City of Toronto, City Council Legislative Documents



	Accessing City Hall
	Mayor
	Councillors
	Meeting Schedules


		City of Toronto Council and Committees
		All Council and Committee documents are available from the City of Toronto Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@toronto.ca.
		TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES AND OTHER COMMITTEES As Considered by The Council of the City of Toronto on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998 EAST YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL REPORT No. 15 11999 Agnes Macphail Award 2Application by Maurizio Trotta Architect Inc. on behalf of Ms. H. Tennyson to alter certain Architectural Elements of a property located at 22 Beechwood Crescent 3Application by Upper East Side Riverdale Inc. for an Exemption of Land from the Provisions of Part-Lot Control - 870 Pape Avenue Phase Two 4January 1, 1999 New Year's Day Levee 5Deletion of an old Easement Agreement for 7 Curity Avenue 6Pedestrian Crossover Installations in East York 7Parking Restrictions on Randolph Road between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue 8Cash-in-Lieu of Parking Application submitted by Mr. Demetrius Pantazison behalf of 734984 Ontario Limited regarding 312 O'Connor Drive 9Parking Concerns on Fulton Avenue from Pape Avenue to the former City of Toronto Boundary 10Request by the East York Gymnastic Club to use the former Borough of East York Logo 11Basement Flooding in the Stag Hill Drive Area 12Request to Name Fire Station No. 2in Honour of Former Fire Chief John Miller 13Other Items Considered by the Community Council City of Toronto REPORT No. 15 OF THE EAST YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL (from its meeting on October 14, 1998, submitted by Councillor Michael Prue, Chair) As Considered by The Council of the City of Toronto on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998 1 1999 Agnes Macphail Award (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the recommendations embodied in the following communication (October 1, 1998) from Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, Chairperson, Agnes Macphail Committee, subject to: (1)amending Recommendation No. (1)(b) by deleting the words "(the riding she represented in the Ontario Legislature)", and inserting in lieu thereof the words "orsuch riding as deemed appropriate by the East York Community Council should redistribution of ward boundaries occur"; and (2)deleting from Recommendation No. (1)(c) the words "the Chair of", so that such recommendations shall now read as follows: "(1)the East York Community Council endorse the following revised Community Selection Committee for the annual Agnes Macphail Award: (a)the MP (or representative) for the riding of Don Valley West (the riding in which she lived); (b)the MPP (or representative) for the riding of York East or such other riding as deemed appropriate by East York Community Council should redistribution of ward boundaries occur; (c)one East York citizen who is a current or former member of a Council appointed board or committee - to be appointed by the East York Community Council; (d)one former member of the Borough of East York Council - to be appointed by the EastYork Community Council; and (e)all previous winners of the Agnes Macphail Award; (2)the East York Community Council support a request for funding of the 1999Agnes Macphail Award in the amount of $1,000.00; and (3)the East York Community Council request that information about the Agnes Macphail Award, and other community awards, be included on the City of Toronto web site.": Purpose: Our request is for your endorsement of the revised Community Selection Committee, funding for 1999 and a method of increasing public awareness of East York's Agnes Macphail Award. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1)the East York Community Council endorse the following revised Community Selection Committee for the annual Agnes Macphail Award: (a)the MP (or representative) for the riding of Don Valley West (the riding in which she lived); (b)the MPP (or representative) for the riding of York East (the riding she represented in the Ontario Legislature); (c)one East York citizen who is a current or former member of a Council appointed board or committee - to be appointed by the Chair of the East York Community Council; (d)one former member of the Borough of East York Council - to be appointed by the EastYork Community Council; and (e)all previous winners of the Agnes Macphail Award; (2)the East York Community Council support a request for funding of the 1999 Agnes Macphail Award in the amount of $1,000.00; and (3)the East York Community Council request that information about the Agnes Macphail Award, and other community awards, be included on the City of Toronto web site. Background: In January 1994 the Council of the Borough of East York established an award to honour AgnesMacphail - Canada's first-elected woman MP in 1921 and first-seated woman MPP in Ontario in 1943. Agnes Macphail resided in East York from 1941 until her death in 1954. AgnesMacphailDay is celebrated each year on her birthday, March 24. Due to the restructuring of municipal government a few changes are necessary in how the award is administered. For the 1998 award, we managed with the resources available to us. 1998 funding was secured in 1997 by the Council of the Borough of East York. Plans are now