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

YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

REPORT No. 8

1(i) Garbage Inspection Process; and(ii) Sunday Morning Litterhog Service

Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

2460 Rogers Road Appeal of Committee of Adjustment Application Ward 27, York Humber

3Application for Demolition Approval - 450 Gilbert Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton

4Tree Removal By-law

5Tree Removal By-law

6Lane Lighting Requests - 1997/98Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

71998 Street Lighting Projects Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

8Lambton Avenue Between Cliff Street and Arnold Avenue Poll Results (i) Reversal of Permit Parking from the North to South Side; (ii) Alternate Side Parking Ward 27, York Humber

9Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Winona Drive Between Vaughan Road and Eglinton Avenue West Ward 28, York Eglinton

10Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Miranda Avenue Between Eglinton Avenue West and Bowie Avenue Ward 28 - York Eglinton

11Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on the South Side of Vaughan Road Between Northcliffe Boulevard and its Westerly Terminus - Ward 28, York Eglinton

12Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Scott Road Between Kersdale Avenue and Aileen Avenue Ward 27, York Humber

13Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Rogers Road Between Oakwood Avenue and Caledonia Road Ward 28, York Eglinton

14Installation of Disabled Parking Space at Westbury Crescent - Ward 27, York Humber

15Request for Disabled Parking Space at318 McRoberts Avenue - Ward 28, York Eglinton

16All-Way Stop Control at Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton

17All-Way Stop Control at Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton

18All-Way Stop Control at Kane Avenue and Aileen Avenue Ward 27, York Humber

19Tree Obstruction of Driveway Access at 144 Humbercrest Boulevard - Ward 27, York Humber

20Alteration of Rostrevor RoadWard 28, York Eglinton

21Zoning By-law Amendment for a Temporary Use at 180 Church Street; Owner & Applicant: Humber River Regional Hospital - Ward 27, York Humber

22Request for Outdoor Eating Area Nova Era Bakery, 488-490 Rogers Road Ward 27, York Humber

23Other Items Considered by the Community Council

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 8

OF THE YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

(from its meeting on July 22, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Bill Saundercook, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998

1

(i) Garbage Inspection Process; and

(ii) Sunday Morning Litterhog Service

Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the report dated July 29, 1998, from the Commissioner of Operations (York District) be adopted, subject to inserting the words 'from the existing budget,', after the figure '$8,000.00', so that such Recommendation now reads as follows:

'It is recommended, subject to funding being provided in the amount of $8,000.00 from the existing budget, that the increased level of service control of litter on Eglinton Avenue West, between Bicknell and Bathurst Streets on Sundays between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., be approved for the balance of 1998.' ")

The York Community Council recommends the approval in principle of a Sunday morning litterhog service on both sides of Eglinton Avenue West, from KeeleStreet to the AllenExpressway.

The York Community Council reports for the information of Council, having requested the YorkCommissioner of Operations Services, to report directly to the July 22, 1998 meeting of Council, providing the estimated cost for such service and possible source of funding.

The York Community Council submits the following report (July 20, 1998) from the YorkCommissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

To report on the feasibility of introducing a by-law to improve the litter and garbage situation in some parts of York, especially on Eglinton Avenue West.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Status:

None.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Solicitor, when reviewing and consolidating the Property Standards By-law, be requested to include a provision concerning garbage collection on Eglinton Avenue West between Bathurst Street and Bicknell Avenue, which permits York to have signs erected within privately owned buildings concerning information on the days and times of garbage collection.

Council Reference/Background History:

Clause 8(z) embodied in Report No. 6 of the York Community Council at its meeting held on May27,1998.

The York Community Council directed that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services report on the feasibility of introducing a by-law requiring the owners of commercial buildings with apartments above and multi-unit apartment buildings to display signs in prominent locations on the doors leading to a main street, regarding compliance with the City's by-law with respect to putting out garbage only on the days designated for collection.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Staff consulted with York's former Solicitor who advised that a by-law could be introduced as an amendment to the existing Property Standards By-law regarding the placement of signs in prominent locations by York staff.

The Director or Municipal Standards for York is currently attempting to blend all the former Metropolitan Toronto, Property Standards By-laws into one single by-law for the City of Toronto. A schedule could be included into the new Property Standards By-law to apply only to the former City of York and no other district.

Conclusions:

As noted above, a by-law amendment could be included into the new Property Standards By-law to require the owners of commercial buildings with apartments above and multi-unit apartment buildings to display signs in prominent locations on the doors leading to a main street, regarding compliance with the City's by-law with respect to putting out garbage only on the days designated for collection.

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (July 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Operations Services, York Civic Centre:

Purpose

To report on the costs and funding to provide Sunday morning clean-up of Eglinton Avenue West from Keele Street to the Allen Expressway.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Status

An additional amount of $8,000.00 will be required to carry out this increase in the level of service for litter control on Eglinton Avenue West between Bicknell and Bathurst Streets. No provision has been made within the 1998 budget allocations to carry out this service.

Recommendation

It is recommended that subject to funding being provided in the amount of $8,000.00 that the increased level of service for control of litter on Eglinton Avenue West, between Bicknell and Bathhurst Streets on Sundays between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., be approved for the balance of 1998.

Council Reference/Background History

Clause No. 1 of Report No. 8 of The York Community Council at its meeting held on July 22, 1998.

The York Community Council recommended approval, in principle, of a Sunday morning litterhog service on both sides of Eglinton Avenue West, from Keele Street to the Allen Expressway and requested the York Commissioner of Operations Services to report directly to the July 22, 1998 meeting of Council, providing the estimated cost for such service and possible source of funding.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification

The present level of service for litter control on Eglinton Avenue between Weston Road and Bathurst Street is as follows:

(1)There are approximately 60 regular litter receptacles located on Eglinton Avenue West between Weston Road and Bathurst Street. In addition there are eight pole-mounted litter baskets. Both the receptacles and baskets are emptied five times a week, Monday through Friday. In addition, if the containers are full when the contractor collects garbage on Saturday evenings, they are also emptied.

(2)During the spring, summer and fall, whenever roads are not snow covered, litter is collected daily, Monday to Friday, with mechanical litterhogs on Eglinton Avenue West between Bathurst Street and Weston Road. The entire length of Eglinton Avenue West between Bathurst Street and the western limit of former City of York is swept twice weekly between 11:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The days on which it is swept varies according to weather condition.

In order to provide the pickup of litter using mechanical litterhogs on Eglinton Avenue West between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. on Sunday, we will require the following resources:

STREETFROMTO

Eglinton Avenue WestBicknell AvenueBathurst Street

Labour: overtime - 4 hrs. - 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.Equipment:

2 Light Equipment Operators ($25.50) -$ 51.002 litter vacs ($12.50) - $ 25.00

1 Supervisor "A" ($34.43) $ 34.431 pick-up ($6.40) - $ 6.40

Labour Totals $ 85.43Equipment Totals $ 31.40

x 4 hrs $341.72 4 hrs $125.60

Grand Total: Labour and Equipment - $467.32 (litter only)

To provide the increased level of service from August to the end of November will cost approximately $8,000.00.

Conclusions

On-site inspection indicates that there is a litter problem on Sunday mornings on Eglinton Avenue West, between Bicknell Avenue and Bathurst Street.

Subject to funding, it is therefore recommended that this level of service be implemented immediately.

Contact Name:

Fred Andrews, Director of Operations

Phone: 416-394-2624, Fax: 416-789-9328.)

2

460 Rogers Road

Appeal of Committee of Adjustment Application

Ward 27, York Humber

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the report dated July 24, 1998, from the Commissioner of Development Services (York District), embodying the following Recommendation, as amended, be adopted:

'It is recommended that Urban Planning and Development Services staff be directed to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing on September 2, 1998, in support of the application for 460 Rogers Road.' ")

The York Community Council recommends the approval of the recommendation in the following communication (July 20, 1998) from Councillor Bill Saundercook.

The York Community Council reports for the information of Council, having requested the YorkCommissioner of Development Services, to submit a further report directly to Council for consideration at its July 29, 1998 meeting.

Background:

As you know, 460 Rogers Road was formerly a property in the ownership of the City of York. It was taken over by the City due to tax arrears. The property was then sold free and clear and the transaction was completed prior to the amalgamation of the area municipalities. The staff at the York Civic Centre were supportive in the Committee of Adjustment process and verbally committed to the purchaser, to provide as much assistance to the purchaser as possible, given that the redevelopment of this property is of utmost importance to the community.

Unfortunately, in the final hour, a neighbour appealed the Committee of Adjustment's decision. A tentative hearing date has been set for September 2, 1998.

Recommendation:

In light of the commitment by staff and the need to redevelop this eyesore, I am requesting that the Community Council authorize planning staff at the York Civic Centre, to attend the hearing on September 2, 1998.

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (July 24, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services - York:

Purpose:

This report is submitted to provide background information on the upcoming Ontario Municipal Board Hearing of September 2, 1998 for a Committee of Adjustment appeal on 460 Rogers Road.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not Applicable

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Urban Planning and Development Services staff be directed to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing on September 2, 1998 for 460 Rogers Road.

Background:

The site which is the subject of this report is located on the north side of Rogers Road between Kale and Chambers Avenues (see Appendix 1 - Location Map). This property was sold to the current owner by the former City of York after it was acquired as a result of delinquent taxes payments. The owner is proposing to tear down the rear portion of the building, previously used as an auto mechanics repair and retail shop, and use it for retail, parking, landscaped open space and seven new townhouses.

The owner submitted applications for Site Plan Approval and Committee of Adjustment variance and consent to sever. Development Services staff reported favourably on the Committee of Adjustment applications (see Appendix 2) and appeared before the Committee in support. The owner at 47 Kale Avenue appealed the Committee of Adjustment decision to approve the applications to the Ontario Municipal Board, due to his concern that the construction of the townhouses may damage his property. A previous report detailing the Committee of Adjustment application and appeal is appended to this report as Appendix 3.

