre (10 foot) building setback from all other property lines;

(c)minimum 5 parking spaces per 100 square metres (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area for all financial institutions, personal service shops and retail stores. Beyond 23,255 square metres (250,000 square feet) of combined built gross floor area of financial institution, personal service shop, retail store, restaurant and entertainment uses, the required parking for these uses shall be calculated on the basis of a minimum 4.8 spaces per 100 square metres (1076 square feet) of total gross floor area;

(d)all uses shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed building except that open storage and display of goods is permitted within 6 metres (20 feet) of the main wall of a building, or in conjunction with a lumber supply store or garden nursery;

(e)Third Party signs shall not be permitted;

(f)the provisions of Section 18, Ancillary Retailing in "E", "M", "ME", "MG", and "MS" Zones, clause IV, General Provisions, shall not apply;

(g)the provisions of this By-law shall apply collectively to these lands notwithstanding their division into two or more parcels;

(2)establish an exception consistent with the Kennedy Commons project to permit the following additional permitted uses:

(a)Places of Entertainment;

(b)Lumber Yard and Building Supply Warehouses;

(c)Open Storage and Display of Goods in conjunction with a Lumber Yard; and

(d)Building Supply Warehouse or a retail store;

(C)enact a by-law to establish Site Plan Control on that portion of the lands not currently covered by Site Plan Control and that the said By-law be presented concurrently with the By-law to establish zoning on the subject lands; and

(D)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic, or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

The two parcels as shown on Figure 2 are owned by the Crown as represented by the Ontario Realty Corporation and are in the process of being sold to First Gulf Development Corporation for incorporation into the Kennedy Commons Ltd. project. Parcel A referred to as the "Ramp Parcel" is 1.2 hectares (3.03 acres) and lies adjacent to the eastbound Highway 401 on-ramp. The new public road through Kennedy Commons crosses this parcel. Proposed development for this parcel includes parking and two buildings (Buildings K and L as shown on the attached Figure 3). These buildings are approximately 2,080 square metres (22,380 square feet) and 375 square metres (4,000square feet) respectively.

Parcel B referred to as the "Antrim Parcel" is 0.2 hectares (.59 acres) and is located immediately opposite the Kennedy Road and Antrim Crescent intersection. A vehicular entrance from Kennedy Road and a portion of Building D shown on Figure 3 are to be developed on this parcel. BuildingD is approximately 2,320 square metres (25, 000 square feet).

The larger parcel or Parcel A as shown on Figure 2 is undesignated and is part of the Macdonald Cartier Freeway Highway 401. In order for this parcel to be used for development consistent with the uses permitted on the Kennedy Commons project an Official Plan Amendment is required. The smaller parcel or Parcel B as shown on Figure 2 was previously designated Special District Commercial when the comprehensive Official Plan Amendment for Kennedy Commons was approved by Council in June of 1996.

The existing zoning on the two subject parcels is "Industrial" M zone on the larger Parcel A and "Industrial Commercial" MC on the smaller Parcel B. These zonings need to be amended to permit the range of uses currently permitted on the Kennedy Commons development site. Current zoning on Kennedy Commons is "Mixed Employment" ME zone and includes an exception to allow additional permitted uses.

It is expected that these parcels will develop in accordance with the proposed site plan (Figure 3) and as an extension of the overall Conceptual Site Plan approval by the former Scarborough Council on June 24, 1997.

Site Plan Control is not applicable to Parcel A and it would be necessary for Council with its approval of these applications to establish through by-law, Site Plan Control on the subject ParcelA.

A preliminary evaluation report was presented to Council in May of 1998 and direction was given to proceed to a Public Meeting on July 22, 1998.

Comments:

(1)These applications will allow surplus land with minimal free standing development potential to be added to the Kennedy Commons project and allow a comprehensive build out of lands at this strategic commercial location in the City.

(2)The proposed amendments are appropriate and the assimilation of these two parcels with the current land holding of Kennedy Commons would allow similar types of commercial activity to be developed on these two parcels.

(3)Approval of the amendments is a prerequisite to continuing on with comprehensive site plan approvals for buildings in or partially within the lands to be redesignated and rezoned.

(4)The applications were circulated for technical review and to date, no negative responses have been received.

Conclusions:

The subject applications are appropriate and allow the two parcels to be developed as commercially viable components of the Kennedy Commons project. The Kennedy Commons project which at this time has four major building components either open or under construction is on its way to becoming one of the City's premier commercial locations and a northerly anchor of the Kennedy Road Business Improvement Area. I highly recommend Council consider the approval of these applications.

Contact Name:

Wayne Quinn, MCIP RPP, Manager

Phone 396-7029

Fax: 396-4265

Email: wquinn@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 14, 1998) from Mr. Michael Rumble, Corridor Management Office of the Ministry of Transportation:

The Ministry of Transportation has reviewed the above mentioned application and we have no objection to the proposed rezoning, subject to the following comments.

Clarification should be made in the above noted application. While First Gulf Group has negotiated to purchase Parcel A, the Ontario Realty Corporation is still the title owner. First Gulf Group will not officially close on the property until such time that they have satisfied the terms of a Legal Agreement with the MTO to reconstruct the Highway 401 ramps at Kennedy Road. It should also be noted that all development of this parcel will require MTO review and approval. A final drainage plan must also be reviewed and approved prior to any development taking place. All structures must be setback a minimum of 13.7 m from the future Highway right of way.

If you have any questions or require further clarification, please contact me at the number listed above at your earliest convenience.

Ms. Roslyn Houser, Solicitor for the owner, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendations.

26

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97054

Proposed Plan of Subdivision T97016

Zaph Avenue Holdings Limited, Zaph Avenue South of Highway 401

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated July 3, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted, subject to adding a further condition (13) under "(C) Draft Plan of Subdivision:", as follows:

"(13)the owner will be responsible for informing the purchaser of these lands of all development charges related to the development."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July 3, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

Larry Dekkema on behalf of Zaph Avenue Holdings Incorporated, has submitted an application for an amendment to the Highland Creek Zoning By-law and an application for approval of a proposed plan of subdivision. The lands are zoned "Single Family Residential". The owner proposes to amend the Zoning By-law to permit the development of twenty-two single-detached dwellings on individual lots.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Council:

(A)amend the Highland Creek Community Zoning By-law, with respect to the lands owned by Zaph Avenue Holdings Incorporated, being Part of Lot 5, Concession 2 and Part of Lots 58 and 59, Registered Plan 2129, by deleting the existing zoning and applicable development standards and replacing them with the following:

(1)one single-family dwelling per lot as shown on the Registered Plan;

(2)minimum building setback 3 metres (10 feet) from the street line except that the garage main wall containing the vehicle access shall be set back a minimum of 6metres (20 feet);

(3)minimum side yard 0.9 metres (3 feet) from each side;

(4)an attached garage shall be erected with each dwelling unit;

(5)chimneys, pilasters, projecting columns, balconies, unenclosed porches and canopies shall not project into any required side yard;

(6)the provisions of Clause VI, Section 16.3 (maximum total floor area per dwelling unit restriction) shall not apply (Exception No. 35);

(B)authorize any unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution;

(C)Draft Plan of Subdivision:

recommend the Draft Plan of Subdivision T97016 by Larry Dekkema on behalf of Zaph Avenue Holdings Inc., as shown on Figure 2, subject to the following conditions:

(1)Plan as stamped "Recommended" this date (Figure 2);

(2)the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City regarding:

(2.1)the provisions of all services, easements, payment of Development Charges;

(2.2)contribution to the City for the cost of street tree planting at $300.00 per lot;

(2.3)the applicant will be required to pay to the City $40.00 per lot to cover geodetic and aerial surveys;

(2.4)the applicant will be required to pay to the City $300.00 per installed hydrant for maintenance purposes;

(2.5)dedication of all streets, 0.3 metre reserves to the City at no charge free and clear of all encumbrances;

(2.6)the owner will be required to pay 3 percent of the estimated cost of servicing to the City to cover engineering and inspection, as determined by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services; and

(2.7)the owner will be required to deed lots 12 and 21 to the City for a temporary road access. These lands will be returned to the applicant when the temporary road access is, in the opinion of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, no longer required;

(3)the applicant to submit a Stage 2 Stormwater Management Report with the submission of the engineering drawings, implementing stormwater management techniques to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(4)the applicant will be required to submit an adjacency report with the submission of the engineering drawings, for review and acceptance by the Works and Emergency Services Department, Planning and Buildings Department and the Ward Councillors;

(5)the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the Toronto Public Utilities Commission (Scarborough) regarding the supply of underground electrical, street lighting and water distribution systems for the proposed development;

(6)the owner to pay a 5 percent parkland contribution as cash-in-lieu of land;

(7)the owner to construct a sidewalk on one side of Goldene Way only and the temporary road access;

(8)the owner to make satisfactory arrangements with Bell Canada regarding services and required easements;

(9)development of this subdivision is dependent on the development to the south, (subdivision T93004) for servicing. The construction of this development cannot proceed until such time as the Subdivision Agreement for the development to the south has been signed and fully secured;

(10)the owner to submit an arborist report prepared by a Certified/Registered Consulting Arborist or Registered Professional Forester. The report to contain information regarding the overall health and condition of the privately owned and City trees and indicate appropriate measures of protecting and/or preserving these trees for approval by the Parks and Recreation Services Department;

(11)the subject lands are to be zoned in accordance with the proposed development standards prior to the registration of the plan; and

(12)prior to registration of the plan the owner to receive approval of the Environmental Impact Study from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.

Background:

(1)The plan of subdivision provides for the extension of Goldene Way and the creation of 22 lots having lot frontages ranging from 13.5 metres (44 feet) to 15.8 metres (52 feet) and lot areas of approximately 452 mē (4,865 square feet) to 529 mē (5,694 square feet) on Goldene Way, with two of the lots having frontage on Zaph Avenue.

(2)Council considered a Preliminary Evaluation Report for the proposed plan of subdivision on May 13, 1998 and directed staff to convene a public meeting targeted for late in the second quarter of 1998, subject to the applicant submitting an Environmental Impact Study to assess the potential impact the development may have on the stream corridor and Category 1 lands.

(3)The lands are located south of Highway 401 west of Zaph Avenue. Amendment No. 988 pending before the Ontario Municipal Board designates the lands Low Density Residential providing for single-family dwellings on lots having minimum lot areas of 450 mē (4,844 square feet). The current zoning for the property permits one single-family dwelling per parcel of land with a minimum of 15 metres (50 feet) frontage on a public street and a minimum lot area of 696 mē (7,500 square feet). The subject property has a total area of 1.4 hectares (3.5 acres) and originally formed the rear yards of the existing lots having frontage on Zaph Avenue. The surrounding land uses consist of single-family residential to the east and north, open space to the north west and an approved plan of subdivision to the south.

(4)A variety of large trees and shrubs exist on the property, unfortunately many are located within the future building envelopes and the proposed road allowance and cannot be saved. An arborist's report will be required to be undertaken by the owner in the hope of identifying and retaining as many of the mature healthy trees as possible. However, the introduction of municipal services in combination with the grading of the site will alter the existing environmental conditions on site. The result of which will be the deterioration of a number of trees in spite of preservation and protective measures. The arborist report is recommended for submission prior to the issuance of a building permit for the development. This will provide staff with the opportunity to assess the feasibility of preserving as much of the existing vegetation as possible.