in place for 1999 and future awards. Discussion: Recommendation 1: The original membership of the Community Selection Committee as approved by East York Council in 1994 needs to be adjusted to reflect the changes which have occurred over the past year. Formerly, the Mayor of East York appointed a citizen from an East York Council board or committee. We are maintaining that intent by having the Chair of the East York Community Council make that appointment. Similarly, the East York Council appointed a former member of East York Council, and we propose that the East York Community Council make that appointment. The East York Community Development Council appointed a citizen. Since the East York Community Development Council no longer exists, we have deleted that appointment and have broadened the citizen base by including all previous Agnes Macphail Award winners on this Community Selection Committee. In the five years that this process has been in place, it has provided a system for an orderly and fair method of selecting a worthy recipient for Council's approval. Recommendation 2: Since its inception, the mailings, catering, entertainment, portraits of the winner, public speaking contest and incidental expenses have been covered by a budget category for General Public Relations by the former Borough of East York in the amount of $1,000.00. For 1998 funding, a request was made to East York Council in 1997 and set aside to be held in trust by the East York Foundation. We had hoped that there would be funds allocated to Community Councils for such local events in the City of Toronto. Since this has not happened, we are requesting funding of $1,000.00 for our 1999 award process. Recommendation 3: While print and oral information gathering continue to be important, it is also necessary to update our ways of communication. Information about Agnes Macphail is available on a number of web sites. Information about the award should be included on the City of Toronto site at the appropriate time of the year. Conclusion: The Agnes Macphail Award is a significant one, honouring an East York resident each year who makes an outstanding contribution in the areas of women's rights, fairness to seniors, criminal justice system and penal reform, international peace and disarmament, access to adequate housing and health care, or education - all issues of importance to Agnes Macphail in her lifetime, and for us now. Contact Name: Lorna Krawchuk Chairperson East York Agnes Macphail Committee Phone: (416) 425-4431 -------- Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, Chairperson, Agnes Macphail Committee, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter. 2 Application by Maurizio Trotta Architect Inc. on behalf of Ms. H. Tennyson to alter certain Architectural Elements of a property located at 22 Beechwood Crescent (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends that: (1)the following report (September29, 1998) from the Director, Community Planning, East District, be adopted; and (2)the following communications (September 9, 1998) from Mr. John J .G. Blumenson, Manager, Preservation Review, Heritage Toronto, Toronto; and (September 2, 1998) from Mr. John Carter, Chair, Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee, East York, be received: Purpose: This report to the East York Community Council provides Council with East York's Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee's (LACAC) recommendation with respect to an application by Maurizio Trotta to make various alterations to the premises at 22 Beechwood Crescent (see Exhibit No. 1) which are covered by a Registered Heritage Easement Agreement under the Ontario Heritage Act R.S.O. 1990. Source of Funds: There are no financial implications. Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council approve the request by Maurizio Trotta Architect Inc., on behalf of Ms. H. Tennyson to make alterations to the ground floor layout and external appearance of a house located at 22 Beechwood Crescent which is subject to a Heritage Easement Agreement registered against the property as Document No. TB433696, all in accordance with the site plan and floor plan drawings Exhibit Nos. 2, 3 and 4 prepared by Maurizio Trotta Architect Inc., and dated August 24, 1998, on file with the City of Toronto Community Planning East York Office. Background: Proposal: The existing premises at 22 Beechwood Crescent are covered by a registered Heritage Easement under Section 37 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990. The easement requires that any alterations to these premises be approved by City Council. The applicant wishes to: alter the ground floor layout of the house to provide a kitchen in what is now the living - dining room and a living - dining room in what is presently a garage; and, introduce various alterations to the north and south elevations of the premises such as: install new windows on the north wall, replace an existing garage doors with a new brick wall and new windows, remove and replace the existing bricks at the junction of the proposed new living space and the main body of the existing house, install a new roof , install new insulation, modify the main front wall and provide a new parking space in front of the newly proposed residence. Comments: On August 18, 1998, the applicant submitted plans (see Exhibit Nos. 2, 3 and 4), illustrating the various proposed alterations for