My report to Council on the Committee of Adjustment appeal indicated that there was no matter of significant Council policy to be defended at the Ontario Municipal Board, therefore staff should not be directed to attend. At its meeting of July 22, 1998, York Community Council reviewed the matter and determined that even though a Council policy was not offended, the City should endorse the Committee of Adjustment decision by providing planning staff to defend the applications at the Ontario Municipal Board.

The building is now vacant and in a poor state of repair. The owner's plan to redevelop the site is encouraged, as it will revitalize that area of Rogers Road and inspire other local businesses to do the same.

Conclusions:

While no major Council policy is an issue in this instance, the applicant's plans to revitalize the property are to be encouraged. As such, York Community Council is recommending that planning staff attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing to support the application.

Contact Name:

Wendy Johncox, Senior Planner, Tel: 394-2869, Fax: 394-2782.)

(A copy of each of Appendices 1, 2 and 3, referred to in the foregoing report, is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

3

Application for Demolition Approval - 450 Gilbert Avenue

Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July6,1998) from the York Commissioner of Development Services:

Purpose:

Under the City of York Act 1994 (Bill PR147), Council of the former City of York enacted special demolition control legislation for the purpose of securing beautification measures on the lands and abutting municipal boulevard as a condition of the issuance of demolition permits. Bylaw 3102-95 was subsequently passed designating the entire City (York) as an area of demolition control pursuant to the City of York Act, 1994.

The owner has applied for a demolition permit to remove the building located on the subject lands. Community Council approval for the release of the permit is being sought.

Source of Funds:

No funding required.

Recommendations:

That the approval to demolish the building shown on the attached site plan as Appendix "B" to this report be approved pursuant to By-law No. 3102-95 with no conditions of approval related to beautification.

Background:

The property owner, Dreamcoast Homes Inc., through their agent Georgian Equipment Ltd., has applied to the City for a demolition permit. The owner wishes to demolish the warehouse building located at 450 Gilbert Avenue and complete the environmental remediation of the site. The property is designated Mixed Use in the Official Plan and zoned PE .

Discussion:

Further to circulation of this application, the following are the responses from various departments:

Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission - Hydro has no concerns with respect to the demolition of the building but requests that the owner of the building make the appropriate arrangements with Hydro staff for the final water and hydro metre readings, and for the recovery of service cables and metres.

Operations Services - We have no concerns in regard to the proposed demolition .

Health Unit - A review of our files indicates no concerns over the demolition of the subject building.

Community Services - No city owned trees at the subject location.

Fire Department - Our concern with respect to this proposed demolition is that it occurs as soon as possible. The water supply to the building has been severed and the sprinkler system is presently out of service.

Development Review Division - The property is designated Employment in the Official Plan and zoned PE-Prestige Employment zone. The site was previously used as a furniture manufacturing operation.

In view of the site's location within an area characterized by a mix of residential and employment uses which has been experiencing new single and semi-detached redevelopment activity and in view of the site's proximity to the shops and services on Eglinton Avenue West, it has strong potential for immediate rezoning and redevelopment for residential use. A few preliminary development inquiries from prospective purchasers support the site's high potential for residential development. If a residential development does not materialize, the site could readily be redeveloped under the PE zoning which permits a wide range of employment uses. The Development Review Division has no objection to the approval of the demolition permit application and requires no conditions of approval relating to beautification.

The Development Review Division suggests that the applicant be advised that Site Plan Control will apply to the development of the site, subject to the provisions of the City of York Site Plan Control By-law.

Local Historical Committees have been notified regarding the demolition permit application.

City Wide Issues:

None.

Conclusions:

The owner of the lands has had a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and a Phase II ESA completed on the property. The owner wishes to proceed with the remediation of the property. In order to complete this work, it is necessary to obtain a demolition permit for the building. Although there are no current permit applications for construction on the property, it is anticipated that the owner will move quickly for development of the site. Approval of the recommendation will allow this department to release the demolition permit and promote the development of the site in the current year.

Contact Name:

Bruce Ashton

York Director of Buildings and Chief Building Official

(Copies of the Appendices, the location map for 450 Gilbert Avenue and the Site Plan referred to in the foregoing report, were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Service Centre.)

4

Tree Removal By-law

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (June15,1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to request Council to direct the Legal Services Division to prepare a by-law to approve the removal of City-owned trees. The properties and reasons for removal are described in this report.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Status:

Removal and planting costs are approved in the 1998 Operating Budget.

Recommendations:

That Council direct the Legal Services Division to prepare a by-law for the removal of City-owned trees, and that forestry staff begin removal and planting.

Comments:

In accordance with York Policy, attached is a list of locations where trees located on City property have either been removed or are in need of removal and the reason for the request.

It should be noted that in each case, where a tree has been removed, the resident has agreed to permit the City to plant a replacement tree.

Conclusion:

Upon approval by Council, City forces will begin removal and planting of replacement trees.

Contact Name:

W. N. Kevin Bowser

York Director of Parks

Tel: 394-2487, Fax: 394-2707

(A copy of the list of locations, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Service Centre.)

5

Tree Removal By-law

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July20,1998) from the YorkCommissioner of Community Services:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to request Council to direct the City Solicitor to prepare a by-law to approve the removal of City-owned trees. The properties and reasons for removal are described in this report.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Status:

Removal and planting costs are approved in the 1998 Operating Budget.

Recommendation:

That Council direct the City Solicitor to prepare a by-law for the removal of City-owned trees and that forestry staff begin removal and planting.

Comments:

In accordance with York policy, attached is a list of locations where trees located on City property have either been removed or are in need of removal and the reason for the request.

It should be noted that in each case, where a tree has been removed, the resident has agreed to permit the City to plant a replacement tree.

Conclusion:

Upon approval by Council, City forces will begin removal and planting of replacement trees.

Contact:

Kevin Bowser

York Director of Parks

Tel: 394-2487

Fax: 394-2707

(A copy of the list of locations, referred to in the foregoing report, is on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

6

Lane Lighting Requests - 1997/98

Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the report (July 8, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services.

The York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having requested the York Commissioner of Operations Services, to report to its September 16, 1998 meeting on the following, subject to 1998 requests for lane lighting being fulfilled:

(i)the lighting of lanes running parallel to St. Clair Avenue West in consultation with staff at the Toronto Civic Centre;

(ii)the lighting of lanes running parallel to Vaughan Road as a priority for 1998 or 1999; and

(iii)the number of unlit lanes in Wards 27 and 28.

Purpose:

To obtain approval for the installation of lane lighting at five locations within the York District.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Status:

The amount of $10,100.00, for funding of new installations of record, is available in the 1998 Lane Lighting Account No. 458-561.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)York Community Council recommend to Council approval of the lane lighting requests which appear in Appendix "A";

(2)Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission (York District) be requested to proceed with the construction of these approved lane lighting projects; and

(3)The existing policy for lane lighting priority criteria (Appendix "B") be applied for future requests.

Council Reference/Background History:

In this year's capital expenditures, the amount of $120,000.00, which is the same as the 1997 budget, was provided for new installations.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

To date, there are five requests on the outstanding lane lighting list (Appendix "A") which have a total estimated cost of $10,100.00. In addition, in my report to Community Council dated June 26, 1998, we recommended an expenditure of $20,000.00, from the Lane Lighting Capital Account, to fund proposed street lighting improvements on Eglinton Ave. West.

In order to address all lighting requests in a consistent and timely manner throughout the community, attached for your information is a copy of the policy for lane lighting priority criteria (Appendix "B").

Conclusions:

With the funds approved by Council, we can accommodate the five outstanding requests.

Contact Name:

Chi H. Ng, Director of Professional Services

Tel: 394-2648, Fax: 394-2888

(Copies of Appendices A and B, referred to in the foregoing report, were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and copies are on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Service Centre.)

7

1998 Street Lighting Projects

Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July20,1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

To obtain approval for street lighting projects within the York District.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Status:

Funding for new installations of record is available in the 1998 Street Lighting Account No.459-561.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the York Community Council recommend to Council approval of the street lighting projects which appear in Appendix A; and

(2)the Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission (York District) be requested to proceed with the construction of these approved street lighting projects.

Council Reference/Background History:

In this year's capital expenditures, the sum of $20,000.00, which is the same as the 1997 budget, was provided for new installations.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

To date, there is one request on the outstanding street lighting list (see Appendix A) for an estimated installation cost of $600.00.

The attached Appendix A provides the locations of the Street Lighting Requests for 1997/98 and you will note that in keeping with existing policy five of the seven projects have been completed.

In addition, in my report to Community Council dated June 26, 1998, we recommended an expenditure of $15,000.00 from the Street Lighting Capital Account, to fund proposed street lighting improvements on Eglinton Avenue West.

Conclusions:

With the funds approved by Council, we can accommodate the outstanding request.

Contact Name:

Chi H. Ng

York Director of Professional Services

Tel:394-2648

Fax:394-2888

(A copy of Appendix A referred to in the foregoing report is on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

8

Lambton Avenue between Cliff Street and Arnold Avenue

Poll Results (i) Reversal of Permit Parking from the North

to South Side; (ii) Alternate Side Parking

Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)alternate side parking be implemented on Lambton Avenue between Cliff Street and Arnold Avenue; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (June 23, 1998) from the CityClerk:

Purpose:

To provide results of a poll conducted of residents on Lambton Avenue (municipal addresses 26 to 68 on the north side and municipal addresses 41 to 83 on the south side) regarding the above proposals.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Clause (l) embodied in Report No. 1 of the York Community Council at its meeting held on January21,1998.

The York Community Council directed that residents be polled to determine majority interest with respect to the above proposals.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The following is a breakdown of residents polled and the responses received:

Total No. Polled:107

No. of Replies Received:20 or 19%

The following is a breakdown of responses received, on a block-by-block basis, according to resident owners, non-resident owners and tenants:

Proposal No. 1 - To reverse on-street permit parking from the north side to the south side of Lambton Avenue, between Cliff Street and Arnold Avenue:

Addresses 26 - 38 Lambton Avenue:

Addresses 40 - 68 Lambton Avenue:

**It should be noted that, although seven resident owners returned poll forms, two did not include a response to the first proposal.