Comments:

(1)The subject property is to be developed in accordance with the recommendations contained in the Highland Creek Secondary Plan Study adopted by Council on April 15, 1997. As part of that study Council also adopted the recommendations of the Centennial Creek Subwatershed Study to designate the Centennial Creek watercourse as Open Space. The objective was to ensure that development adjacent to the watercourse is sensitive to the natural environment. A number of the proposed lots are adjacent to the watercourse. The owner had an Environmental Impact Study prepared for this site to ensure that the proposed development is sensitive to the natural environment.

(2)An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) has been prepared for this property. The purpose of the study was to look at the natural features of the site and recommend measures to minimize any potential impact that may result from this development. Staff reviewed the study and with minor revisions are in support of the protective measures proposed. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has not yet provided their comments on the EIS. The applicant will therefore be required to obtain their approval prior to registration of the plan of subdivision.

(3)The draft plan of subdivision (Figure 2) proposes the further extension of Goldene Way, which is identified on the Highland Creek Community Tertiary Plan. The Tertiary Plan which was adopted by the former City of Scarborough Council, provides a basis for assessing a rational street pattern and efficient lotting of new lots being created from the rear yards of existing single-family lots. The proposed road allowance for this development will be dedicated to the City of Toronto and constructed to full municipal standards by the developer. Lots 12 and 21 (Figure 2) will be deferred from development to provide temporary access to Zaph Avenue.

(4)The zoning proposed for this development will reflect the same development standards as the approved development to the south. This will allow for complementary development in terms of dwelling siting, mass and height.

(5)The new lots will provide for additional housing stock to the City's inventory.

(6)The extension of Goldene Way will provide for the development of largely vacant land.

Conclusions:

Approval of this draft plan of subdivision and amending zoning by-law will allow for the further extension of Goldene Way, thus providing for the creation of single-family lots similar in size to those of the recently approved plan of subdivision on the abutting lands to the south and other existing lots in the vicinity, which have frontages of 12.2 metres (40 feet) and lot areas of

450 mē (4,843 square feet).

Contact Name:

Theo Lawrence, Planner

Phone: (416) 396-7038

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: lawren_t@city.scarborough.on.ca

Mr. Larry Dekkema, representing the owner, appeared before the Community Council and expressed support for the staff recommendation, and also indicated his agreement to the proposed amendment.

27

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97058

2351 Kennedy Road Incorporated

2351 Kennedy Road

Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 30, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted, subject to the following amendments to Recommendation (A) Zoning By-law, "Permitted Uses":

(1)delete (1)(b) "financial institutions" and renumber the remaining Permitted Uses accordingly;

(2)strike out in (1)(g), the words "educational facilities" and insert in lieu thereof: "tutorial facilities limited to a maximum of five (5) students"; and

(3)add the following new Recommendations Nos. (10) and (11) under (A) Zoning By-law:

"(10)the total gross floor area of medical and dental offices combined shall not exceed 186 square metres (2,000 square feet) and shall not occupy more than four (4) Residential/Employment Units;

(11)the total gross floor area of tutorial facilities shall not exceed 186 square metres (2,000 square feet) and shall not occupy more than four (4) Residential/Employment Units."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Tam O'Shanter Community Zoning By-law for the lands located on the east side of Kennedy Road, north of Sheppard Avenue East from Highway Commercial (HC) to Residential/Employment (RE) to permit a three storey building containing 78 residential dwelling units, 27 of which will contain a commercial component on the ground floor (live/work units). The commercial uses will be limited to offices, financial institutions, retail stores, personal service shops, service shops and agencies, studios, educational uses, and day nurseries.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A) Zoning By-law:

amend the Tam O'Shanter Community Zoning By-law Number 12360, as amended, with respect to 2351 Kennedy Road, being Part of Lot 28, Concession 3, by deleting the current Highway Commercial (HC) zoning and introducing a Residential/Employment (RE) Zone in the Tam O'Shanter Community as follows:

(1)Permitted Uses: Residential dwelling units and Residential/Employment Units:

Residential/Employment Units means a dwelling unit which may be combined with one or more of the following non-residential uses:

(a)offices;

(b)financial institutions;

(c)retail stores (excluding food preparation and excluding food consumption on site);

(d)personal service shops;

(e)service shops and agencies (excluding auto-related service shops);

(f)studios;

(g)educational facilities;

(h)day nurseries;

occupied and operated by one or more persons residing in the dwelling unit;

(2)maximum 78 residential dwelling units including a maximum of 27 ground floor related Residential/Employment Units;

(3)maximum of 93 mē (1,000 square feet) gross floor area of non-residential uses, shall be delineated and separated from the dwelling unit by solid partition walls and limited to the ground floor, may be combined within each Residential/Employment Unit;

(4)maximum total gross floor area of non-residential uses 930 mē (10,000 square feet);

(5)minimum 1 mē (11 square feet) of indoor recreational floor space per dwelling unit;

(6)minimum building setback 3 metres (10 feet) from the street line, excluding decorative entrance features which may project into the minimum required setback;

(7)maximum number of storeys, excluding parking levels, chimneys, skylights, vents, antennae, elevator machine rooms, rooftop mechanical equipment and penthouse, and parapet walls: 3 storeys;

(8)Clause VI-Provisions for all Zones, Sub-Clause 6, Coverage, shall not apply.

(9)minimum parking requirements:

(a)1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, of which 0.2 spaces per dwelling unit shall be reserved for visitors; and

(b)the greater of :

(i)2.4 parking spaces per Residential/Employment Unit, of which 1.4 spaces per Residential/Employment Unit shall be reserved for visitors, or

(ii)1 parking space per Residential/Employment Unit plus 4 spaces per 100 mē (1076 square feet) gross floor area of non-residential uses within each Residential/Employment Unit.

(B)enact a By-law under the provisions of Section 42(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, to require that parkland or cash in lieu be conveyed at the of rate of 1 hectare for every 300 dwelling units; and

(C)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law amendment as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

(1)Site Statistics

Site Area:0.53 hectares (1.3 acres)

Frontage : 56.4 metres (185 feet)

Number of dwelling units proposed:78 (including 27 live/work units)

Total gross floor area of commercial component:930 mē (10,000 square feet)

Total floor area of recreation room: 83 mē (887 square feet)

Total gross floor area of project:6315 mē (68, 000 square feet)

Proposed Residential density:150 units per hectare (60 units per acre)

Proposed intensity of development:1.2 times the site area

Proposed parking:126 spaces including 48 visitor spaces

Dwelling unit sizes: 48 mē (511 square feet) to 112 mē (1200 square feet)*

Commercial component sizes:26 mē (276 square feet) to 45 mē (482 square feet)

* Includes commercial component

(2)The subject lands contain a one-storey vacant restaurant building to be demolished. Vehicular access to Kennedy Road is provided from one mutual driveway shared with the adjacent commercial development to the south. There are several mature trees along the north and east property lines. Surrounding uses include a 20 storey residential apartment building to the north, a 5 storey office/commercial development to the south, Agincourt Mall on the west side of Kennedy Road, and multiple family residential uses to the east beyond the channelized west branch of the Highland Creek which backs onto the subject lands.

Kennedy Road Elevation

(3)The subject lands are designated Commercial Mixed Use providing for a variety of residential, office, commercial, hotel and community facility uses. These uses may be developed in separate buildings or in multi-use buildings or projects. The designation on the subject lands provides for a pre-subway density of 1.2 times the site area for all the uses combined. This includes High Density Residential providing for a density of up to 150 units per hectare (60 units per acre). The current Highway Commercial (HC) zoning permits only a restaurant (exclusive of drive-in and take-out service) with a maximum gross floor area of 930 mē (10,000 square feet). The lands are subject to Site Plan Control for which an application has been submitted in support of the Zoning By-law amendment.

(4)A Preliminary Evaluation Report was before Scarborough Community Council on January21, 1998 at which time it endorsed the processing of the application in the normal manner, subject to the applicant submitting a Traffic Impact Study and Planning staff convening a Community Information Meeting.

Comments:

(1)The live/work concept has many variations across the City of Toronto and generally consists of a dwelling unit in which a small component of floor area is devoted to business use by the occupant(s) of the dwelling unit. There are no recently built examples of live/work developments in the former municipality of Scarborough however two planned developments will contain live/work units. The Mondeo development at Birchmount Road and Ellesmere Avenue will contain live/work units along Birchmount Road. The Port Union Village is another location where live/work dwelling units will be built in the Village Common area along Port Union Road south of Lawrence Avenue.

View of Inside Courtyard

(2)The application was circulated to various technical review agencies, none of which expressed objections to the proposal. The Toronto District School Board advises that the student yield from the proposed development and other developments in the area will create accommodation pressures at the junior elementary level, and have indicated that alternative accommodation arrangements will be required for these students. It is Planning staff's understanding that alternative accommodation arrangements may include busing students emanating from this development to a school which as capacity available such as Pauline Johnson Public School. The Toronto Catholic School Board advises that students could be accommodated in permanent facilities at St. Bartholomew and Mary Ward Catholic Schools.

(3)A Community Information Meeting was held the evening of June 1, 1998 at Tam O'Shanter Public School. Notice for this meeting was provided to all properties within 120 metres (400feet) of the subject property and to the Central Agincourt Community Association. A letter was received by the City in response to the notice from Henry Tam of H. Tam and Associates at 2347 Kennedy Road, Suite 500, objecting to the proposal for reasons of crime, traffic, and lack of parking and poor management at 2347 Kennedy Road.

Six residents attended the meeting as well as local Councillors Doug Mahood and Sherene Shaw. A number of concerns were raised including traffic operations in the vicinity of the subject lands, parking, impact on existing trees along the north lot line, and loading facilities.

Traffic and Parking

(1)A Traffic Impact and Parking Study prepared by R.V. Anderson Associates Limited concludes that the proposal will actually reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the site when compared to the existing restaurant zoning. The estimated total trips generated during the weekday p.m. peak hour by the existing zoning is 163 trips compared to a total of 110 trips for the proposal. The proposed parking supply of 126 spaces was also reviewed and found to be sufficient to meet the parking demands of the project.

(2)Planning staff concur with the Traffic Impact and Parking Study. The proposal will maintain the mutual driveway to Kennedy Road currently shared with the office/commercial development to the south. Although it is difficult to make a left turn onto Kennedy Road from the site, the frequency of left turns will be reduced when compared with the current restaurant zoning. Concern was raised at the Community Meeting regarding the lack of gaps available at the Sheppard access for the commercial development to the south. The concern is that with continued shared access between the two properties, more vehicles will use the congested Sheppard access. The applicant's traffic consultant is currently reviewing this matter to determine if the on-site vehicle circulation pattern of the adjacent commercial property can be improved.

(3)The proposed mixed use nature of the proposal has a number of benefits which help to reduce traffic and parking demands. The 27 live/work dwelling units will provide an opportunity for a business and residence to be combined at the same location. This means the occupant of the dwelling will not have to drive to work. The owner of the live/work unit will have one reserved underground residential parking space as will every dwelling unit. This frees up one space for customer parking which would ordinarily be used by the business operator if he/she lived elsewhere.

There will be a common pool of 32 surface parking spaces available for customers of the live/work units. The 16 residential visitor spaces in the underground parking garage will also be available to customers. These spaces are not frequently used by visitors to the residential dwelling units during the business day making shared parking desirable in this instance.

The mixed use nature of the project will result in residents of the project, as well as residents and employees of adjacent properties, being customers to the live/work units, thereby further reducing traffic and parking demands. The subject lands are also well located on a major arterial road well served by TTC transit and a nearby GO Station is available for commuters.

(4)The recommended parking standard has been drafted to accommodate both the residential dwelling units and the live/work units, as follows:

(a)a total of 1.2 parking spaces will be required for each residential dwelling unit, of which 0.2 spaces per dwelling unit shall be reserved for visitors; and

(b)the greater of 2.4 parking spaces per live/work unit (of which 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit shall be reserved for visitors), or 1 space per live/work unit plus 4 spaces per 100mē (1076 square feet) of commercial gross floor area will be required.

The parking standard for the live/work units has been drafted to ensure sufficient parking is provided for the larger commercial component sizes. Based on the recommended parking standard, a total of 126 spaces are required.

Siting and Landscaping

(1)The proposal successfully implements the objectives of the Agincourt Centre Secondary Plan which promotes an overall compact built form that maximizes building at grade and provides a continuous built street edge. The proposed siting of the building close to the street line will encourage a pedestrian oriented streetscape along this portion of Kennedy Road. The decorative entrance feature will identify the walkway between Kennedy Road and the internal courtyard of the project as well as provide a visual interest in the building design. Deliveries to the commercial component will be undertaken in the courtyard which faces south toward the existing commercial development. Garbage will be stored indoors in two garbage storage rooms located in the underground garage and picked up from a loading space at the south east corner of the proposed building.

(2)Several trees along the north and east property line will have to be removed due to construction of the building because the low-rise nature of the proposal results in a larger property coverage. The existing trees along the north property line provide a privacy screen for the residential apartment to the north. Residents at the Community Meeting expressed concern that this privacy screen will be lost with the removal of the trees. The owner has retained a landscape architect who has prepared a landscape plan to address this concern. New trees will be planted along the north lot line and a solid wood fence will be constructed to provide a visual screen. The details of the landscape plan can be worked out with interested residents prior to final Site Plan Control approval.

(3)The rear portion of the subject lands falls within the Highland Creek West Branch preliminary flood line. The Agincourt Centre Secondary Plan stipulates that development may be permitted within the area of the preliminary flood line, subject to approval by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the City. The applicant has held discussions with City and Authority staff in order to design the building consistent with the requirements of the TRCA for developments partially within a flood plain. The proposal has the following features and in this regard is acceptable to TRCA and City staff:

(a)there is an opportunity to undertake restoration of the stream corridor because the existing retaining wall along the east lot line will be removed and rebuilt further back from the watercourse;

(b)flood storage can be maintained on the property and the proposed structure can be adequately flood proofed; and

(c)the flood depths and velocities on the property at the site of the proposed structure are small.

Prior to final Site Plan Control approval and issuance of a Building Permit, the owner will fulfil a number of conditions of the TRCA including submission of a detailed landscape plan indicating how the corridor is to be renaturalized with native woody plants, and providing assurances that the structure will be flood proofed to the level of the Regional Storm Flood Plain elevation.

Residential/Employment (RE) Zone

(1)A Residential/Employment (RE) Zone is proposed to be introduced into the Tam O'Shanter Community to accommodate the proposal. The zoning stipulates that the 'work' component of the live/work unit must be occupied and operated by one or more persons residing in the dwelling unit. Planning staff recognize that it may be difficult to enforce such a provision because it is possible that someone may only choose to reside in the live/work unit and lease out the 'work' component of the unit. There is a demand for live/work units. This project will be marketed to individuals looking for space to live and work in. The introduction of such projects will reduce the pressures on established residential communities where there is constantly a demand to convert residential dwellings into live/work units. It is anticipated that the owner will be applying for draft plan of condominium approval for this project. Each live/work unit will be sold as one entire unit which will have a connection between the live and work components.

(2)The largest commercial component of the live/work units is approximately 45 mē (482squarefeet). The owner has requested flexible zoning to enable larger commercial components of up to 93 mē (1,000 square feet) associated with one live/work unit. This will enable the owner to market the live/work units to business persons looking for more commercial space. For example someone may choose to purchase a live /work unit which has a commercial component of 90 mē (964 square feet) gross floor area on the ground floor and living space above half that commercial space. This means the second half of living space above the commercial space would be constructed as a separate dwelling unit unassociated with the live/work unit. If this flexibility is utilized, it may result in less live/work units but it may diminish the possibility of working space spilling over into the living space of the live/work units.

Planning staff recognize it may be difficult to delineate between the live and work space in each unit. The layout of the units will be designed to accommodate the work space on the ground floor. In most instances, this space will be accessible to the public and therefore our inspectors can determine if there is spillover after reviewing the floor plan layout. In those instances where the public do not have regular access to a live/work unit such as one used for a private art studio, the inspector will not be able to enter the private residence to determine if the work component spills over into the living space of the unit. However, in such cases there may not be an enforcement issue because if the public is not regularly using this business, there will be little traffic or parking demands generated by the unit.

(3)The Agincourt Centre Secondary Plan contains a Policy which requires the alternative parkland contribution of 1 hectare per 300 units which can be satisfied via cash-in-lieu of land. To utilize this Official Plan policy, I am recommending Council enact a By-law under the provisions of Section 42(3) of the Planning Act.

Conclusions:

The proposed 3 storey, 78 unit residential development containing 27 live/work units is a unique opportunity for a quality project that will merge with surrounding developments in a compatible manner. The proposal implements the vision established by the Agincourt Centre Secondary Plan to create a vibrant pedestrian environment and urban fabric for this area.

Contact Name:

Joe Nanos, Acting Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-7037

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: nanos@city.scarborough.on.ca

Mr. Henry Chiu, Architect for the project, appeared before the Community Council and expressed support for the staff recommendations, and also indicated his agreement to the proposed amendments.

28

Official Plan Amendment Application P97023

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97057

574780 Ontario Limited, 8119 Sheppard Avenue East

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated June 26, 1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that the report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, be adopted.

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (June 26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Rouge Employment District Secondary Plan and the Employment Districts Zoning By-law (Rouge Employment District) by redesignating the property at 8119 Sheppard Avenue East to Special District Commercial and rezoning the property to "Mixed Employment Zone (ME)", while maintaining the existing General Industrial Uses with High Performance Standards designation. In addition, the existing Open Space designation on the easterly portion of the property is proposed to be deleted. The proposed amendments would permit commercial uses, including restaurants, and offices in addition to the permitted industrial uses.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Official Plan:

amend the Rouge Employment District Secondary Plan with respect to the lands at 8119Sheppard Avenue East, being Part of Lot 4, Registrar's Compiled Plan 10303, by redesignating the land from General Industrial Uses with High Performance Standards and Open Space and replacing them with the Special District Commercial designation and adding the following Numbered Policy:

"South Side of Sheppard Avenue East, East of Morningside Avenue

In addition to the Special District Commercial designation, General Industrial Uses with High Performance Standards, are permitted. Non-Accessory Signs excluding Marketplace Signs are not permitted.";

(B)Zoning By-law Amendment:

(1)amend the Employment Districts Zoning By-law Number 24982

(Rouge Employment District), as amended, with respect to the lands at 8119 Sheppard Avenue East, being Part of Lot 4, Registrar's Compiled Plan 10303, by deleting the existing zoning and replacing it with the "Mixed Employment Zone (ME)" to include Day Nurseries, Educational and Training Facility Uses, Financial Institutions, Industrial Uses, Offices, Personal Service Shops, Places of Worship, Recreational Uses, Restaurants and Retail Stores;

(2)Development Standards:

(2.1)maximum gross floor area of all buildings shall not exceed 0.3 times the lot area;

(2.2)minimum 3 metres (10 feet) building setback from the streetline;

(2.3)non-accessory signs, except Marketplace Signs, shall not be permitted;

(2.4)the provisions of Section 15, Ancillary Retailing in "E", "M", "ME", "MG" and "MS" Zones, Clause V, General Provisions, shall not apply;

(2.5)parking to be provided in accordance with the General Parking Regulations for All Zones;

(2.6)the provisions of this By-law shall apply collectively to these lands notwithstanding their division into two or more parcels;

(C)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution; and

(D)the applicant enter into a financially secured Servicing Agreement with the City covering the required services to service the site, prior to Council's adoption of the Zoning By-law. The agreement is to include provision for the construction of municipal sidewalks along the south side of Sheppard Avenue; the enclosure of the watercourse and the provision of storm and sanitary services.

Background:

This rectangular site has a 100 metres (328 feet) frontage on Sheppard Avenue and a depth of 58 metres (191 feet). A watercourse traverses the easterly portion of the parcel. The watercourse is enclosed to the north and south of the subject site.

Offices, commercial and industrial developments abut the north side of Sheppard Avenue, across from the site. Lands immediately to the south with frontage on Morningside Avenue, zoned for industrial and office uses, accommodate a car repair business and storage of used automobile parts and other equipment. An Esso service station occupies the south-east corner of Sheppard and Morningside Avenues.

The Official Plan designates the lands General Industrial Uses with High Performance Standards, and Open Space to recognize the watercourse on the easterly portion of the property.

The site is zoned "Industrial Zone (M)" with a holding provision (H). These lands may be rezoned to delete the holding provision when Council is satisfied that municipal water, storm and sanitary sewers are adequate to serve the proposed development.

On February 18, 1998, Council endorsed a Preliminary Evaluation Report and directed the Planning and Buildings Department to target a Public Meeting on these applications for May 27, 1998, subject to the applicant submitting a Stormwater Management Study, a Traffic Impact Study, proposed building elevations and landscape plans. Council also requested the applicant to revise the site plan to achieve a greater building presence along Sheppard Avenue and minimize the number of access points onto Sheppard Avenue.

Comments:

Site Plan

In support of the proposed amendments, the applicant has submitted a Site Plan Control application. The proposal consists of two single storey buildings with parking for 107 cars. The owner indicated that the easterly building has been designed to accommodate a sit-down and drive-thru Wendy/Tim Hortons restaurant. The use of the westerly building has not yet been determined, although the owner has indicated that a financial institution expressed interest in locating a bank with a drive-thru facility. The revised site plan reflects the owner's desire to provide for a site organization which could accommodate these uses. Also, the westerly building has been re-configured in an effort to achieve a better building presence on the street.

The landscape plan and building elevations have been improved through the increase of tree planting along the site frontage and architectural detailing on the building walls. Staff are continuing discussions with the owner with respect to the site plan details to achieve a development which would contribute to the existing streetscape along Sheppard Avenue, while recognizing the functional needs of the proposed development.

In order to reduce visual cluttering in this prestigious employment area, I am recommending that non-accessory signs except Marketplace signs be prohibited. This will be achieved through an appropriate Zoning By-law provision.

Circulation Comments

The applications were circulated to various agencies, none of which expressed opposition to the proposed changes, provided certain transportation improvements and the provision of site servicing have been addressed.

The Works and Environment Department requires the owner to enter into a financially secured agreement with the City to enclose the existing watercourse and to provide storm and sanitary services for the new development, including the dedication of a public easement and paying a rebate for the provision of sewers through the Esso property. The owner is also required to construct a public sidewalk along the site frontage on Sheppard Avenue. These obligations will be secured through a financially secured agreement between the City and the owner prior to the passage of the Zoning By-law.