Addresses 41 - 57 Lambton Avenue:

Addresses 65 - 83 Lambton Avenue:

Proposal No. 2 - To implement alternate side parking:

Addresses 26 - 38 Lambton Avenue:

***Six poll forms were returned from resident owners; however, none included a response to this question. All were brought into our office by one resident and all were completed in the same manner. Responses were provided for the first proposal only. In two instances where responses had been provided for the second proposal, answers were subsequently crossed off and initialled.

Addresses 40 - 68 Lambton Avenue:

****Although seven resident-owners returned poll forms, two did not respond to this proposal. One of these poll forms was brought into our office, together with those mentioned above.

Addresses 41 - 57 Lambton Avenue:

Addresses 65 - 83 Lambton Avenue:

Comments from residents are attached hereto as Appendix 1.

Conclusions:

As noted above:

(i)The majority of residents are equally in favour and opposed to the proposal to reverse on-street permit parking from the north side to the south side of Lambton Avenue, between Cliff St. and Arnold Ave.

(ii)The majority of residents are opposed to the proposal to implement alternate side parking.

Contact Name:

Steve Brown

York Operations Services - Traffic Division

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2758

9

Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Winona Drive

between Vaughan Road and Eglinton Avenue West

Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)on-street permit parking be implemented on Winona Drive between Vaughan Road and Eglinton Avenue West; and

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

The Community Council submits the following report (May 7, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

To show results of a poll conducted to determine majority interest regarding the above proposal.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendations:

For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Clause No. 7(t) embodied in Report No. 2 of the York Community Council.

The York Community Council at its meeting held on February 18, 1998, directed that the residents be polled to determine interest in this proposal.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The following is a breakdown of residents polled based on the number of replies received:

Total No. Polled:342

No. of Replies Received:14 or 4%

No. of Replies Not Counted:0

No. of Replies In Favour:7 or 50%

No. of Replies Not In Favour:7 or 50%

The following is an overall breakdown of responses, according to resident owners, non-resident owners and tenants:

Comments from residents are attached hereto as Appendix 1.

Conclusions:

For the consideration of York Community Council as residents are equally in favour and opposed to the proposal for on-street permit parking on Winona Drive, between Vaughan Road and Eglinton Avenue West.

Contact Name:

Steve Brown, Operations Services - Traffic Division

394-2655, 394-2758 (fax)

10

Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Miranda Avenue

between Eglinton Avenue West and Bowie Avenue

Ward 28 - York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)on-street permit parking be implemented on Miranda Avenue between EglintonAvenueWest and Bowie Avenue; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (May 29, 1998) from the CityClerk:

Purpose:

To show results of a poll conducted of residents on Miranda Avenue between a point 46 metres north of Eglinton Avenue West and Bowie Avenue, regarding a proposal to implement on-street permit parking.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendation:

For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Clause No. 132.4 embodied in the Minutes of the Works and Parks Committee meeting of September22, 1997.

The Works and Parks Committee, at its meeting of September 22, 1997, directed that staff undertake a poll for permit parking on Miranda Avenue between Eglinton Avenue West and Bowie Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The following is a breakdown of residents polled to determine interest in the above-mentioned proposal based on the number of replies returned.

Total No. Polled:23

No. of Replies Received:1

No. of Replies IN FAVOUR:1

No. of Replies NOT IN FAVOUR:0

The following is an overall breakdown of responses, according to resident owners, non-resident owners and tenants:

Conclusion:

As noted above, the majority of residents, based on the responses received, are in favour of the proposal to implement on-street permit parking on Miranda Avenue between a point 46 metres north of Eglinton Avenue West and Bowie Avenue.

Contact Name:

Steve Brown, York Operations Services - Traffic Division

Tel: 394-2655, Fax: 394-2758

11

Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on the South Side

of Vaughan Road between Northcliffe Boulevard and

its Westerly terminus - Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)on-street permit parking be implemented on the south side of Vaughan Road between Northcliffe Boulevard and its westerly terminus; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (July 9, 1998) from the CityClerk:

Purpose:

To show results of a poll conducted of residents on the south side of Vaughan Road between Northcliffe Boulevard and its westerly terminus, regarding the above proposal.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendations:

For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Clause 7(c) embodied in Report No. 2 of the York Community Council and Clause 14(n) embodied in Report No. 4 of the York Community Council.

York Community Council, at its meeting held on April 1, 1998, directed that residents on the south side of Vaughan Road between Northcliffe Boulevard and its westerly terminus be polled for comments regarding this matter.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The following is a breakdown of residents polled based on the number of replies returned:

Total No. Polled:359

No. of Replies Received:61 or 17%

No. of Replies Not Counted: 0

No. of Replies in Favour:56 or 92%

No. of Replies Not In Favour: 5 or 8%

The following is an overall breakdown of responses, according to resident owners, non-resident owners, and tenants:

Comments from Residents are attached hereto as Appendix I.

Conclusions:

As noted above, the majority of residents, based on the responses received, are in favour of the proposal to implement on-street permit parking on the south side of Vaughan Road between Northcliffe Boulevard and its westerly terminus.

Contact Name:

Steve Brown

York Operations Services - Traffic Division

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2758

(A copy of Appendix 1, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

12

Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Scott Road

between Kersdale Avenue and Aileen Avenue

Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)on-street permit parking be implemented on Scott Road between Kersdale Avenue and Aileen Avenue; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (July 9, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

To show results of a poll conducted of residents on Scott Road between Kersdale Avenue and Aileen Avenue, regarding the above proposal.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendations:

For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Clause 14(q) embodied in Report No. 4 of the York Community Council.

York Community Council, at its meeting held on April 1, 1998, directed that residents on Scott Road between Kersdale Avenue and Aileen Avenue be polled to determine interest regarding this matter.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The following is a breakdown of residents polled based on the number of replies returned:

Total No. Polled:24

No. of Replies Received:3 or 12.5%

No. of Replies Not Counted:0

No. of Replies in Favour:3 or 100%

No. of Replies Not In Favour:0

The following is an overall breakdown of responses, according to resident owners, non-resident owners, and tenants:

Conclusions:

As noted above, the majority of residents, based on the responses received, are in favour of the proposal to implement on-street permit parking on Scott Road between Kersdale Avenue and Aileen Avenue.

Contact Name:

Steve Brown, Operations Services - Traffic Division

394-2655, 394-2758 (fax)

13

Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on

Rogers Road between Oakwood Avenue and Caledonia Road

Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)on-street permit parking be implemented on Rogers Road between Oakwood Avenue and Caledonia Road; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (July 13, 1998) from the CityClerk:

Purpose:

To show results of a poll conducted of residents on Rogers Road between Oakwood Avenue and Caledonia Road, regarding the above proposal.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendations:

For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Clause 14 (p) embodied in Report No. 4 of the York Community Council.

York Community Council, at its meeting held on April 1, 1998, directed that residents on Rogers Road between Oakwood Avenue and Caledonia Road be polled to determine interest regarding this matter.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The following is a breakdown of residents polled based on the number of replies returned:

Total No. Polled:208

No. of Replies Received: 9

No. of Replies Not Counted: 1

No. of Replies in Favour:5 or 62.5%

No. of Replies Not In Favour:3 or 37.5%

The following is an overall breakdown of responses, according to resident owners, non-resident owners and tenants:

Comments from residents are attached hereto as Appendix A.

Conclusions:

As noted above, the majority of residents, based on the responses received, are in favour of the proposal to implement on-street permit parking on Rogers Road between Oakwood Avenue and Caledonia Road.

Contact Name:

Steve Brown

York Operations Services - Traffic Division

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2758

(A copy of Appendix A referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

14

Installation of Disabled Parking Space at

Westbury Crescent - Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July8,1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

Mr. Secondo Niccoletto, 60 Bicknell Avenue is requesting a designated disabled parking space be established on Westbury Crescent directly abutting the flankage of their residence.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Traffic budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Uniform Traffic By-law No. 2958-94 be amended to prohibit parking anytime on the north side of Westbury Crescent for one vehicle length, directly abutting the flankage of municipally addressed residence 60 Bicknell Avenue; and

(2)Mr. S. Niccoletto receive a copy of this report.

Council Reference/Background History:

Mr. S. Niccoletto by letter dated June 19, 1998 (Appendix I), through Councillor Bill Saundercook's office is requesting consideration to establish a designated disabled parking space on the north side of Westbury Crescent, directly abutting the flankage of his residence, located at 60 Bicknell Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The property municipally addressed as 60 Bicknell Avenue is located on the north/west corner of Bicknell Avenue and Westbury Crescent.

Bicknell Avenue is a collector roadway, traversing in a north/south direction between Rogers Road and Eglinton Avenue West, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow. On-street parking is currently prohibited on the west side of Bicknell Avenue, directly in front of Mr. S. Niccoletto's residence, located at 60 Bicknell Avenue.

Westbury Crescent is a local roadway, traversing in an east/westerly direction between BicknellAvenue and Juliet Crescent, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow. On-street parking is exclusively permitted on the north side of Westbury Crescent. A maximum signed one (1) hour parking regulation is in effect, during the hours 8:00 am to 7:00 pm, with an unsigned three (3) hour parking regulation for all other times.

Mr. S. Niccoletto is requesting that a designated disabled parking space be established directly abutting the flankage of his residence on Westbury Crescent, where on-street parking is legally permitted.

As Council is aware, any person currently possessing a valid provincial permit bearing the international symbol of access is exempt from the following on-street traffic regulations:

1.Payment to engage a parking meter;

2."No Parking" for a period longer than 3 hours;

3."No Parking" restrictions, other than rush hour prohibitions, i.e. 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. or 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.;

4.Signed maximum parking duration regulations, i.e. 1 hour.

Mr. S. Niccoletto does possess a valid Province of Ontario Disabled Parking Permit #377256, expiring in April 2002 (Appendix II).

Conclusions:

Based on this information, Mr. S. Niccoletto can legally park on the west side of Bicknell Avenue where on-street parking is presently prohibited, which would result in an impediment to the safe two-way vehicular traffic flow on the street.