The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority requires the owner to obtain a permit to enclose the watercourse. Upon further consideration, the Authority no longer requires the applicant to provide a stormwater management report. The creek is enclosed beyond the site's boundaries, and the stormwater quality issues have already been addressed through the adjacent Morningard subdivision which has been designed to accept the stormwater runoff from this site. As municipal services are available to accommodate the site development, the holding provision (H) in the zoning by-law is no longer required.

Transportation

The Traffic Impact Study and the Addendum respectively submitted on April 23, 1998 and May19,1998, conclude that the proposed development could be accommodated on the site and that site traffic would have a negligible impact on the operation of the area road network. The study recommends that a centre left turn lane be provided to ensure safe turns into and out of the site. There is sufficient pavement width on Sheppard Avenue in the vicinity to accommodate a two way centre lane. The submitted material has been reviewed by the City transportation staff who agree in principle with the traffic consultant's assessment of the proposed development's traffic impact on the area road network. To ensure adequate and safe traffic circulation within the site, both access points should be provided. The westerly driveway has been relocated to align with the vehicular access to the development on the north side of Sheppard Avenue. If a bank drive-thru is to occupy the westerly building, the transaction window should be located at the south-west corner of the building to ensure the maximum number of storage spaces for the customer waiting line. All improvements can be accommodated as part of the Site Plan Control approval conditions.

Conclusions:

In 1996, Council redesignated industrial lands extending east of the site and further south along Milner Avenue to Special District Commercial to provide for commercial facilities offering a wide variety of goods and services. A Home Depot store which recently opened on the abutting property to the east, constitutes the first phase of the development proposals envisioned for this area. A new Business Depot store is proposed at the north-west corner of Milner Avenue and Grand Marshall Drive.

The expansion of the Special District Commercial designation will provide additional benefits for this area through increased assessment and will further capitalize on infrastructure investments in roads. Retaining the permissions for industrial uses will provide opportunities for industrial development, should such an opportunity arise, if the proposed commercial uses not materialize.

The site has excellent road access and has proximity to large populations thereby generating the demand for these types of service uses. The proposed amendments will expand the opportunity for the future development of this area by permitting more diversified employment activities. The proposed amendments are considered appropriate development for this area, and will provide a service to the surrounding industrial uses.

Contact Name:

Anna Czajkowski, Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-7022

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: czajkows@city.scarborough.on.ca

Mr. Irv Schmerler, representing the owner, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and expressed support for the staff recommendation.

29

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z97061

Juhan Holdings Incorporated

5739, 5741, 5743 and 5745 Finch Avenue East

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated April20,1998, from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommends that City Council:

(1)strike out the recommendation contained in the following report; and

(2)refuse the subject application.

Recorded vote:

Yeas:Councillors Altobello, Ashton, Balkissoon, Berardinetti, Cho, Duguid, Faubert, Kelly, Mahood, Tzekas - 10

Nays:Nil

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on July22,1998, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (April 20, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to amend the Malvern Community Zoning By-law for the south-west corner of Finch Avenue and Baldoon Road, as shown on Figure 1. Juhan Holdings Inc. is proposing to amend the Neighbourhood Commercial (NC) Zone by adding Day Nurseries, Personal Service Shops and Restaurants as permitted uses and by reducing the minimum parking requirement for all uses from 3 parking spaces per 100 mē (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area to 2.3 parking spaces per 100 mē (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area except for Day Nurseries and Restaurants which will be subject to the minimum parking requirements of the Zoning By-law.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A)Zoning By-law:

amend the Malvern Community Zoning By-law Number 14402, as amended, with respect to the lands located at 5739-5745 Finch Avenue, being Block B, Registered Plan M-1667, as follows:

(1) delete the contents of the existing Exception and replace it as follows:

(a)Only the following uses are permitted:

-Day Nurseries;

-Financial Institutions;

-Laundromats;

-Laundry and Dry Cleaning Pick-ups;

-Offices;

-Personal Service Shops;

-Restaurants;

-Sale of drugs, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and tobaccos;

-Sale of household hardware;

(2)add the following development standards:

(a)minimum of 2.3 parking spaces per 100 mē (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area for all uses except for Day Nurseries and Restaurants; and

(b)minimum driveway width shall be 5.8 metres (19 feet) for two way traffic; and

(B)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law amendment as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

The subject site has an area of approximately 2,150 mē (23,150 square feet) and is developed with a 709 mē (7,636 square feet) two-storey building constructed in 1977. Surrounding uses include single-family residential dwellings to the south, west and east of the subject property and to the north across Finch Avenue East are one and two-storey industrial buildings.

The Official Plan designates the site as Neighbourhood Commercial Uses which provides for a limited number and range of convenience goods to local populations of up to 10,000 people within an approximate 400 metre (1,312 foot) radius.

The property is zoned "Neighbourhood Commercial Uses" permitting a wide range of commercial uses. However, by way of Exception, the property is restricted to the following uses:

Domestic Retail

-Sale of drugs, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and tobaccos;

-Sale of foods and soft drinks for consumption off the premises (No food store to exceed 465 mē (5,005 square feet) external dimensions);

-Sale of household hardware;

Service Uses

-Bank or Trust Company;

-Barber Shop and Beauty Parlour;

-Business and Professional Offices;

-Laundromats;

-Laundry and Dry Cleaning Pick-ups; and

-Shoe Repair Shop.

A minimum of 3.22 parking spaces per 100 mē (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area is to be provided for all uses.

A Preliminary Evaluation Report was before Scarborough Community Council on February 18, 1998 at which time it endorsed the processing of the applications subject to Staff convening a Community Information Meeting, the owner submitting a traffic study and that the Public Meeting be targeted for the second quarter of 1998.

Community Information Meeting

A Community Information Meeting was held on March 10, 1998, attended by 4 members of the public and the Ward Councillors. In summary, the following comments were raised at this meeting:

(1)concern that the rear of the building was being used for illegal activities and that there was insufficient lighting to monitor these activities; and

(2)concern regarding potential odours that may emanate from the proposed restaurant.

Comments:

(1)The application was circulated to various agencies, none of whom have expressed concern. Statutory Public Notice has been provided to all assessed persons within 120 metres (400feet) of the subject property.

(2)The owner's original proposal was to construct a 158 mē (1,700 square feet) restaurant. However, as a result of concerns expressed by the residents and the owner's inability to provide the required amount of parking for the restaurant uses, the owner revised the application. The owner is now proposing to convert 135 mē (1,453 square feet) of vacant retail space into a sit down restaurant (Coffee Time) while the remaining 574 mē (6,179square feet) will be used for retail, personal service and office related uses.

Using the standard parking requirements for retail, personal service, office and restaurant uses, the owner would be required to provide a minimum of 14.5 parking spaces for the restaurant and a minimum of 17.2 parking spaces for the retail, personal service and office uses for a total of 32 parking spaces for all permitted uses. A total of 28 parking spaces are currently provided by the owner, resulting in a parking shortfall of 4 parking spaces. Approximately 282 mē (3,040 square feet) of the retail/office space is currently vacant.

(3)The intent of the Zoning By-law in requiring minimum parking requirements is to ensure that there is an adequate supply of parking on site to meet the needs of the tenants and their visitors and to avoid overflow parking onto neighbouring properties and streets.

Staff propose to reduce the parking requirement for all uses except for Day Nurseries and Restaurants which will be required to provide parking in accordance with the minimum requirements of the Zoning By-law. The proposed minimum parking requirement for all other uses would be 2.3 parking spaces per 100 mē (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area. Transportation Staff indicate that even if the vacant space was occupied the proposed parking supply would adequately meet the needs of the tenants and visitors during peak periods of demand. The combined parking rate will be sufficient as the combined parking supply will be shared between users. Of note, patrons of Donut Shops do not typically remain parked at a site for sustained periods of time but rather purchase their products and leave.

(4)Concern was expressed with potential odours emanating from the restaurant. The owner has indicated that Coffee Time does not propose to prepare food products on site, but rather that all food products would be delivered to this property. Of note, an existing tenant currently operates a small take out restaurant where food is currently prepared with no known adverse impact on the community.

(5)At the community information meeting concern was raised that the rear of the building was being used for illegal activities. In an attempt to minimize such activity and control access to this area, the owner proposes to erect a chain link fence with a secured gate at both ends of the rear yard and to improve on site lighting. The owner has also proposed additional landscaping around the perimeter of the site. These matters will be secured through the site plan control agreement.

(6)Staff also propose to recognize the existing driveway aisle width of 5.8 m (19 feet) for two way traffic, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 6 m (20 feet). The reduced driveway aisle has existed since 1977 when the building was constructed, with no known adverse impact.

Conclusions:

The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is appropriate as it would provide the owner with more flexibility in leasing the premises. Specifically, a small sit down restaurant in this location would serve both the existing residential community to the south and the industrial area to the north of the subject lands. I recommend that Scarborough Community Council support the request to amend the Zoning By-law.

Contact Name:

Victor Gottwald, Acting Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-5004

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: gottwald@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following supplementary report (June 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report presents a summary of the comments received at the second Community Information Meeting held on June 9, 1998, as directed by Scarborough Community Council on May 27, 1998.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that City Council approve the recommendations contained in my report dated April 20, 1998.

Background:

Community Information Meeting

A second Community Information Meeting was held on June 9, 1998, attended by approximately 35 people (see attached Figure 4 indicating the location of the residents in attendance at the Community Information Meeting). Notice for the Community Information Meeting (see attached) was circulated as directed by Council, to residents and tenants within 120 m (400 feet) of the subject property. In addition, Councillor Raymond Cho prepared his own notice and circulated it to a much broader area (see attached).

In summary, comments raised by the community have been grouped into three categories: Traffic, Land Use, and Safety/Crime.

Traffic

Concern was expressed that the overall level of traffic in the neighbourhood has been increasing and that travel is becoming increasingly cumbersome. Residents indicated that they have difficultly with turning movements at the Finch Avenue and Baldoon Road intersection, particularly with the left turning movement from Baldoon Road onto Finch Avenue. Some residents expressed concern

with the number of buses in the neighbourhood, and indicated a desire to eliminate bus service through the community. In addition, concern was expressed that buses often remained parked on Baldoon Road for extended periods of time causing congestion on the street.

A number of residents indicated that the proposed Finch Avenue driveway should not be supported as this entrance will only exacerbate the traffic problems in the neighbourhood. Concern was also expressed that there would be insufficient on site parking.

Land Use

A number of residents expressed concern with the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment specifically the proposed restaurant/donut shop. Concern primarily focused on the proposed hours of operation and whether there is a need for another donut shop in the immediate area. A number of residents, however, did express support for the proposal.

Safety/Crime

Concern was raised that the introduction of a 24 hour-a-day donut shop would attract undesirables and create a hangout for youth. The proposed donut shop would ultimately increase the amount of crime in the area and would not enhance community living.

Some concern was expressed that the rear of the building and the telephone booths located on the northeast corner of the site were being used for illegal activities and that there was insufficient on site lighting to monitor these activities.

Notice for Public Meeting

Of note, the majority of residents expressed a desire to attend the Public Meeting scheduled for June24, 1998 at 2:00 p.m.. However, many of the residents indicated that they would be unable to attend at 2:00 p.m. and would like the meeting to be re-scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on the same day.

Planning Staff have consulted Legal Staff to determine whether or not Council can re-schedule the public meeting to 7:30 p.m. It is the opinion of the Legal Department, that if Council were to schedule the meeting for 7:30 p.m. they would have to give new notice. Therefore, should Council wish to set a time of 7:30 p.m., the next available date to continue with this Public Meeting would be July 22, 1998.

Comments:

(1)In response to concerns raised at the community information meeting the Road and Traffic Services Division is currently reviewing the traffic situation in the neighbourhood and will work with the community to address the concerns raised at the meeting. A separate Community Information Meeting will be held by the Road and Traffic Services Division to address possible traffic solutions.

(2)Discussions with Transportation Staff indicate that the proposed full access driveway to Finch Avenue will not only improve on site circulation but would also reduce the number of vehicles using Baldoon Road. In fact, it is likely that the Finch Avenue access will serve the industrial traffic to the north and the travelling public and the Baldoon Road access will serve the local residents. Traffic generated from the proposed restaurant is likely not to negatively impact the residential neighbourhood to the south.

(3)Concern was raised that there would be insufficient parking to meet the needs of the restaurant patrons. Using the standard parking requirements for retail, personal service, office and restaurant uses, the owner would be required to provide a minimum of 14.5 parking spaces for the restaurant and a minimum of 17.2 parking spaces for the retail, personal service and office uses for a total of 32 parking spaces for all permitted uses. A total of 28 parking spaces are currently provided by the owner, resulting in a parking shortfall of 4 parking spaces. Approximately 282 mē (3,040 square feet) of the retail/office space is currently vacant.

The intent of the Zoning By-law in requiring minimum parking requirements is to ensure that there is an adequate supply of parking on site to meet the needs of the tenants and their visitors and to avoid overflow parking onto neighbouring properties and streets.

Staff propose to reduce the parking requirement for all uses except for Day Nurseries and Restaurants which will be required to provide parking in accordance with the minimum requirements of the Zoning By-law. The proposed minimum parking requirement for all other uses would be 2.3 parking spaces per 100 mē (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area. Transportation Staff indicate that even if the vacant space was occupied the proposed parking supply would adequately meet the needs of the tenants and visitors during peak periods of demand. The combined parking rate will be sufficient as the combined parking supply will be shared between users. Of note, patrons of donut shops do not typically remain parked at a site for sustained periods of time but rather purchase their products and leave.

(4)A number of the residents expressed concern that the proposed donut shop would operate 24 hours a day. As mentioned to the residents at the Community Information Meeting, the City cannot control hours of operation through the Zoning By-law. Rather hours of operation can only be controlled with agreements between the owner of the plaza and the proposed tenant. The owner did indicate at the Community Information Meeting, that the proposed tenant (Coffee Time) has agreed to restrict the hours of operation.

(5)At the Community Information Meeting concern was raised that the rear of the building and that the telephone booths located on the north east corner of the site were being used for illegal activities. In an attempt to minimize such activity and control access to this area, the owner proposes to erect a wood fence with a secured gate at both ends of the rear yard and to improve on site lighting. The owner has also proposed additional landscaping around the perimeter of the site. These matters will be secured through the site plan control agreement. In addition, the owner is proposing to remove the telephone booths and place them within the proposed restaurant. The owner has also agreed to hire a security company should the need arise.

Conclusion:

The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is appropriate as it would provide the owner with more flexibility in leasing the premises while maintaining compatibility with surrounding residential uses. A fully tenanted site will provide greater on site surveillance. A small sit down restaurant in this location would serve both the existing residential community to the south and the industrial area to the north of the subject lands. The proposed Finch Avenue entrance would improve access to this site and would relieve a portion of the traffic pressure on Baldoon Road.

Contact Name:

Victor Gottwald, Acting Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-5004

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: gottwald@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following supplementary report (June 18, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report was prepared in response to the request of Scarborough Community Council for the Director of Road and Traffic Services to report on traffic calming measures that could be implemented on Baldoon Road.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

No financial implications have been identified to date.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)physical traffic calming measures not be considered for Baldoon Road at this time; and

(2)staff be directed to conduct up-to-date traffic counts and speed surveys for Baldoon Road, and submit a report to Scarborough Community Council in the fall of 1998 indicating appropriate mitigating measures, as required.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of May 27, 1998, Scarborough Community Council considered the Zoning By-law Amendment Application captioned above, and deferred the Public Meeting under the Planning Act on this matter until the next Community Council meeting scheduled for June 24, 1998, at 2:00 p.m. Reasons for the deferral were:

(i)for the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, to hold a further community consultation meeting and report accordingly; and

(ii)for the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, to report on traffic calming measures that could be implemented on Baldoon Road.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

In discussions with staff of the Planning and Buildings Department, we understand that a community information meeting was held on June 9, 1998 at which time elements of the development application were reviewed and comments from the community residents were heard. Several of these comments related to area traffic concerns over transit buses, short-cutting traffic, parking and turning movements onto Finch Avenue.

Baldoon Road is a very important access route for the residential community in this area. It functions as the only connecting link to Finch Avenue between Tapscott Road and Neilson Road, south of Finch Avenue. It connects with Crow Trail, which itself collects traffic from intersecting local streets and provides access for the community directly out to Tapscott Road and Neilson Road. Due to its connecting function in the area street network, Baldoon Road is also a vital route for emergency services (i.e., fire, ambulance, police) and operational services (i.e., garbage collection, snow clearing, road maintenance), and together with Crow Trail, Baldoon Road also serves as a primary transit spine for bus service in the community. The Finch East No. 39, Neilson No. 133 and Tapscott No. 134 bus routes all provide transit service into the community such that the combined average scheduled frequency of service is one bus every 2.5 minutes during weekday rush hours, and one bus every 4 to 5 minutes during off-peak times and weekends.

Conclusions:

Due to the characteristic function of Baldoon Road as an important transportation link for theresidential community as described above, physical traffic calming measures/restrictions on Baldoon Road are not recommended at this time. Significant impacts on residential accessibility, emergency response, municipal operations, and transit services are likely to result. Traffic counts, speed surveys and supplementary field observations will be carried out in order to quantify the level of activity on Baldoon Road and determine whether changes to the current traffic and parking regulations are warranted. These results will then be conveyed to the Scarborough Community Councillors for information and/or concurrence with any suggested changes.

Contact Name:

Peter Noehammer, Senior Transportation Engineer

Road and Traffic Services, Works and Environment, Scarborough District

Telephone: 396-5670, Fax: 396-5681

e-mail: noehammer@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (June 10, 1998) from Brian and Deborah Mee, area residents:

We are adamantly opposed to any 24 hour type operation proposed for this vacant Finch Avenue location. We believe this would attract criminal gangs that currently operate in Metro Toronto as this location is remote and isolated and this location would be ideal for them. Secondly, I don't think this location warrants a 24 hour operation from a business point of view as there is not a high traffic location during the midnight hours.

The proposal for a new driveway has merit; however, I would make this for entering only or entering and only eastbound exiting, not westbound exiting. I live in the neighbourhood and use Baldoon to exit on to Finch west to go to work so I am quite familiar with the traffic patterns around this location.

Also, you may want to consider the bus traffic at this intersection especially when the buses park at the stop and stand there or visit the current hamburg store there. Perhaps a traffic light would be warranted at Baldoon and Finch.

In closing, we're not opposed to commercial development at this location. It's just the hours of operation that concern us.

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communication (July 10, 1998) from the workers at 5633 Finch Avenue East:

We, the workers at 5633 Finch Avenue East, are strongly concerned about the application Z97061-S97152 which will change the zoning by-law at 5739-45 Finch Avenue East. In this letter, we strongly express our feelings against this application.

We are afraid that this change will cause traffic chaos. Finch Avenue is a major road. A large number of vehicles pass by here every day, especially in rush hour. This small plaza just stands at the corner of the traffic lights of Finchdene and Baldoon Road. There are two bus stops, traffic lights and the entrance to Baldoon Road from Finch Avenue here. If another entrance is just a few metres away from Baldoon Road, this area must get big traffic jams in rush hours. Therefore, we do not agree with this application since we pass by here every day.

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

-Mr. Ed Fleury, Solicitor for the applicant, expressing support for the staff recommendations, and drawing to the attention of the Community Council that neighbourhood concerns respecting crime or theft have nothing to do with his client's application, and with respect to the parking issue, indicating that there are more than sufficient parking spaces for the uses proposed;

-Mr. Zahir Ismail, area resident, expressing opposition and concerns about possible increased traffic impacting the neighbourhood as a result of this application;

-Mr. Brian Mae, area resident, expressing opposition and concerns that the parking spaces proposed for this application may not be sufficient and will result in overflow parking into the neighbouring streets;

-Ms. Alison Dantos, area resident, expressing opposition and concerns that the proposal may exacerbate problems already existing in the plaza respecting drug dealing and theft and may encourage further loitering and generally inhibit public safety in the area;

-Ms. Janet Anderson, area resident, expressing opposition and concerns that the applicant may be able to obtain a Liquor License for these premises;

-Ms. Flavia Dantos, area resident, expressing opposition and advising that the other retail premises in this plaza have been robbed more than once;

-Ms. Pamela Foster, area resident and Member of Malvern Family Resource Centre, expressing opposition and concerns that this proposal could be a magnet for young people in the area because of the lack of recreational opportunities available to them;

-Mr. Jaswinder Shoker, area resident, expressing opposition and tabling a petition containing 85 signatures against this proposal;

-Ms. Lisa Fleming, area resident, expressing opposition and concerns about the negative impact this proposal would have on the community;

-Mr. Rajiv Parikh, area resident, expressing opposition and advising of his agreement with the foregoing concerns.

In addition to the petition referred to above which was tabled by Mr. Shoker, and the two letters of objection in the foregoing Clause, the Community Council also received 18 comment sheets from the Community Information meeting held on Tuesday, June 9, 1998, all generally in opposition to the proposal, and a 27 signature petition of support, all of which were provided to Members of The Scarborough Community Council, and the originals of which are on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

30

Request for Direction, Minor Variance Appeal

3173763 Canada Incorporated

East Side of Warden Avenue, North of Metropolitan Road

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1)strike out the recommendation contained in the following report; and

(2)take no action on this matter.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (July3, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

This report seeks direction from Council as to the City Solicitor's role at the pending Ontario Municipal Board hearing, which has been scheduled for August 10, 1998, on the current minor variance application appeal, as detailed below.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council direct the City Solicitor to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing in support of the Committee of Adjustment's decision with respect to Minor Variance Application SA50/98.

Comments:

Variance Application SA50/98

3173763 Canada Inc.

East side of Warden Avenue, North of Metropolitan Road

Part of Blocks G and H, Registered Plan 4597

Ellesmere Employment District - Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Toronto Chinese Methodist Church is proposing to purchase the subject property in order to construct a place of worship. The Church has applied to the Committee of Adjustment for the City of Toronto for a variance from the provisions of the Employment Districts Zoning By-law No. 24982 (Ellesmere), as amended, in regard to Part of Blocks G and H, Registered Plan 4597, for the property located on the east side of Warden Avenue, north of Metropolitan Road, to permit:

(1)a Place of Worship on a lot which does not abut directly upon Warden Avenue, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a Place of Worship on this site provided the lot abuts Warden Avenue; and

(2)the use of this property, which does not abut or front a street, whereas the Zoning By-law prohibits the erection of a building or use of a lot unless the lot to be so used or upon which the building is situated or proposed to be erected, abuts or fronts on a street.

An abutting property owner, Quality Inn - Toronto East, has appealed the May 20, 1998 decision of the Committee of Adjustment which authorized a variance to permit a Place of Worship on a lot which does not abut directly upon Warden Avenue, and the use of this property to permit the erection of a building or use of a lot which does not abut or front a street.