We are more inclined to recommend prohibiting parking on the north side of WestburyCrescent, where on-street parking is legally permitted, by establishing a designated disabled parking space directly abutting the flankage of 60 Bicknell Avenue to accommodate a single motor vehicle. This would enable Mr. S. Niccoletto to park in the prohibited disabled parking space by virtue of his provincial permit, without disrupting traffic.

It is, therefore, recommended that a designated disabled parking space be established on the north side of Westbury Crescent directly abutting the flankage of 60 Bicknell Avenue to accommodate a single motor vehicle.

Contact Person:

Stephen C. Brown

York Manager Traffic/Parking

Tel: 394-2655

Tel: 394-2888

(Copies of Appendices 1 and 2, referred to in the foregoing report, were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

15

Request for Disabled Parking Space at

318 McRoberts Avenue - Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July7,1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

Mr. Pietro Lorusso, 318 McRoberts Avenue is requesting a designated disabled loading/unloading zone be established directly in front of his residence.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Traffic budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Uniform Traffic By-law No. 2958-94 be amended to prohibit parking anytime on the west side of McRoberts Avenue for one vehicle length, directly in front of Mr. P. Lorusso's municipally addressed residence, located at 318 McRoberts Avenue, during the last half of each month (April to November 30), including the winter months (December 1st to March31) for the establishment of a loading/unloading area only; and

(2)Mr. P. Lorusso receive a copy of this report.

Council Reference/Background History:

Mr. P. Lorusso by letter (Appendix I), is requesting consideration to establish a designated disabled loading/unloading area, directly in front of his residence, located at 318 McRoberts Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Mr. P. Lorusso's municipally addressed residence is located on the west side of McRoberts Avenue between Rogers Road and Corby Avenue.

McRoberts Avenue between Rogers Road and Corby Avenue is a local roadway, traversing in a north/south direction, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow. Alternate side on-street parking is currently in effect on this section of McRoberts Avenue. Parking alternates from the east side for the first half of the month to the west side for the last half of the month, between the months of April through to November. During the winter months, parking is exclusively permitted on the west side of the street.

At present an unsigned three (3) hour maximum parking regulation is in effect, with a permit restriction between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 6:00 am, for any vehicle displaying a valid on-street parking permit stating McRoberts Avenue.

Mr. P. Lorusso's request is for a designated disabled loading/unloading area on McRoberts Avenue, directly in front of his residence, for wheeltrans drop off and pick up only.

Conclusions:

The establishment of a designated disabled loading/unloading area would provide unobstructed access for wheeltrans during the last half of each month, commencing April through November, including the months December to March 31st, when on-street parking is legally permitted on the west side of McRoberts Avenue, directly in front of Mr. P. Lorusso's residence.

It is, therefore, recommended that a designated disabled loading/unloading area be established, directly in front of Mr. P. Lorusso's residence located at 318 McRoberts Avenue, for a single vehicle length to facilitate unobstructed wheeltrans access for loading/unloading purposes only, during the days and months when on-street parking is legally permitted on the west side of McRoberts Avenue.

Contact Person:

Stephen C. Brown

York Manager Traffic/Parking

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2888

(A copy of Appendix 1, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

16

All-Way Stop Control at Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue

Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July 8, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

Councillor Rob Davis by memo dated June 8, 1998, is requesting the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue, to resolve motorists speeding on Gilbert Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Traffic budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)an all-way stop control be installed at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and KitchenerAvenue; and

(2)the Uniform Traffic By-law No. 2958-94 be amended to introduce an all-way stop control, within the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue.

Council Reference/Background History:

Councillor Rob Davis is requesting the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The present geometric layout of the intersection is a "T" type design, currently uncontrolled on all three approaches.

Gilbert Avenue is classified as a local roadway under the City of York Official Plan, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow in a north/southbound direction between Eglinton Avenue West and Kitchener Avenue.

Kitchener Avenue between Gilbert Avenue and Caledonia Road is classified as a local roadway under the City of York Official Plan, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow in an east/west direction.

To ensure the overall effectiveness and safety of all-way stop conditions, established warrant criteria are utilized in analyzing the eight (8) hour count data to determine if the warrants are justified.

In order for an intersection to be warranted for an all-way stop control, at least one of the five warrant criteria must be fulfilled one hundred percent . A recent study at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue yielded the following results:

StudyWarrant

Intersection Safety Stop Sign CriteriaResultsFulfillment

(a)a total vehicle volume on all intersection approaches

exceeding 350 vehicles for the highest one hour

recorded;40 No

(b)a volume split of 75/25 or greater than 25% for the

minor street;72/28 Yes

(c)a combined vehicular and pedestrian volume on the

minor street exceeding 200 per hour with an average

pedestrian delay of 30 seconds or more;0 No

(d)average of 4 or more collisions per year for a three-

year period subject to relief through multi-way

stop control;0 No

(e)minimum traffic control signal warrants are satisfied

but cannot be implemented immediately.0 No

Conclusions:

Based on the study results, an all-way stop control is warranted at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Kitchener Avenue and is therefore recommended.

Contact Name:

Stephen C. Brown

York Manager, Traffic/Parking

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2888

17

All-Way Stop Control at Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue

Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July 8, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

Councillor Rob Davis by memo dated June 8, 1998, is requesting the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue, to resolve motorists speeding on Gilbert Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Traffic budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)an all-way stop control be installed at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue; and

(2)the Uniform Traffic By-law No. 2958-94 be amended to introduce an all-way stop control, within the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue.

Council Reference/Background History:

Councillor Rob Davis is requesting the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The present geometric layout of the intersection is a "T" type design, currently controlled with a stop sign for westbound vehicular traffic on Keith Avenue.

Gilbert Avenue is classified as a local roadway under the City of York Official Plan, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow in a north/southbound direction between Eglinton Avenue West and Kitchener Avenue.

Keith Avenue between Gilbert Avenue and Caledonia Road is classified as a local roadway under the City of York Official Plan, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow in an east/west direction.

To ensure the overall effectiveness and safety of all-way stop conditions, established warrant criteria are utilized in analyzing the eight (8) hour count data to determine if the warrants are justified.

In order for an intersection to be warranted for an all-way stop control, at least one of the five warrant criteria must be fulfilled one hundred percent. A recent study at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue yielded the following results:

StudyWarrant

Intersection Safety Stop Sign CriteriaResultsFulfillment

(a)a total vehicle volume on all intersection approaches

exceeding 350 vehicles for the highest one hour

recorded;95 No

(b)a volume split of 75/25 or greater than 25% for the

minor street;72/28 Yes

(c)a combined vehicular and pedestrian volume on the

minor street exceeding 200 per hour with an

average pedestrian delay of 30 seconds or more;0 No

(d)average of 4 or more collisions per year for a three

year period subject to relief through multi-way

stop control; and0 No

(e)minimum traffic control signal warranges are

satisfied but cannot be implemented immediately.0 No

Based on the study results, an all-way stop control is warranted at the intersection of Gilbert Avenue and Keith Avenue and is therefore recommended.

Contact Name:

Stephen C. Brown

York Manager, Traffic/Parking

Tel: 394-2655

Fax: 394-2888

18

All-Way Stop Control at Kane Avenue and Aileen Avenue

Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July13,1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

Ms. Mabel Furlott, 93 Kersdale Avenue by letter dated July 5, 1998, through CouncillorFrancesNunziata's office is requesting the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at Kane Avenue and Aileen Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Traffic budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)an all way stop control be installed at the intersection of Kane Avenue and AileenAvenue; and

(2)the Uniform Traffic By-law No. 2958-94 be amended to introduce an all-way stop control, within the intersection of Kane Avenue and Aileen Avenue.

Council Reference/Background History:

Ms. Mabel Furlott, through Councillor Frances Nunziata's office, is requesting the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at the intersection of Kane Avenue and Aileen Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The present geometric layout of the intersection is a "cross" type design, currently the intersection is under stop control for east and westbound vehicular traffic on Aileen Avenue.

Kane Avenue is classified as a local roadway under the City of York Official Plan, providing one-way vehicular traffic flow in a southbound direction between Eglinton Avenue West and OldWestonRoad.

Aileen Avenue is classified as a local roadway under the City of York Official Plan, providing two-way vehicular traffic flow in an east/west direction between Keele Street and BlackthornAvenue.

To ensure the overall effectiveness and safety of all-way stop conditions, established warrant criteria are utilized in analyzing the eight (8) hour count data to determine if the warrants are justified.

In order for an intersection to be warranted for an all-way stop control, at least one of the five warrant criteria must be fulfilled one hundred percent. A recent study at the intersection of Kane Avenue and Aileen Avenue yielded the following results:

Intersection Safety Stop Sign CriteriaStudyWarrants

ResultsFulfilment

(a)a total vehicle volume on all approaches 185 No

exceeding 350 vehicles for the highest one

hour recorded;

(b)a volume split of 75/25 or greater than 25% 66/34 Yes

for the minor street;

(c)a combined vehicular and pedestrian volume 0 No

on the minor street exceeding 200 per hour

with an average pedestrian delay of 30

seconds or more;

(d)average of 4 or more collisions per year for 1 No

a three year period subject to relief through

multi-way stop control;

(e)minimum traffic control signal warrants are 0 No

satisfied but cannot be implemented immediately.

Conclusions:

Based on the study results, an all-way stop control is warranted at the intersection of KaneAvenue and Aileen Avenue and is therefore recommended.

Contact Name:

Stephen C. Brown, Manager, Traffic/Parking

394-2655, 394-2888 (fax)

19

Tree Obstruction of Driveway Access at

144 Humbercrest Boulevard - Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)the following report (June 23, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services be adopted;

(2)any fees applicable to this parking permit be waived;

(3)the parking permit be revoked should the obstruction to the driveway no longer exist; and

(4)in addition to the issuance of a parking permit, that the City provide the owner(s) of 144 Humbercrest Boulevard with a letter confirming the circumstances by which the permit has been issued, and the granting of authority to park a vehicle on a non-designated permit street; and that the appropriate police division be so notified.