The concerns raised regarding this variance application appeal include traffic on a City street and land use compatibility issues. However, staff are of the opinion that the proposed use, as expressed in the staff report (attached), is appropriate for this site. Therefore, the City Solicitor should be directed to attend any OMB hearing in support of the Committee's decision regarding this variance.

Contact Name:

Bill Kiru, MCIP, RPP

Planner, Community Planning Division

(416) 396-7014

(416) 396-4265 Fax Number

kiru@city.scarborough.on.ca

31

Part Lot Control Exemption Application SPL98003

Blueblood Developments Incorporated, Bridlegrove Drive,

Castlethorpe Drive and Storebridge Drive

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July7, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

Blueblood Developments Inc. is constructing a residential subdivision consisting of single-family and street townhouse dwellings totalling 152 units situated on 17 Blocks on a Registered Plan. The applicant has applied to lift Part Lot Control on 7 of the Blocks to divide them into 60 separate lots. One dwelling unit is currently under construction on each of the proposed lots.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1)enact a Part Lot Control Exemption By-law with respect to Blocks 3, 4, 9, 12 to 15 on Registered Plan M-2317;

(2)repeal the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law one (1) year from the date of the passing of the By-law; and

(3)direct that all conveyances which occur after the exemption from Part Lot Control shall be in accordance with reference plan(s) to be approved by the Chief Planning Official prior to the plan(s) being deposited in the Land Registry Office; and

(4)authorize any unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the exemption by-law as may be required to give effect to this resolution.

Background:

(1)The single family residential lots will have minimum frontages of 9 metres (30 feet) and the street townhouse lots will have minimum frontages of 7 metres (23 feet), except for nine lots which will have slightly reduced frontages due to their location on the curvature of the road. The reduction of frontages for these parcels is necessary at the streetline. These pie-shaped parcels become wider towards the interior of the lots, consistent with the minimum frontage requirements. Lot frontage variances have been granted for three of the nine parcels and the remaining six parcels will be considered by the Committee of Adjustment on August12,1998.

(2)Maintenance and encroachment easements are proposed between street townhouse lots and between single family lots, to enable owners to gain access to the neighbouring lot for maintaining the exterior of their dwelling.

Comments:

(1)Section 50(7) of the Planning Act, 1990, authorizes the lifting of Part Lot Control on lots or blocks within a registered plan. This method of land division allows lot lines to be finalized during or after construction and is advantageous, especially for street townhouses, because it avoids the potential problem of party walls of dwelling units being built not coinciding exactly with lot lines.

(2)The preparation of reference plans for the proposed lot divisions, reviewed by the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings prior to registration on title, will ensure municipal monitoring and control and will ensure that the deposited plans reflect Council's approval. There are no Official Plan or zoning concerns raised by this application, except for the lot frontage reductions noted above which are expected to be resolved by minor variance.

Conclusions:

The lifting of Part Lot Control on the subject lands will facilitate the finalization of a successful residential development already endorsed by Council.

Contact Name:

Joe Nanos,

Acting Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-7037

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: nanos@city.scarborough.on.ca

32

Part Lot Control Exemption Application SPL98004

Carma Developers Limited, Bar Harbour Square

and Freeport Drive - Port Union Village

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July17,1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

Carma Developers Limited requests an extension to the existing Part Lot Control Exemption By-law for the lands located on the south side of Lawrence Avenue west of Port Union Road as shown on Figure 2. On September 2, 1997, the former Scarborough Council enacted By-law 25229 which exempted a number of semi-detached and street townhouse lots within this subdivision from Part Lot Control. A twelve month expiry provision was included in the By-law and the By-law is set to expire on September 2, 1998. The applicant now requests an extension to exempt 49 semi-detached lots within this subdivision from Part Lot Control for an additional twelve month period.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1)approve the application by Bayview Wellington Homes (Port Union) Incorporated on behalf of Carma Developers Limited for an extension to the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law with respect to the following lots on Registered Plan M-2292:

Semi-Detached Lots

Lots 134 - 141 inclusive;

Lots 143 - 159 inclusive;

Lots 161 - 168 inclusive;

Lots 432 and 433;

Lots 435 - 437 inclusive;

Lots 439 - 445 inclusive;

Lots 460, 461, 463 and 469;

and that a Part Lot Control Exemption by-law to implement this recommendation be enacted;

(2)direct that the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law shall expire one (1) year from the date of the passing of the by-law;

(3)direct that all conveyances which occur after the exemption from Part Lot Control shall be in accordance with the reference plan(s) approved by the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings prior to the plan(s) being deposited in the Land Registry Office, and generally in accordance with the lots as laid out on Registered Plan M-2292 as shown on Figure 2; and

(4)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the exemption by-law as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

These lands are designated Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential Uses. Low Density Residential permits detached, semi-detached, and street townhouse dwellings. Medium Density Residential permits a variety of housing types including townhouses low-rise apartments and other housing to a maximum height of four storeys and a maximum net density of 100 units per hectare (40 units per acre).

The subject lands are zoned for Street Townhouse (ST) permitting Single-Family, Two-Family, and Street Townhouse dwellings, as follows:

(a)maximum one dwelling unit per lot as shown on the Registered Plan; or

(b)maximum two dwelling units per parcel of land with each dwelling having a minimum frontage of 7.5 metres (25 feet) on a public street and a minimum lot area of 219 square metres (2,357 square feet).

Comments:

Passing of the previous two Part Lot Control exemption by-laws allowed the owner to proceed to divide the semi-detached lots by a series of reference plans which conform with the party walls of each pair of semi-detached dwellings, as constructed. These reference plans were reviewed by the City prior to registration. This process has been advantageous as it avoids potential difficulties when completed construction results in party walls which do not precisely coincide with pre-established lot lines.

Although the applicant has completed reference plans for many of the lots and maintenance easements, the build out of the subdivision is not yet complete. Therefore the applicant has requested an extension of the exemption by-law to cover the lots for which reference plans have not yet been prepared.

Conclusions:

The lifting of Part Lot Control on the subject lands will facilitate the implementation of a highly desirable development already endorsed by the former Scarborough Council.

Contact Name:

Victor Gottwald, Acting Senior Planner

Phone: (416) 396-5004, Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-Mail: gottwald@city.scarborough.on.ca

33

Preliminary Evaluation Report

P97024/Z97062 - Paul Viaros, 381-383 Birchmount Road

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that City Council:

(1)strike out the recommendation contained in the following report (May 14, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, wherein it is recommended that the subject application be refused; and

(2)direct that staff continue to process the applications in the normal manner and schedule a Public Meeting in the fall of 1998, subject to the applicant revising his Official Plan Amendment Application and Zoning By-law Amendment Application to request Industrial District Commercial designation and zoning.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (May 14, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

Mr. Paul Viaros has applied to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to provide for Auto-related Mixed Use to permit retail and service uses including vehicle sales, in addition to the existing employment uses on an industrial property at the south-east corner of Birchmount Road and Raleigh Avenue. The applicant requests permission to use approximately 35 square metres (376square feet) of the existing 375 square metre (4036square feet) industrial building at 381-383 Birchmount Road, for an automobile sales business.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council refuse the applications by Paul Viaros to amend the Official Plan (P97024) and the Employment District Zoning By-law (Z97062) to permit 35squaremetres (376square feet) of the existing industrial building to be used for an automobile sales business. The land is designated and zoned for General Industrial Uses providing for employment uses and the proposed site-specific amendments for Auto-related Mixed Use would be incompatible and not appropriate for this area. The intent of the Auto-related Mixed Use designation is to include a variety of commercial, highway commercial, office, residential and community facility uses. The mixing of incompatible uses such as industrial and vehicle sales and outdoor storage of vehicles are not permitted in this designation.

Background:

(1)The subject property is situated on the south-east corner of Birchmount Road and Raleigh Avenue, with frontage and access on Raleigh Avenue. The bulk of the building is used by the applicant's heating and airconditioning shop. The car sales office occupies the north part of the building. The site is surrounded by industrial uses on the west, a vehicle repair operation on the east, a service station and car lot on the north, and the CNR on the south. Raleigh Avenue contains a mixof industrial and residential uses, including automobile service and garage uses which have legal non-conforming status.

(2)The Official Plan provides for General Industrial Uses with High Performance Standards.

(3)The site is zoned General Industrial Uses permitting day nurseries, educational and training facility uses, industrial uses, places of worship, recreational uses and offices, excluding medical and dental offices.

The site is under site plan control.

(4)In 1995, the former City of Scarborough Council undertook Official Plan and Zoning changes to restrict vehicle service and repair uses in Employment Districts to the interior of specific Employment Districts away from arterial roads and residential areas. Council's initiative also separated the various elements previously incorporated in the definition of public garages, in order to provide for clarity in the zoning By-law, and as a result provided separate definitions for Vehicle Repair Garages, Vehicle Sales Operations, Vehicle Service Garages and Vehicle Service Stations. Vehicle Sales Operations are permitted only in the following zones: Industrial Commercial Zone (MC), Industrial District Commercial Zone (MDC), Highway Commercial Zone (HC), District Commercial Zone (DC) and Vehicle Service Zone (VS).

(5)The applicant has submitted a drawing indicating that four parking spaces can be provided in the front yard to accommodate the needs of the proposed use. An additional eight parking spaces can be accommodated at the rear of the property to satisfy the needs of the other tenants.

(6)In 1992, the applicant submitted a minor variance application (A261/92) to the Committee of Adjustment to permit an auto sales operation. The application was approved by the Committee for a period of three years. In 1995, when the variance lapsed, the applicant applied again to the Committee (A284/95) to extend the permission for an auto sales operation for an additional three years. Committee refused the application indicating that the variance would not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, which provide for Industrial Uses. The Committee indicated that this is a matter more appropriately dealt with by Council as Zoning By-law and Official Plan amendments.

The Committee's decision was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, and the Board dismissed the appeal. This prompted the applicant to submit the current applications.

(7)The applications have not been circulated to technical agencies and departments for their comments. Planning staff have discussed the staff position with the applicant and with the Councillors for Scarborough Bluffs.

Comments:

Planning staff have met with the applicant on several occasions to discuss this proposal. Staff have expressed concern with the applicant's proposal because it does not maintain Council's intent with respect to auto-related uses in our employment areas and along major roads. Also, if approved, the application would entail a spot Official Plan amendment for a small site and would not meet the broader objectives of the Official Plan to maintain integrity and continuity for the continuous viability of employment generating uses. There are other more appropriate areas in the municipality along arterial roads that can accommodate this use.

The applicant has been encouraged by Planning staff to withdraw his applications. The applicant has however requested that we report his applications to Council.

Conclusions:

The applicant's proposal to introduce retail and service uses and vehicle sales in addition to the existing employment uses, will conflict with Council's policy of removing auto-related uses from major street frontages in Employment Districts. The intent of the Auto-related Mixed Use designation is to include a variety of commercial, highway commercial, office, residential and community facility uses. The mixing of incompatible uses such as industrial and vehicle sales and outdoor storage of vehicles are not permitted in this designation.

A spot Official Plan amendment for this site cannot be supported because it would provide for an undesirable and incompatible use within a small portion of the building. The vehicle sales operation would also be incompatible with the industrial use carried by the applicant in the remaining part of the building, is not appropriate for this area, and would not be good planning. I therefore recommend that Council refuse these applications.

Contact Name:

Aristotle Christou, Senior Planner

(416) 396-5228

(416) 396-4265 Fax No.

christou@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of Council, the following supplementary report (July 5, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

At its meeting of June 24, 1998, Scarborough Community Council referred the May 14, 1998, report of the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, back to staff and requested that the Commissioner consult further with the applicant and report accordingly to the July 22, 1998, meeting of Community Council.

Recommendation:

For the information of the Scarborough Community Council.

Background:

Mr. Viaros has applied to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to provide for Auto-related Mixed Use to permit retail and service uses including vehicle sales, in addition to the existing employment uses on an industrial property at the south-east corner of Birchmount Road and Raleigh Avenue. The applicant requests permission to use approximately 35 mē (376 square feet) of the existing 375 mē (4036square foot) industrial building at 381-383 Birchmount Road, for an automobile sales business.

My May 14, 1998, report recommended that Council refuse the applications. The land is designated and zoned for General Industrial Uses providing for employment uses and the proposed site-specific amendments for Auto-related Mixed Use would be incompatible and not appropriate for this area. The intent of the Auto-related Mixed Use designation is to include a variety of commercial, highway commercial, office, residential and community facility uses. The mixing of incompatible uses such as industrial and vehicle sales and outdoor storage of vehicles are not permitted in this designation.

Comments

Planning staff have met with the applicant and discussed potential uses for the site. The applicant submitted a letter on June 24, 1998, requesting the following uses be considered by Scarborough Community Council, in addition to the existing industrial use: used car sales, wholesale and retail of electrical supplies, plumbing supplies, heating and air conditioning parts and supplies, car parts, maintenance and cleaning supplies, new and used restaurant equipment, print shop and retail of discounted warehouse merchandise such as shoes and clothing.

Staff have reviewed the applicant's proposed uses for the site. It would appear that an Industrial District Commercial land use designation and zoning, with an additional permission for retail sales and industrial uses, would accommodate the applicant's requirements. This would be similar to the land use and zoning currently applying on the property to the north, and would provide for consistency of land uses in this area.

Conclusion:

Scarborough Community Council has two options available in determining how to proceed further with these applications. You may refuse the applications without further consideration, based on my analysis and recommendations contained in my report of May 14, 1998.

Alternatively, Scarborough Community Council may direct staff to continue to process the applications in the normal manner and schedule a Public Meeting in the fall of 1998, subject to the applicant revising the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment applications to request Industrial District Commercial designation and zoning.

Contact Name:

Aristotle Christou, Senior Planner

(416) 396-5228

(416) 396-4265 Fax No.

christou@city.scarborough.on.ca

Councillor Gerry Altobello declared his interest in the foregoing matter in that his family owns a business on Raleigh Avenue.

34

Request for Fence By-law Exemption

Mary Graham and Steve Duriancik, 109 Phyllis Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April7,1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough:

Purpose:

The applicants are seeking approval to retain a section of fence approximately 3.81 metres (12.5 feet) long at a height of approximately 3.0 metres (10 feet) whereas By-law 24945 as amended permits a maximum height of 2 metres (6.8 feet).

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit a 3.81 metre (12.5 feet) section of fence to remain at a height of 3.0 metres (10 feet) whereas By-law 24945 as amended permits a maximum height of 2.0 metres (6.8 feet).

Background/History:

In 1992, the owner of 107 Phyllis Avenue installed a central air conditioning unit. The operation of this unit resulted in a number of noise complaints to the city by the applicants. In this regard, a request for legal action was made however the age of the evidence was such that charges could not be processed.

The property was inspected in July 1997 and the section of fence under consideration in this report was noted and a notice under the by-law was issued. There was no change in September and as a result, charges were initiated under the by-law.

The owners advise that the section of fence in question was erected in order to deflect the sound of the air conditioner away from their rear deck and we are advised that the barrier has worked as intended. The blocking of sunlight does not appear to be an issue as a site inspection confirmed that there are no windows on the abutting building facing the section of fence in question.

Comments:

The main issue in evaluating exemption proposals is that of safety particularly to pedestrians. Owing to the location of the fence to the rear of the house in the side yard, there are no safety issues involved.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, Supervisor

(416) 396-5341

(416) 396-4266 Fax Number

byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

Ms. Mary Graham, the applicant, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter and provided documentation and photographs in support of the Fence By-law exemption request, a copy of which was provided to all Members of the Community Council and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

35

Request for Fence By-law Exemption

Mark and Louis Tojici, 84 Wexford Boulevard

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June27,1998) from the Director of Municipal Standards:

Purpose:

The applicants are seeking approval to erect a 1.8 metre (6 foot) fence along a portion of the north, south and east property lines.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil

Recommendation:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit a 1.8 metre (6 foot) privacy fence provided a 2 metre (6.5 foot) sight triangle is provided at the northeast, southeast and southwest corners of the property.

Background/History:

On June 11, 1998, a written request for an exemption from the fence by-law was received from the owners of 84 Wexford Boulevard. The applicants are seeking permission to erect a fence along a portion of the north, south and east property lines and culminating at the house. As indicated in the request, the buildings on the property are sited in such a manner so as to limit the use of the rear yard for open space activities.

The property was inspected on June 11, 1998 and a number of photographs were taken. It was noted that the intersection at Wexford Boulevard and Sherwood Avenue is controlled by four-way stop signs. In addition, it was noted that there are no sidewalks on the west side of Wexford Boulevard, however, there are sidewalks along the north side of Sherwood Avenue abutting the subject property. It was also noted that the driveway of 86 Wexford Boulevard abuts the applicants' north property line. The main issue is that of adequate sight visibility for vehicular traffic and this issue can be addressed provided the proposed fence incorporates sight triangles in the fence at the north/east corner and south/east corner of the applicants' property. In this regard, it is suggested that 2 metre (6.5 foot) sight triangles would be sufficient.

A by-law enforcement inspector dealing with road allowance by-laws examined the property and advises that a fence in the location proposed incorporating sight triangles is not likely to pose a safety problem with vehicular or pedestrian traffic.

Justification:

Section 14 of By-law 24945, as amended, provides that any person may apply for an exemption to any provision of the by-law.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, Supervisor

(416) 396-5341

(416) 396-4266 Fax Number

byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

Committee Council received a letter indicating support for this Fence By-law Exemption request from the adjacent property owner, Mr. I. Maione, a copy of which was provided to all Members of Community Council and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

36

Request for Fence By-law Exemption

Kenneth Evans, 2 Senator Boulevard

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June27, 1998) from the Director of Municipal Standards, subject to adding the following to the recommendation:

"... and further, that staff be directed to inspect the rear yard fence on this property and the area adjacent to the neighbouring garage."

Purpose:

The applicant is seeking approval to permit an existing fence to remain at its current height and location. The fence is of board on board construction with lattice at the top and is located on the applicant's north and west property line. The fence is an average height of 1.2 metres (4 feet) along the north property line and divides the subject property from 23 Cromwell Road. The fence along the west property line varies in height from 1.29 metres (4.25 feet) to 1.37 metres (4.5 feet).

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil

Recommendation:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit a board on board fence with lattice at a height of 1.37 metres (4.5 feet) along the north property line and in the front yard on the west property line to a maximum height of 1.37 metres (4.5 feet).

Background/History:

Acting upon a complaint, an inspection was undertaken on November 19, 1997 of 2 Senator Boulevard. At the time of the visit, a fence was being constructed. Upon examination, the contractor was instructed to relocate one of the support posts so as to create a sight triangle for the vehicles backing out of 23 Cromwell Road. The property was re-inspected on November 21, 1997 and while there were no sight line safety issues noted, the fence was found to be in excess of the maximum height permitted. As a result, a notice dated December 4, 1997 was issued to the registered owners of the property.

Subsequent to that, a request seeking an exemption to the by-law was received. An inspection was undertaken on May 16, 1998 and several photographs were taken of the site. There are no sidewalks on Cromwell Road in the vicinity of the subject property thus any pedestrian traffic is likely to be on the travelled portion of the road allowance. The fence is constructed well back from Cromwell Road on the west side and coupled with the sight triangle created by the angled fence, visibility of pedestrian and vehicular traffic is excellent.

An opinion was sought from the inspectors dealing with road allowance by-laws and they advise that in their opinion, no problems with respect to encroachments or sight lines exist at the subject property.

Justification:

Section 14 of By-law 24945, as amended, provides that any person may apply for an exemption to any provision of the by-law.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, Supervisor

(416) 396-5341

(416) 396-4266 Fax Number

byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

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

-Mr. Mike Ilchyshyn, owner of the adjacent property, who indicated his concerns respecting the rear yard fence and its proximity to his garage; and

-Mr. Ken Evans, the applicant.

37

City-Owned Property on Danforth Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following recommendation contained in a communication (July 22, 1998) from Councillor Gerry Altobello, subject to adding the following:

"AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council direct The Corporate Services Committee not to authorize the sale of this property subject to review by the Urban Planning and Development Services Department."

I would appreciate Community Council's consideration of the following:

WHEREAS the City is the owner of a linear piece of property measuring approximately 189 metres by 31 metres with an area of approximately .5 hectares located on the south side of Danforth Avenue east of Eastwood Avenue and west of Birchmount Road in Ward 13 Scarborough Bluffs, Birchcliff Community; and

WHEREAS the property has a significant grade differential (approximately 10 metres) sloping southward from Danforth Road to the rear lot line of the single family dwellings on Rhydwen Avenue; and

WHEREAS the subject property is designated Residential Low Density in the Official Plan of the former City of Scarborough and is zoned Single Family "S" in the Birchcliff Community Zoning By-law; and

WHEREAS there is considerable doubt as to whether the subject property could be developed for uses intended by the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and further that access to Danforth Avenue is highly unlikely due to the changes in grade; and

WHEREAS it is appropriate to consider the best use of this land as open space in accordance with the Major Open Spaces zone in the Birchcliff Community Zoning By-law; now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that City Council direct staff to introduce changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law of the former City of Scarborough to effect an Open Space use of the subject lands.

Councillor Gerry Altobello,

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs.

38

Other Items Considered by The Community Council

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)

(a)Neighbourhood Complaints - Plaza at 261 Port Union Road

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following report for further consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on October 14, 1998, with the following directions to staff:

(a)that negotiations with Sun Life, the residents and the Ward Councillors, be continued in an attempt to address the concerns of the residents and arrive at a satisfactory resolution of this issue;

(b)that in the event that an appeal of the Fence Viewer's Award proceeds, that staff report thereon to the October 14 meeting of Community Council, and City Council be requested to support the residents in any such appeal;

(c)that the cost to the residents of sharing the Fence Viewer's fees be rebated, apportioned accordingly, subject to staff investigating with Legal Services and Municipal Standards staff, the source of and mechanism for proceeding with such rebate, and report thereon to the October 14 meeting of Community Council;

(d)that staff include in the negotiations with Sun Life, the matter of scheduling deliveries and pick-ups at the plaza to day-time hours only; and

(e)that staff refer the issue of complaints respecting skateboarders in this area to Toronto Police Service 42 Division and request their action in an attempt to resolve this problem:

(May 28, 1998) from the Director of Municipal Standards responding to Community Council's request that staff investigate property standards complaints at Ravine Park Plaza, and recommending that this report be received for information.