Purpose:

Councillor Bill Saundercook is requesting staff to review and report on alternative options available to the City, other than removing an existing oak tree belonging to the City located at 144Humbercrest Boulevard, that is currently obstructing Mr. Albert Deavitt's right of access to his residence.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None required.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the City Solicitor prepare a by-law, which authorizes the issuance of an on-street parking permit to facilitate parking on a non-designated permit street to a residential property owner, for the purposes of parking, due to a mature healthy tree obstructing a residential property owner's right of access to their residence.

Council Reference/Background History:

Councillor Bill Saundercook is requesting staff to review and report on alternative options available to the City other than removing an existing oak tree, belonging to the City located at 144Humbercrest Boulevard, that is currently obstructing Mr. Albert Deavitt's driveway.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Mr. Albert Deavitt's residence is located on the west side of Humbercrest Boulevard between

St. Johns Road and Dundas Street, within Ward 27, York Humber.

Currently on-street parking on Humbercrest Boulevard between St. Johns Road and Dundas Street is legally permitted on the east side, exclusively. The parking duration is an unsigned maximum three(3) hour limit, anytime.

Through the years the oak tree has grown in size. As a result, the base of the tree has expanded to currently occupy half of Mr. Albert Deavitt's driveway. Presently the only recourse A. Deavitt has available to negotiate around the tree is to drive onto the neighbour's front yard to park his vehicle.

Obviously, the City is responsible for the obstruction realizing the tree is located on the municipal road allowance. Staff have investigated the age and condition of the tree and reported it is healthy. Appreciating the species, age, and condition of the tree, staff are reluctant to recommend its removal, and therefore have requested that we review and report on alternative options available. Outlined below are three viable alternatives and their implications to resolving this issue:

Scenario 1

A. Deavitt could apply for front yard parking to establish a parking space on the south side of their property line.

The implications would result in the Deavitt's incurring an expenditure of between $2,000.00 and $3,000.00 to licence and provide a legal parking space on the south side of their property line.

In a recent telephone conversation with A. Deavitt, front yard parking is not an alternative option he is prepared to pursue.

Scenario 2

On-street permit parking provides those residents, without adequate off-street parking facilities to legally park their vehicles on the streets on which they reside for extended periods of time, with impunity from the signed and unsigned parking regulations.

However, on-street permit parking is only considered by Council, after conducting a poll where the results verify the majority of resident responses received support the introduction of on-street permit parking.

The implications, therefore, may be the majority of resident responses received do not support the introduction of on-street permit parking, resulting in A. Deavitt being unable to park for extended durations of time. Should, however, the majority of resident responses received support the introduction of on-street permit parking the Deavitts would incur an expenditure of $64.20 per year.

Scenario 3

Appreciating the unique circumstances, on-street permit parking is a viable alternative to resolving this matter, as it relates to a single property owner for the remainder of the City tree's life span.

The current implementation policy process for on-street permit parking requires a public process, with no guarantees for its acceptance by the majority of resident responses.

We would, therefore, recommend that the Solicitor prepare an on-street permit parking by-law authorizing the issuance of an on-street parking permit on a non-designated street to a residential property owner where extenuating circumstances, being a municipal tree, circumvent a residential property owner's right of access to their residence.

We would also suggest that a nominal fee of $1.00 per month or $12.00 per year, plus G.S.T., be charged to cover the administration cost of processing the permit.

The implications would require the Deavitts to purchase an on-street parking permit.

Conclusions:

On-street permit parking is a viable alternative where extenuating circumstances, being a municipal tree, circumvent residential property owners' right of access to their residence. We, therefore, recommend and support the Solicitor preparing a by-law authorizing the issuance of an on-street parking permit to any residential property owner where right of access to their residence is obstructed, by a healthy mature municipal tree, on non-designated streets within the York District.

Contact Person:

Stephen C. Brown, York Manager Traffic/Parking

Tel: 394-2655, Fax: 394-2888

20

Alteration of Rostrevor Road

Ward 28, York Eglinton

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

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1)the previously approved traffic calming measures scheduled for implementation on Rostrevor Road as part of the Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan, be amended to install only the speed bumps on this street;

(2)the City Solicitor prepare a by-law amending the relevant by-law with respect to the Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan;

(3)the City enact a by-law authorizing the alteration of Rostrevor Road; and

(4)the City Clerk be directed to publish the required notice as set out in TheMunicipalAct.

The York Community Council submits the following communication (July 17, 1998) from Councillor Rob Davis:

I am requesting that the York Community Council amend the relevant by-law to alter the Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan on Rostrevor Road.

Specifically, I would request that the plan for the road narrowing and speed hump on RostrevorRoad be altered to remove the road narrowing on the south side of Rostrevor Road, with only the speed hump remaining as part of the plan.

In order to allow us to meet the legislative requirements, I would further request that we defer installation of any measures on Rostrevor Road, for a period of four weeks.

21

Zoning By-law Amendment for a Temporary Use

at 180 Church Street; Owner and Applicant: Humber River

Regional Hospital - Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the following report (July2,1998) from the York Commissioner of Development Services, and for the reason that the proposal is an appropriate use of the lands on a temporary basis, recommends as follows:

(1)that the application by the Humber River Regional Hospital for a Temporary Use at 180 Church Street be approved for a one (1) year period, and that subsection (378) of the Draft Temporary Zoning By-law be amended accordingly to read ".....a period of time not to exceed one (1) year from the day of the passing of this by-law.......";

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

The York Community Council reports for the information of Council, having advised the Pelmo Park Childcare Centre to undertake a search for a permanent location for their daycare centre; and

having requested staff to ensure that this Temporary Zoning By-law does not impact on the separate rezoning application by the Humber River Regional Hospital, with respect to the proposed expansion of its hospital facilities.

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

The Community Council submits the following report (July 2, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Development Services:

Purpose:

This report is submitted to recommend a temporary use by-law to allow a daycare at 180 Church Street for a maximum period of three years.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not Applicable.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1)the application be approved; and

(2)a Temporary Zoning By-law, to amend Zoning By-Law No. 1-83 be passed in accordance with the draft Temporary Zoning By-law, attach as Appendix 3 to this report.

1.Background

The Pelmo Park Childcare centre, now located at Pelmo Park Elementary Public School in the former City of North York, has been requested to vacate the school by August 31, 1998. The childcare centre is finalizing negotiations with the Humber River Regional Hospital for the use of 180 Church Street on a leasehold basis for the operation of a daycare on a temporary basis starting in September 1998. Daycare administrators have indicated that space is not available in any other school in the area and the centre, which serves a local population, is in dire need of a daycare location in order to continue serving the community.

Humber River Regional Hospital has acquired a number of residential properties with dwellings on the same block as the hospital and, under a separate rezoning application, is proposing to expand the hospital facilities and construct a parking garage. The hospital has communicated that its property at 180 Church Street is surplus to its needs as envisioned by the site plan submitted in support of expansion proposal This temporary use zoning application is proposed as a way of assisting the daycare to continue serving the local community by accommodating its relocation needs. This is proposed as a temporary measure while the concurrent rezoning application for the hospital expansion is being reviewed. A daycare use permitted as an accessory or complimentary use to the hospital, but not necessarily on the 180 Church Street site, is being reviewed as part of the larger application dealing with the hospital expansion.

2.Proposal

This application is for an amendment to Zoning By-law No. 1-83 to permit a vacant, 260 m², two storey house at on a property having an area of approximately 525 m² at 180 Church Street, to be used on a temporary basis (for a period up to three years), as a daycare centre with up to fifty children and eight staff members. The site is located in the former City of York on the northeast corner of Church and Pine Streets, and is owned by the Humber River Regional Hospital (See Appendix 1 - Location Map).

The main house will be renovated for a daycare, and the existing rear yard garage will be demolished in order to provide four drop-off parking spaces. Six staff parking spaces will be provided in the hospital staff parking lot abutting the site to the north (See Appendix 2 - Site Plan).

3.Compliance with Official Plan and Zoning By-law

The Official Plan designation for the site is Low Density Residential. Official Plan policies for this designation allows compatible minor commercial uses and institutional uses which serve a local population. The proposed use of the subject property complies with the Official Plan.

The site is zoned R1 - Residential District by Zoning By-law No. 1-83. A daycare use is not allowed in an R1 zone unless it is in a school. A temporary use by-law will allow the use of the site for a day nursery while the concurrent Zoning By-law amendment for the hospital is being evaluated for a report to Toronto Council.

Comments:

(1)Issues:

The following issues have been raised in considering this temporary use zoning application for a daycare centre.

-need for the daycare centre in the community;

-Official Plan criteria for approval of temporary use applications

-impact on traffic in the area and parking; and

-noise and nuisance to adjacent neighbours.

(2)Evaluation:

(a)Need for the Daycare Centre in the Community

Approximately 45 to 50 local children now are enrolled in the Pelmo Park Childcare Centre. They range in age from toddlers to age twelve (before and after school programmes). These children will not have the service now being provided if the daycare closes because it cannot find suitable accommodation and to be operational in September 1998. This will cause hardship for working parents who must look for less convenient or more expensive care, and also place the children at risk if some parents choose to have them at home alone, before and after school. The daycare has the potential to take on an expanded role over time as a workplace daycare for the hospital, while also serving the local community.

This local service provides for the care and safety of local children. The service is considered valuable and needed within the community and should not be discontinued. The site at 180 Church street is suitable for the daycare's locational needs.

(b)Official Plan Criteria for Approval of Temporary Use Applications

The Official Plan policies for temporary uses state that in considering the enactment of a Temporary Use By-Law, Council shall be satisfied that the following conditions shall apply:

(i)Extensions of the period of temporary use may be permitted by subsequent By-laws, but generally should not continue for more than a total of six years.

Comment:

This is the first application for a Temporary Use By-law at this location and the Department is recommending that the by-law be approved only for a period of 3 years.

(ii)Additional buildings or the expansion of existing building(s) may be permitted that do not encumber the long term viability of the uses provided for in the Official Plan and Zoning By-Laws.

Comment:

The proposed by-law will allow the daycare use on a temporary basis within existing building. The underlying R1 zoning will remain in place so as not to encumber the long term viability of the area as a low density residential area. More over, the proposed temporary use by-law contains a provision to allow new accessory buildings or additions and alterations to the existing building, in accordance with R1 zoning regulations in order to control built form.