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

-Mr. Richard Ferrell, representing Sun Life Property Management;

-Mr. Bob Marley, Architect;

-Mr. William Brock, area resident;

-Mr. Mike Longathie, area resident;

-Ms. Liz Oliver, Vice President, West Rouge Community Association; and

-Mr. Fred Ples, area resident.

(b)Parking Prohibition on Savarin Street

Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following report, at the request of Councillor Duguid, for further consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on October 14, 1998, in order to permit a community information meeting to take place in September for further consultation on this matter:

(July 9, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, recommending that:

(1)the parking regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2)the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

(c)Traffic Control Signals - McNicoll Avenue and Silver Springs Boulevard

Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following report, at the request of Councillor Shaw, for further consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on September 16, 1998, to permit further consultation with staff:

(July 9, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, updating Community Council on the status of the request made by the former City of Scarborough that traffic control signals be installed at the subject intersection, and presenting this report for the information and direction of Community Council.

(d)Parking and Traffic Concerns on Fundy Bay Boulevard by

David Lewis Public School and St. Maximilian Kolbe Catholic School

Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following report, at the request of Councillor Shaw, for further consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on September 16, 1998, to permit further consultation with staff and the community:

(June 29, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, recommending that:

(1)the parking regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2)the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3)the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

(e)Procedure Required to Close Faulkland Road

North of Leahurst Drive

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having referred the following report back to staff with the request that they report further on means of controlling undesirable traffic on Faulkland Road:

(July 16, 1998) from the Director of Road and Traffic Services, Scarborough, responding to a request from Councillor Altobello and further to a direction from City Council, during its consideration of the proposed TTC bus facility at Comstock Road and Lebovic Avenue, that staff report on the process for closing Faulkland Road, and recommending that this report be received for the information of Community Council and City Council.

(f)The 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid - Public Consultation

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(a)received the following information report from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, respecting the public consultation process related to Toronto's bid to host the 2008 Olympics;

(b)approved the request from the Olympic Bid Office that Scarborough Community Council conduct a public meeting on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, at 7:30 p.m. and receive a presentation from Mr. David Crombie; and

(c)directed that the Olympic Bid Office be requested to advertise Scarborough Community Council's public meeting in the Scarborough Mirror in addition to any other advertising which is being arranged:

(July 7, 1998) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, providing, for the information of Community Council, a report generally outlining the public consultation process related to Toronto's bid to host the 2008 Olympics and requesting that Scarborough Community Council conduct its public consultation meeting on the evening of Wednesday, September 16, 1998, at 7:30 p.m. at which time Mr. David Crombie will make a presentation.

(g)Ontario Municipal Board Decision

Zabs Holdings Limited, 6 Pine Ridge Drive

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 8, 1998) from the City Solicitor, advising of the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board with respect to the appeal by Zabs Holdings Limited against the refusal of the former City of Scarborough to approve their planning applications.

(h)Ontario Municipal Board Decisions

Spiros Plessas, 106 Crockford Boulevard

Paisley Products of Canada, Upton Road Works Yard

1098748 Ontario Limited, Sheppard Avenue and Kennedy Road

Stan Jordan Appeal of By-law No. 25265

Wards 13, 14 and 17 - Scarborough Bluffs

Scarborough Wexford and Scarborough Agincourt

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 9, 1998) from the City Solicitor advising of the decisions of the Ontario Municipal Board with respect to the hearings held on the subject appeals.

(i)Preliminary Evaluation Report

Official Plan Amendment Application SP98010

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98017

699982 Ontario Limited, 4730-4736 Sheppard Avenue

Marshalling Yard Employment District

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report:

(July 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommending that the Scarborough Community Council convene a Public Meeting to consider this application targeted for the fourth quarter of 1998, subject to:

(1)the applicant submitting a Site Plan Control Application addressing the concerns detailed in the Commissioner's report; and

(2)undertaking negotiations with the owner, in consultation with staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department and the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, to investigate options for possible acquisition of the lands associated with the channelized watercourse, at no cost to the City.

(j)Preliminary Evaluation Report

Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ98004

Shell Canada Products Limited

Gloria Kirk and Naab Holding

6715, 6727 and 6731 Kingston Road

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report, subject to striking out all the words after "circulated" in Recommendation No. (2) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: ".. and the area of notification to include the properties from Tideswell Boulevard westerly to Graham Farm Lane and from Highway 401 northerly to the point where Tideswell Boulevard intersects with Sheppard Avenue and including the area north of Sheppard Avenue and the properties on the north side of Royal Rouge Trail", so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(2)staff convening a Community Information Meeting to be scheduled upon submission of Item (1); notice of this meeting to be circulated, and the area of notification to include the properties from Tideswell Boulevard westerly to Graham Farm Lane and from Highway 401 northerly to the point where Tideswell Boulevard intersects with Sheppard Avenue and including the area north of Sheppard Avenue and the properties on the north side of Royal Rouge Trail.":

(July 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommending that the Scarborough Community Council convene a Public Meeting to consider this application, targeted for the third quarter of 1998, subject to:

(1)the applicant filing a site plan control application addressing the issues identified in the Commissioner's report; and

(2)staff convening a Community Information Meeting to be scheduled upon submission of the site plan control application; notice of this meeting to be circulated within 120metres (400 feet) of the subject site.

(k)Preliminary Evaluation Report

Draft Plan of Subdivision Application T98006

776669 Ontario Limited (Anson Investments), Anson Avenue

Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report:

(July 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommending that the Scarborough Community Council convene a Public Meeting, targeted for the third quarter of 1998, to consider this application.

(l)New Applications Received - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, advising Community Council of the new applications received during the three-week period ending June 29, 1998, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(m)Site Plan Control Approvals - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, advising Community Council of the various Site Plan Control Approvals granted by the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(n)City-Initiated Official Plan Amendment Application W98009

Road Allowance Linking Metropolitan Road and Continental Place

Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Scarborough Community Council reports having rescheduled the Public Meeting under the Planning Act respecting the following report to its meeting to be held on October 14, 1998, at 2:00 p.m.:

(June 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommending that City Council:

(1)amend Schedule "C" of the Official Plan, the Roads Plan of the former City of Scarborough, by identifying a new 23 metre (75 foot) road right-of-way connection linking the eastern terminus of Metropolitan Road southerly to Warden Avenue through Continental Place, and by amending Schedule "A" of the Official Plan, the Land Use Plan, to also reflect the proposed road; and

(2)authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan amendment as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

(o)Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z95032

Aspen Ridge Homes (Markham Gardens) Incorporated

South of Sheppard Avenue, East of Markham Road

Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

The Scarborough Community Council reports having rescheduled the Public Meeting under the Planning Act respecting the following report to its meeting to be held on October 14, 1998, at 2:00 p.m.:

(June 22, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, recommending that City Council repeal the Malvern East Agricultural Holding Zoning By-law No. 13219, as amended, and incorporate Blocks 2 and 3, Registered Plan 66M-2300, in the Malvern Community Zoning By-law No. 14402, as amended; zone them in accordance with the Permitted Uses and Development Standards detailed in the Commissioner's report, and authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law amendment as may be required to properly carry out the intent of these recommendations.

Mr. Roy Varicelli, Architect for the project, appeared before the Community Council and expressed support for the staff recommendations.

The Community Council received letters of objection to this application from the following persons:

-Mr. David Yeung, area resident;

-Ms. Jennifer Chan, area resident;

-Mr. Wilmot Procope, area resident; and

-Mr. Kwok C. Chan, owner of property in the area;

copies of which were provided to all Members of Community Council, and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

(p)Consent Applications - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, advising Community Council of the Consent Decisions granted by the Commissioner.

(q)Referral from The Urban Environment and Development Committee

respecting Guidelines for Determining City-Wide Interests in Planning Matters

The Scarborough Community Council reports having recommended to City Council, under letter from the City Clerk to be considered in conjunction with Clause No. 2 of Report No. 9 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee at the City Council meeting to be held on July 29, 1998, that the Protocol for Identifying and Processing Planning Matters of City-wide Interest and Cross-boundary Issues be amended, as follows:

"(1)under 'Process' on Page 2, strike out the words 'for information' in A. 2. b. and insert in lieu thereof the words 'for appropriate action', so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

'Process:

A.Processing planning applications to amend the official plan(s)

and/or zoning by-law(s):

2.If only a local interest is identified in respect to the application:

b.The Preliminary Evaluation Report from staff is placed on the Community Council agenda for appropriate action.'; and

(2)include in the Protocol the ability to acknowledge any concerns of the local Councillor and allow the Councillor the opportunity to request that such concerns be recognized as a City-wide issue.":

(July 14, 1998) from the City Clerk, advising that the Urban Environment and Development Committee, at its meeting held on July 13, 1998, endorsed the recommendations embodied in the joint report (June 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the City Clerk respecting the Protocol for Identifying and Processing Planning Matters of City-wide Interest and Cross-Boundary Issues, subject to minor amendment, and referred the Protocol to the Community Councils for recommendation/comment to City Council on July 29, 1998.

(r)Ontario Municipal Board Hearings - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 14, 1998) from the Commissioner of Planning and Buildings, Scarborough, advising Community Council of the status of the various current appeals before the Ontario Municipal Board.

(s)Fence By-law Exemption Request

Martin and Charlotte Truter, 32 Bethley Drive

Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

The Scarborough Community Council reports having been advised by staff that the applicant has withdrawn the Fence By-law Exemption Request identified in the following report, and having therefore agreed to the withdrawal of the report:

(July 13, 1998) from the Director of Municipal Standards, recommending that City Council approve the subject Fence By-law Exemption request.

(t)Ward Boundary Review Process

The Scarborough Community Council reports having reconsidered its decision made at its meeting held on June 24, 1998, that a Public Meeting be conducted on Thursday, September 17, 1998, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of obtaining public input on the matter of ward boundaries, ward division and governance, and having directed that such Public Meeting now take place on Wednesday, October 14, 1998, at 7:30 p.m.

(u)Guild Inn

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received a verbal presentation made by Mr. Joseph W. Ventura, Member of a Group wishing to proceed with the management and operation of The Guild Inn, accompanied by Mr. Peter Proszanski, Solicitor for the Group, and Mr. Todd Kirlik, Guildwood area resident who supports this initiative, and having referred the presentation to the attention of the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, for consideration in conjunction with the Feasibility Study which is currently underway to determine the future use of The Guild Inn from an arts and culture perspective.

(v)Ontario Hydro Corridor (Graywood Investments/Norstar)

Ontario Municipal Board Hearing

The Scarborough Community Council reports having considered, in camera, the confidential report (July 20, 1998) from the City Solicitor and attached staff reports respecting the Ontario Municipal Board Hearings on Ontario Hydro Corridor Lands, and having deferred further consideration of these reports to a Special Meeting of Community Council to be convened prior to the City Council meeting to be held on Wednesday, July 29, 1998, and requested that, in the interim, the affected Councillors discuss this matter further with staff.

--------

The following persons appeared before the Community Council to express their support for the possible future acquisition of Hydro Corridor lands for parkland and recreational uses:

-Mr. Ronald Brown, representing Wishing Well area residents;

-Ms. Sheryl Saunders, President of the North Bridlewood Residents' Association;

-Ms. Linda Wheeler, representing residents in the area affected south of Highway 401; and

-Mr. Phillip Egginton, President of the Bridlewood Community Association.

Respectfully submitted,

LORENZO BERARDINETTI,

Chair.

Toronto, July 22, 1998.

(Report No. 7 of The Scarborough Community Council, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998.)