(iii)The proposed temporary use must be compatible with adjacent land uses or measures to mitigate any adverse impacts must be applied.

Comment:

The proposed temporary use is in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan to allow minor commercial uses that serve the local population. It is compatible with the adjacent hospital use . Measures to address any adverse impacts on adjoining residential uses are available through the Site Plan Approval process and are discussed in a subsequent section of this report.

(iv)The use does not adversely impact on traffic or transportation facilities in the area.

(v)Parking on the site must be sufficient for the use.

Comment:

Impact on area traffic and parking are addressed in a following section.

(vi)The site can adequately accommodate the proposed use, with attention to considering such matters as site layout, building design, access and provision of landscaping screening and buffering measures, and servicing.

Comment:

The site can accommodate the proposed use subject to the mitigation measures that will be secured through the Site Plan Approval process as discussed in a subsequent section of this report.

(c)Impact on Traffic in the Area and Parking

Most of the children in the daycare centre are driven to school and the majority of staff members drive. The hospital is proposing four drop-off parking spaces at the north side of the property with driveway access from Pine Street. The existing on-site garage will be demolished to allow for the arrangement of 4 rear yard surface parking spaces behind the existing tree abutting the driveway. Staff parking for six cars is proposed in the abutting hospital staff parking lot to the north. The peak hours for traffic and short term parking are from 7 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m., with the heaviest demand occurring during the second hour of each peak.

The average drop-off or pick up time is approximately five minutes which means each parking space can be used a maximum of twelve times in an hour. The provision of four parking spaces will allow a maximum of forty-eight parking opportunities per hour, or ninety-six in each two hour peak period. Since the daycare will have a maximum of fifty children, the on-site parking spaces would meet the demand.

Of the eight daycare staff, six drive their cars to work. The intention is to provide the six staff parking spaces in the hospital parking lot. Due to the proximity of transit on Jane Street, and the Church Street bus, there are more alternatives for transit use that daycare staff and patrons may avail themselves of at the proposed new location. Even if they do not, the proposal will meet the current need. The hospital could also dedicate more parking spaces for the daycare staff use, if required.

Traffic in the larger neighbourhood will not increase, as these are local trips. The Works Department has not expressed a concern with the impact that the use will generate on the local road network, based on the fact that traffic to the daycare will continue to be using the same road network. They do not expect any additional adverse impact on traffic and transportation facilities in the area. The traffic study for the hospital expansion proposal will also address the cumulative effect that both the daycare and the hospital expansion will have on traffic and parking. As part of the traffic evaluation for the hospital rezoning consideration will be given to appropriate recommendations regarding traffic mitigation measures or the continuation of a daycare use at this location beyond the prescribed temporary period.

(d)Noise and Nuisance to Adjacent Neighbours

The most immediate neighbour is at 182 Church Street. The elderly owners of the property have indicated that the number of children and the increased local traffic will be intolerable. The neighbours on the south side of Church Street have also voiced a concern regarding the possibility of fencing the front yard to provide safety for the children. They indicated that this will be the only high front yard fence in the area, thus detracting from the openness of the surrounding front yards.

The forty-nine children proposed to be in the daycare will be in two categories: toddlers and pre-schoolers who will spend the entire day at the centre (eighteen children), and kindergarten and school age (thirty-one children) who will be at the daycare before and after school. The daycare has indicated that all of the children would not be in the playground at any one time. These splits will reduce the number of children at the daycare all day and will limit the noise from the outdoor areas to primarily the late afternoon period.

The use of fencing and landscaping to provide screening and buffering to the adjacent properties is an effective way of reducing the noise from the day-care's outdoor activities. A Site Plan application for the change in use will be required to be submitted by the applicant for approval. Matters relating to fencing, landscaping and the provision of on-site parking spaces will be addressed to the City's satisfaction under the Site Plan Approval process.

One of the reasons for having a temporary use by-law on the property is to monitor the actual impact a use will have on the surrounding area without permanently allowing the use in that location. If the use is in operation in September, 1998, monitoring would take place until the report on the hospital zoning is prepared. At that time, consideration will be given to a recommendation to continue the daycare use at this location, move the use to a different part of the hospital property, or discontinue the use completely.

(3)Public Process:

A Planning Act Public Meeting is being held on July 22, 1998, at which time the draft by-law will be before York Community Council for approval. If adopted, the draft by-law will be before City Council on July 29, 1998. The community will be able to make presentation to the Community Council meeting.

If the neighbours do not agree with City Council's decision on the matter, they may appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Conclusions:

The temporary use by-law allows for establishment of the daycare and the monitoring of any impact it may have on the immediate area throughout the temporary use. Any desire to establish the use on a permanent basis would require zoning approval. The service is valued by the community, however the location could change as part of the consideration and evaluation of the Zoning application for the hospital expansion.

Contact Name:

Wendy Johncox, Senior Planner, York Civic Centre

Tel: 394-2869, Fax: 394-2782

(Copies of Appendices (1) Location Map, (2) Site Plan, and (3) Draft Temporary Zoning By-Law referred to in the foregoing report, were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Centre.)

APPENDIX 3 - Draft Temporary Zoning By-Law

Authority:

Intended for the first presentation to Council:

Adopted by Council:

CITY OF TORONTO

BY-LAW No.

To amend Former City of York By-Law No. 1-83

regarding Lands - 180 Church Street.

The Council of The City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:

Section 16 - Amended

1.That Section 16 of City of York By-Law No. 1-83, as amended, be further amended by adding a new subsection (378) as follows:

"(378)Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsections (1) and (2) of Section 7 of this by-law, the lands and building existing on the date of the enactment of this By-law to introduce this Subsection municipally known as 180 Church Street, as more particularly described in Schedule "A" to this Subsection, may be used for a day nursery and for any accessory uses for a period of time not to exceed three years from the day of the passing of this by-law to introduce this subsection, subject to the following conditions:

(i)any additions or alterations to the buildings or structures existing on the lands on the date of the passing of this by-law to introduce this subsection or any new building or structure to be erected on the lands, shall conform with the provisions of Subsection (3) of Section 7;

(ii)a minimum of four parking spaces for drop-off and pick-up activities shall be provided and maintained on the lands; and

(iii)parking facilities shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the parking regulations of By-Law 1-83, as amended."

2.Subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P.13., as amended, this by-law shall come into force on the date of its passing.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , A.D. 1998.

MayorCity Clerk

SCHEDULE A to Subsection 16 (378).

Legal Description to follow.

The Community Council also submits the following communication (July 10, 1998) from A.Rumsey, 182 Church Street:

Mr. and Mrs. Rumsey have lived at 182 Church Street for fifty years. We own the house and property, paying taxes to York township over the same period.

We are both over 80 years of age and in poor health. We do not want a childcare centre at 180Church Street with all the bells and whistles, four buses, and around fifty kids. The four buses would fill half the yard. We cannot have strain of the noise, traffic, property devaluation and loss of privacy.

This is a residential area and must remain so, come out and look at the houses in the block. In the fifty years, the hospital has taken over the houses, green houses and property. I am surrounded by the hospital on the north, east and west sides. My house is the only one that the hospital has not bought.

If the hospital wants to turn 180 Church Street into a childcare centre, I would suggest that they negotiate a fair settlement for 182 Church Street and compensate Mr. Rumsey for having been put in the position of having to sell and move.

I would also want the township to start looking after its taxpayers' interest, rather than side with big business.

The Community Council also submits the following communication (July 22, 1998) from Ms.Raulina Kesteven, 185 Church Street, to members of the Community Council and the Pelmo Park daycare providers:

I am here before you today to speak to you about a request made to City Council by the Humber River Regional Hospital for the rezoning of 180 Church Street into a day care centre. We the residents, are not opposed in principle to day care as we realize that it is a necessary and worthwhile cause. We are, however, opposed to the centre being housed at 180 Church Street for the following reasons:

(1)Safety and Security:

HRRH has taken over the mental health assessment unit that was once housed at Northwestern Hospital. The outpatient program already brings walk-in mentally disturbed people to the area.

Over the past 15 years that we have been residents within the neighbourhood, we have called the hospital on numerous occasions to inform them that one of their mentally handicapped patients is on the loose again. Sometimes, the comments from the hospital staff are "on no - not again". Over the years, the residents who live next door to 180 Church Street have collected clothing from these mentally ill patients. They sometimes use the yard at 184 Church Street to undress, fall asleep on the back lawn etc. In fact, last week two patients undressed and left their clothing behind. These articles have been brought to the meeting this evening.

Be aware that if this application is approved, you will have children playing in a yard with the possibility of mental patients in the next yard. Last year in Hamilton a schizophrenic person murdered a two year old boy. The mental unit poses a grave security risk to the neighbourhood.

2.Traffic congestion and noise generation:

Traffic has already reached unacceptably high levels with the merging of Northwestern Hospital nad the Humber River Regional Hospital. Adding the daycare centre to the neighbourhood will only serve to compound the issue. The rezoning also applies for four parking spaces to be installed at the back of the house. These spaces will be used for pickup and drop off. Where do the other 46 cars that are dropping kids off stop? The corner of Church Street and Pine Street alrea heavily congested with traffic at peak times of the day. This is the approximate time that the children will be picked up and dropped off.

The residents within the neighbourhood are essentially older people. Some of them have serious health problems. They do not want to see an increase in traffic and noise levels within the area. 180 Church Street is a private residence and does not have the facility to accommodate 50 pickups and dropoffs per day. The yard will have to be fenced in with a minimum six-foot fence to keep the children housed within the premises. Any signage or enclosures around the property will change the residential streetscape.

3.Building and By-law Issues:

The site is zoned as R1 residential and as such a daycare facility is not allowed. There are several issues to be concerned about over and above the zoning. Building code requirements, inspection for asbestos usages and or toxic materials of any kind, fire regulations, i.e. egress etc., access for handicapped people.

4.Availability of alternate space:

Only this morning I learned from one of the parents whose child goes to the Pelmo Park Daycare Centre, that the Centre has a firm commitment from a local church on William Street, to house the centre. If the petition to rezone 180 Church Street is denied, the centre will take up the offer made by the church. Considering that the daycare centre has already been proactive in finding itself another location, we would respectfully suggest that Council disallow the motion to rezone.

In closing, I would like to present the Council with a list of 61 signatures that were obtained during a petition drive to oppose the daycare centre locating to 180 Church Street.

Petition signed by residents on Church Street, Robert Street, Uphill Avenue, Woodward Avenue, Pine Street, Jane Street and Dalbeattie Avenue

By now you are aware that the Humber River Regional Hospital has approached the City of Toronto to rezone the property at 180 Church Street (north-east corner of Church and Pine Streets) to allow for a daycare centre with parking facilities on the premises. This daycare centre will house approximately 50 youngsters ranging in all ages.

Previously the Ministry of Education provided the Boards of Education with funding for daycare centres. Now the municipalities will be responsible for providing funding and premises for daycare centres.

We, your neighbours, oppose the daycare facility and request that you sign this petition which will be presented to the City to express our views on the subject matter at hand.

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

-Mr. Donald McKenzie, member, Board of Directors, Pelmo Park Childcare Centre, in support of the application.

-Mr. Wayne Kestevan, 185 Church Street - made enquiries regarding this temporary rezoning and its potential to be considered in conjunction with the present development process for the hospital expansion; whether the renovations to the house would be in conformity with provincial standards such as, accessibility for the physically handicapped; the safety concerns regarding the proximity of the drop off point for the children and a bus stop and major entrance to the hospital; questionned the findings of the consultant's study with respect to traffic; expressed concerns regarding the increase in traffic and its impact on the neighbourhood; and is opposed to the rezoning.

-Ms. Raulina Kestevan, 185 Church Street - presented the communication recorded above; and enquired as to the cost for renovations to the house; the source of funding; and the charge to the childcare centre for use of the property.

-Mr. Dalius Butrimas, 47 Uphill Avenue - concerned for the safety of the children, as the centre will be in close proximity to a mental health hospital; there is the potential for violence as sexual offenders and pedophiles will be attending at the facility; the west wing of the hospital is not properly secured, as patients leave the facility and appear on the properties of the residents, sometimes undressing in the backyards and barefeet in the snow.

-Mr. Leon King, 125 Woodward Avenue - suggested that the property could be converted to a clinic or service centre; concerned that traffic will be increased; and not in favour of the proposed used.

-Mr. A. Rumsey, 182 Church Street - in support of his communication recorded above.

-Mr. Scott Dudgeon, Humber River Regional Hospital - advised that the hospital was assisting the community with a much needed service; provided clarification with respect to the traffic issue; their consultants have advised that traffic in the neighbourhood will be neutral; the drop off and pick up times will be staggered; advised that the childcare centre will not be leading to the establishment of a day clinic; and provided information on mental health.

-Mr. Fred Witleveen, 177 Church Street - questionned the consultant's study regarding traffic; has observed the changes in traffic patterns over the years; concerned with the speed at which this temporary rezoning is proceeding as the community is already experiencing difficulty dealing with the larger expansion proposal by the hospital; and is opposed to the rezoning.

-Mr. Jim Darwin, 63 Pelmo Court - advised that he is not in favour of the proposal; concerned that the rezoning will become part of the large proposal for expansion by the hospital; and enquired as to whether the Pelmo Park Childcare Centre has investigated alternative locations.

-Ms. Kim Cross, Supervisor, Pelmo Park Childcare Centre - advised that one of the reasons for selection of this property, was its close proximity to a school.

-Resident - enquired whether the parents of the children have the same confidence in the mental health facility, and suggested that the parents should be notified.

22

Request for Outdoor Eating Area

Nova Era Bakery, 488-490 Rogers Road

Ward 27, York Humber

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

The York Community Council recommends the approval of the application for a permit by the owner of Nova Era Bakery, to establish an outdoor eating area at 488-490 Rogers Road, within the Watt Avenue road allowance, in accordance with the stipulated guidelines.

The York Community Council reports for the information of Council, having formed a Working Group comprising of the two Councillors for Ward 27, and having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, to direct the York Manager, Traffic/Parking, to investigate the following issues and report to the Working Group:

(1)garbage in the area, and more regular enforcement;

(2)illegal parking of vehicles on the sidewalk impeding pedestrian access;

(3)the implementation of a No Standing regulation on one side of Watt Avenue;

(4)a change in classification from bakery to restaurant and the requirement for higher parking standards;

(5)the proposed installation of bollards at the intersection;

(6)clearing the debris from the property adjacent to the premises; and

(7)communicating with the Toronto Parking Authority to determine the feasibility of constructing parking lots in the Old Weston Road/Rogers Road area.

The Community Council submits the following report (May 29, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services:

Purpose:

To provide information relevant to an application for the establishment of an outdoor eating area at 488-490 Rogers Road, adjoining the existing premises within the Watt Avenue road allowance.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None required.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the City Clerk give public notice of Nova Era Bakery's application for an outdoor eating area within the Watt Avenue road allowance;

(2)further notice granting the public opportunity to provide comments on this application at a York Community Council meeting; and

(3)upon hearing public comments, the decision to grant a permit be decided by the Community Council.

Council Reference/Background History:

Mr. Helder Costa, owner of Nova Era Bakery, 488-490 Rogers Road, is requesting permission to establish an outdoor eating area adjoining his premises within the Watt Avenue road allowance.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The primary guideline for outdoor eating areas located along residential flankages is to provide buffering and screening to minimize any audio or visual impacts that may affect residential properties, whereupon public notice is given with an opportunity for public input, with the decision to grant a permit decided by the Community Council.

Nova Era Bakery at 488-490 Rogers Road, is located on the north-east corner of Rogers Road and Watt Avenue, within Ward 27, York Humber.

Mr. Helda Costa, owner, is requesting to establish an outdoor eating area measuring 4.45 metres by 12.05 metres (Appendix I). The owner is proposing to construct a removable wooden structure. The eating area is to be cordoned off with a one metre high wood railing.

The current established outdoor eating area guidelines are as follows:

(1)A minimum pedestrian sidewalk clearance of 2.14 metres from face of curb to the perimeter of the eating area.

The application is in compliance.

(2)Where an outdoor eating area is located along the flankage of a building, along a residential side street, there must be a sufficient setback from the residential properties and/or screening to the outdoor eating area as not to have an adverse impact.

This application provides a 1.5 metre high wood lattice screening along the north wall of the outdoor eating area. The closest residential property is located 21.75 metres from the proposed outdoor eating area.

(3)An outdoor eating area in a commercial-residential zone across the street from a residential zone must provie a buffer from the residential use across the street.

The zoning immediately adjacent to this application is similar, being mixed use commercial-residential. Buffering therefore, would not be a condition of approval.

(4)Outdoor eating areas in commercial-residential zones fronting on residential side streets must provi a minimum separation between the perimeter of the outdoor eating area and any residential entrance in the same or an adjoining building.

This application is for an outdoor eating area along the flankage, separation from any residential entrance, therefore would not be a condition of approval.

(5)An outdoor eating area must be paved before a licence is issued. Acceptable materials include concrete, granite, brick, wood and lockstone.

The applicant is proposing a wooden structure, with a cedar or pressure treated deck flooring and therefore in compliance.

(6)All outdoor eating areas must have perimeter fencing. Further, screens may enclose the sides and the street edge of an outdoor eating area below the fence.

The applicant is proposing a 1 metre high wooden railing as a perimeter enclosure and therefore in compliance.

(7)All elements of the outdoor eating area must be readily removable to accommodate the primary functions of the road allowance.

This application is for a removable wooden structure, with no foundations. The proposed structure is to be constructed on precast concrete pads resting on top of the existing asphalt boulevard, being removable and therefore in compliance.

Conclusion:

Both the Building Division and the Health Unit were contacted to provide their respective comments concerning this application and reported the following:

Building Division:

The maximum area allowed for an outdoor eating area according to the Zoning By-law No. 1-83, Section 3, Clause 32(b) is 53.65 square metres, representing 50% of the total area devoted to patron use.

The proposed outdoor eating area measures 53.62 square metres, being therefore in compliance with the zoning regulations.

Health Unit:

The Health Unit has no objection to Nova Era Bakery's application for an outdoor eating area located at 488-490 Rogers Road.

Nova Era Bakery's application meets all of the guidelines for an outdoor eating area within the WattAvenue road allowance. Therefore, based on Council's policy, public notice be given of Nova Era Bakery's application for an outdoor eating area. Notice granting the public an opportunity to provide comment at a meeting of the York Community Council, upon which the decision to grant a permit be decided by the Community Council.

The Community Council also submits the following petition signed by approximately 27 residents of Watt Avenue, Kane Avenue and Kersdale Avenue:

We, the residents of Ward 27, are strongly opposed to the idea of an outdoor eatery for NovaEraBakery, located at 488-490 Rogers Road, at the corner of Rogers Road and Watt Avenue.

The following are our concerns regarding this issue:

1.There is a scrap/automotive repair shop about 100 metres east of Nova Era Bakery. The stench which the former establishment expels carries all the way to the bakery making for an odour undesirable for a bakery, let alone an outdoor eatery.

2.Along with the stench of the repair shop comes the scampering of rodents and other vermin. I had the unpleasant experience of running into a family of rats huddled between the alley of Nova Era Bakery and its neighbour to the east, a Vietnamese food exporter, on a Sunday afternoon.

3.Mr. Helder Costa, the proprietor of Nova Era Bakery, blatantly disregards the CityofToronto By-law No. 2890-78, which prohibits the placing of garbage by an establishment on the sidewalk several days prior to pickup. This situation makes walking along Rogers Road a trying experience especially for the elderly and people with disabilities.

4.Considering the fact that several cars park on the location of the site of the proposed eatery, parking will definitely be a problem. Pictures which span from July 12 to 19, 1998, clearly indicates patrons of Nova Era Bakery literally abandoning their vehicles on the sidewalks, curbs, in front of driveways on both sides of Watt Avenue, and especially at the crosswalk intersecting Old Weston Road and Rogers Road.

Based on these facts, we have concluded that it is in the best interest of the City of Toronto to revoke Nova Era Bakery's application for an outdoor eatery. We suggest that both the Health Unit and the Traffic/Parking division re-examine this situation on the basis of these four facts.

As a community, we understand the importance of revitalizing the economy of the area, but it is only futile to think that this is possible by disregarding the filth which engulfs our community.

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

-Resident, 9 Watt Avenue;

-Mr. Anthony Pistilli, 61 Kane Avenue;

-Mr. Manuel Santos, 101 Kersdale Avenue;

-Mr. Joe Costa, co-owner of Nova Era Bakery, 488-490 Rogers Road; and

-Mr. Floyd Migory, President, Silverthorn Ratepayers' Association.

23

Other Items Considered by the Community Council

(City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, received this Clause as information, subject to striking out and referring Item (c), entitled, "Request from the Toronto Extrication Team for a Donation, regarding Attendance at the 1998 International Auto Extrication Competition and Learning Symposium", embodied in this Clause, back to the York Community Council for further consideration.)

(a)The 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid - Public Consultation.

The York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 7, 1998) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture & Tourism, providing a general outline of the public consulation process related to Toronto's bid to host the 2008 Olympics, specifically setting out the details of Phase I of the process, and recommending that the report be received as information.

Mr. Brian Jackson of the Olympic Office, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(b)York Lions Steel Band.

The York Community Council reports having congratulated Mr. Mike Stacey and the York Lions Steel Band, the winners of a gold medal in the float category at an international event held in Birmingham, England, on June 30, 1998; and having made an appropriate presentation to the group in recognition of their achievements.

(c)Request from the Toronto Extrication Team for a Donation,

regarding Attendance at the 1998 International Auto Extrication

Competition and Learning Symposium.

The York Community Council reports having expressed its support for the Team's participation in the subject event, and having requested the Grants Review Committee to approve the donation of $2,500.00.

The Community Council had before it the following communications:

(i)(July 17, 1998) from Councillor Nunziata advising that Firefighter First Class, LorneBabiuk, wished to make a deputation to the Community Council.

(ii)(July 15, 1998) from Firefighter First Class, Lorne Babiuk, advising that the team had qualified to compete at the abovementioned competition and learning symposium, that funds are being raised through various events and contributions from local businesses, and requesting that the Community Council give consideration to donating $2,500.00 to assist with the costs associated with the team's participation.

Firefighter Dan Ramsay appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(d)Levy Site (Riverboat Landing), 1400 Weston Road,

Request for Reactivation of the Westpointe Advisory Committee,

Ward 27 - York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having established a new working group for the Levy Site, comprised of the two local Councillors and community representatives, and having requested the YorkCommissioner of Development Services to develop Terms of Reference for the group, to be submitted to the Community Council for approval at the earliest opportunity.

The York Community Council had before it the following communications:

(i)(May 14, 1998) from the York Solicitor, responding to a request from the Community Council for a report on the history of the Levy site, the status of the current application and any legal implications related to the request for reactivation of the Westpointe Advisory Committee; and recommending that the Committee not be activated at the present time.

(ii)(April 6, 1998) from Ms. Ella Jackson, Chair, Westpointe Foresight Group, advising that there has been a new purchaser of the site, the developement is proceeding, the Westpointe Advisory Committee has not been convened to monitory current progress, and requesting that the advisory committee be reactivated.

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

-Ms. Ella Jackson, Chair, Westpointe Foresight Group;

-Mr. Tuffy Zidner, Weston BIA; and

-Mr. Ron Kowalczyk, B.G. Schickendanz Central Inc.

(e)Request for Change in the Status of the Laneway between

673 and 693 Vaughan Road - Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having approved the proposals in the following communication, and having referred this matter to the Commissioner of Corporate Services to direct the Interim Lead, Facilities and Real Estate, to proceed accordingly.

(May 21, 1998) from Councillor Joe Mihevc requesting that appropriate staff make offers to purchase the laneway from all involved owners; arrange for transfer of title from willing owners at a cost of $1.00 per property; and to report back on the status of the laneway, after this initial round of offers and purchases is completed.

(f)Traffic Concerns on Eileen Avenue - Ward 27, York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to direct the York Manager, Traffic/Parking, to report on traffic control measures for Eileen Avenue.

The Community Council submits the following communication:

(June 25, 1998) from Councillor Bill Saundercook advising that a resident on Eileen Avenue had expressed concerns regarding the speed of traffic on Eileen Avenue, as there are many school children in the area.

(g)Poll Results - Proposal for Alternate Side Parking and

Permit Parking on Peveril Hill Road South,

Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 7, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that 24 residents were polled, 3 were in favour, 15 were not in favour, and 1 reply was not counted, and requesting direction of the Community Council.

(h)Preliminary Evaluation Report, Official Plan and Zoning By-law

Amendment Application for 424 Gilbert Avenue - Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having approved the recommendations in the following report:

(July 2, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Development Services advising that the applicant proposes to divide the property into six (6) lots, create rights-of-way, and build three (3) pairs of three-storey, semi-detached dwellings (six homes); that although the employment policies of the Official Plan allow for the introduction of residential uses, the applicant wishes to redesignate and rezone the site for residential use on a permanent basis; and recommending that:

(1)the Planning Department schedule a Community Consultation Meeting in consultation with the Ward Councillors; and

(2)staff be directed to prepare a Recommendation Report on the application and provide notice of a Planning Act Public Meeting at the appropriate time.

(i)Request for All-Way Stop Control at Glenholme Avenue

and Earnscliffe Avenue - Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(July 13, 1998) from the York Commissioner of Operations Services advising that the present geometric layout of the intersection is a "T" type design, that the intersection is all-way stop controlled on the south and east approaches; and recommending that the report be received for information purposes.

(j)Request for All-Way Stop Control at Glenholme Avenue

and Conway Avenue - Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to direct the York Manager, Traffic/Parking, to report on the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at the intersection of Glenholme Avenue and ConwayAvenue.

(k)Poll Results - Proposal for Permit Parking on Cordella Avenue

between Weston Road and Louvain Street - Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having deferred consideration of the following report to its September 16, 1998 meeting, to allow the two local Councillors to meeting with the residents, in view of a petition received by Councillor Saundercook:

(July 13, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that one hundred and seventeen (117) residents were polled; fifty-three (53) replies were received with fifty-one (51) in favour and two (2) not in favour; and requesting the direction of the Community Council.

(l)Guidelines for Determining City-Wide Interest in Planning Matters.

The York Community Council reports having advised Council of its support for the proposed guidelines and protocol, as set out in the joint report from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the City Clerk.

The Community Council had before it the following communication:

(July 14, 1998) transmittal letter from the the City Clerk, advising that the Urban Environment and Development Committee on July 13, 1998, approved Recommendation No.(3) embodied in the joint report (June 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the City Clerk; and recommending in part, that this report be placed on the agendas of the July 22, 1998 meetings of all Community Councils and that comments be forwarded directly to the July 29, 1998 City Council meeting.

(m)Municipal Animal Care and Control Legislation.

The York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(July 9, 1998) from the Interim Contact, Board of Health for the City of Toronto Health Unit advising that the Board of Health on July 6, 1998, considered two reports from the Medical Officer of Health (June 19 and July 3, 1998), and several communications from interested parties and heard deputations on this matter; that the reports were received and referred to the Medical Offier of Health for further report in consultation with the City Solicitor and preparation of a draft by-law; and requesting that each Community Council consider this report and draft by-law when prepared and submit comments to the Medical Officer of Health.

Ms. Fiona Venedam, York Animal Control Shelter, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(n)Consultation on Access and Equity in the City of Toronto.

The York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(June 17, 1998) from the Co-Chairs, Task Force on Community Access and Equity advising that as a follow-up on the Terms of Reference, members of the Task Force are now conducting consultations with City departments, special purpose bodies and members of the public, particularly equity-seeking communities.

(o)Request to Transplant Oak Tree from 108 Gardenview Crescent

to the rear of St. James School - Ward 27, York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having directed the two local Councillors to meet with Mr. Crowe and Ms. Melville to discuss an appropriate location for the tree.

The Community Council had before it the following communciation:

(July 17, 1998) from Councillor Nunziata forwarding a letter from Ms. Sandra Melville, Co-Chair, Warren Park Ratepayers Association, advising that Mr. Joseph Crowe, owner of 108 Gardenview Crescent, is requesting that an Oak tree located on his property be transplanted to near the benches at the rear of St.JamesSchool, in honour or "Aaron James" who perished in a recent fire on GardenviewCrescent.

(p)Fees Charged to Community Groups for Fairs and Events.

The York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture & Tourism, to direct the York Commissioner of Community Services, to report to its September 16, 1998 meeting on:

(1)the elimination or reduction of fees charged to community groups for community fairs and festivals;

(2)a review of the remaining funds in the Festivals Account;

(3)the fees charged in other areas in the City of Toronto; and

(4)highlighting this matter for consideration during the 1999 budget process.

The Community Council had before it the following communication:

(July 15, 1998) from Councillor Mihevc advising that the fees charged to community groups have been significant; that this levy is affecting the operations of community-based groups; requesting that the fees be eliminated or reduced to prevent the loss of contributions these groups provide to the community; and that the funds in the Festivals Account be reviewed.

(q)Speed Reduction on Rogers Road.

The York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to direct the York Manager, Traffic/Parking, to bring forward reports on the proposed reduction of speed to 40/km on Rogers Road.

(r)Traffic Polls.

The York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report on:

(1)new initiatives to increase residents' responses to traffic poll questionnaires, including the use of plain language and negative option polling;

(2)the development of a protocol to be used as a guideline for Councillors when deciding on an issue, and for this protocol to be communicated in the poll letter;

(3)a mechanism to communicate to the residents in multiple languages, by providing translation services and appropriate persons to contact for information in their respective languages.

Respectfully submitted,

BILL SAUNDERCOOK

Chair

Toronto, July 22, 1998

(Report No. 8 of The York Community Council, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998.)