LACAC's review. Subsequently on August 27, 1998 these plans were forwarded to Heritage Toronto for their technical input. The plans were reviewed by John Blumenson Manager, Preservation Review. His opinion, (see Exhibit No. 5), was that the proposed changes would not deter from the heritage character of the building or have a negative impact on the attached building at 20 Beechwood Crescent. The plans were also scrutinised by the members of LACAC during a meeting with the applicant held on July 28, 1998. That meeting gave LACAC an opportunity to view the plans, provide their suggestions and ultimately formulate their position in support of the alterations (see Exhibit No. 6). The applicant will also be required to obtain permission from the Committee of Adjustment to park in front of the main front wall of the house. The City's Solicitor advises that since the easement agreement itself provides a mechanism for granting an approval, no further amendments are required. Conclusion: LACAC recommends this application for approval, based on the following considerations: the proposed revisions were examined by technical experts from Heritage Toronto who advised that they were acceptable; and, the proposed alterations will only affect the garage structure which in any case appears to be a later addition to the original coach house attached to the main house on the lands. Contact Name: Jean Besz, Senior Planner East York Community Office (416) 778-2045-tel no.; (416) 466-9877-fax planning@borough.eastyork.on.ca The East York Community Council also submits the following communication (September9,1998) from Mr. John J. G. Blumenson, Manager, Preservation Review, Heritage Toronto, Toronto: "I have reviewed the plans for interior and exterior alterations to this historic property and also spoken with Maurizio Trotta, the owner's architect. In general, I do not believe the changes will deter from the heritage character of the building, which was originally and coach house with a later garage. Neither do I believe the changes to have a negative impact on the attached building on the adjacent property which was the main house of the then larger property. I have conveyed to the architect some minor design elements which he has agreed to revise. These include the elimination of the water table course along the front of the garage portion of the coach house; either a chimney or an exhaust must be shown on the appropriate elevation to service the new fireplace and I suggested but not required that the interior staircase be reused in the new position rather a completely new stair constructed. Any other matters such as the selection of brick or new windows may be reviewed during construction. Secondly, I have no objection to the work being executed in two phases as the architect as outlined in his letter dated August 24, 1998 to Mr. Iraklis Tsotos, Buildings and Inspections Department. Please advise if these comments are satisfactory to you and if required, I will be available for the next meeting at which this alteration will be heard by LACAC." The East York Community Council also submits the following communication (September2,1998) from Mr. John Carter, Chair, Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee, East York: "I've canvassed LACAC members regarding plans submitted by M. Trotta Architect Inc. For alterations to 22 Beechwood Crescent. I've also conferred with John Blumenson about issues raised at the July meeting where Mr. Trotta made a presentation regarding proposed work to this property which has an Historic Easement Agreement. We would support the changes which have been proposed. In regards to the existing easement document, I'd appreciate if you could get a legal opinion about if the original document should be revised to reflect the proposed changes. If a new easement is required, does it need approval from the East York Community Council? I trust that you will follow up with Iraklis Tsotsos, John Blumenson and Councillors Prue and Ootes if required. Thanks JC". Insert Table/Map No. 1 location maps 1-4 Insert Table/Map No. 2 location maps 1-4 Insert Table/Map No. 3 location maps 1-4 Insert Table/Map No. 4 location maps 1-4 3 Application by Upper East Side Riverdale Inc. for an Exemption of Land from the Provisions of Part-Lot Control - 870 Pape Avenue Phase Two (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September29, 1998) from the Director, Community Planning, East District: Purpose: This report to the October 14, 1998 East York Community Council concerns a request by Upper East Side Riverdale Inc. for an exemption of a portion of the lands at 870 Pape Avenue from the provisions of part-lot control. Source of Funds: N.A. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1)pursuant to Section 50(7) of the Planning Act, that City Council enact the By-law which is attached to this report as Appendix "A", and which exempts the lands forming Blocks1,2,3,4,5 and 6 of Registered Plan 66M-2325 at 870 Pape Avenue from the provisions of part-lot control; (2)the owner and his Solicitor be required to provide an undertaking that they will advise the City Solicitor for the East York Office immediately upon the conveyance of each of the lots; and (3)pursuant to Section 50(7) of the Planning Act, upon the conveyance of the lots, the City Solicitor for the East York Office be directed to bring forward a By-law to repeal the part-lot control exemption. Background: The subject site is located on the south-west corner of Pape and Mortimer Avenues. In the summer and fall of 1997, the former East York Council approved a site specific official plan amendment, rezoning, plan of subdivision and site plan, to permit the development of these lands for 78 semi-attached and townhouse units. The plan of subdivision was undertaken to establish the municipal streets and major blocks of land. It was the developer's intention to apply for the removal of part-lot control to establish the titles to the individual lots for each housing unit. The provisions for the removal of part-lot control are set out in the Planing Act. They permit municipalities to authorize conveyance of land by the passage of a By-law to suspend the application of part-lot control. Part-Lot control normally applies to all lands within a registered plans of subdivision. The reinstatement of part lot control following the conveyance of land prevents future landowners from any further subdivision and conveyance of their lots. This method of land division is typically used in developments of semi-detached dwellings and townhouses where it is easier to draw lot boundaries after the final detailed design of the dwellings has taken place or after the demising walls between units have actually been constructed. On July 22, 1998, East York Community Council received a staff report on the removal of part-lot control on Block 7 of the project. East York Community Council recommended approval of the lifting of part-lot control which was subsequently approved by City Council. The developer's are now applying for the removal of part-lot control on all of the remaining units in the project (blocks1,2,3,4,5 and 6.) Discussion: The by-law attached as Appendix "A" to this report will allow the creation of parcels of land to be conveyed to individual purchasers. We recommend that the applicant provide an undertaking to notify the City of the conveyances and that the City Solicitor be authorized to bring forward a repealing by-law to ensure: �that the requirements of the Planning Act concerning the By-law's approval and registration are carried out; and, �that part-lot control is reinstated once the conveyance of these lots has been arranged. This is required to prevent any further land subdivision by future landowners without further municipal approval. Usually on applications for the removal of part-lot control, staff recommend that the City enter into an agreement with the developer regarding conditions that the applicant must satisfy before part-lot control is lifted. However, in this case, the site is part of a registered plan of subdivision and is under site plan control. Any major issues regarding the development of the site have been secured through the City's existing subdivision and site plan control agreements with the developer. Conclusions: Staff believe that the City's interests have already been adequately secured through the existing subdivision and site plan control agreements. Therefore, we recommend that this application for the exemption from part-lot control be approved. Contact Name: David Oikawa, Director of Planning (East York) 778-2049 466-9877 (fax) doikawa@borough.eastyork.on.ca Appendix A Draft By-law for the lifting of Part-Lot Control on Blocks 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 of Registered Plan 66M-2325 at 870 Pape Avenue Authority: East York Community Council Report No. ( ), October 14, 1998 Intended for first presentation to Council: October 28, 1998 Adopted by Council: City of Toronto Bill No. By-law A by-law pursuant to the provisions of Section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, to exempt certain lands being Blocks 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 of Registered Plan 66M-2325 at 870 Pape Avenue, in the City of Toronto (formerly Borough of East York). Whereas, pursuant to the provisions of Section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, the Council of a municipality may by by-law provide that Subsection 50(5) of the Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the by-law; The Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows: 1.That subsection 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 does not apply to the following lands located within a plan of subdivision: All and Singular that certain parcels or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being in the City of Toronto (formerly Borough of East York) and being composed of Blocks 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 of Registered Plan 66M-2325 at 870 Pape Avenue, but only for the purpose of: a)conveying the whole of one or more parts shown on the plan attached hereto as Schedule "1" (hereinafter called the "Plan"); and, b)conveying the whole of one part shown on a reference plan to be approved by the Commissioner of Urban Planning & Development Services as may be required to identify easements and encroachments. 2.That this by-law shall not come into effect until: i)it has been approved by the approval authority or its delegate, if required, pursuant to the Planning Act; and, ii)this by-law has been registered on title. Enacted and Passed this day of , A.D. Mel Lastman,Novina Wong, MayorCity Clerk Insert Table/Map No. 1 Schedule 1 4 January 1, 1999 New Year's Day Levee (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends that: (1)the East York Community Council be permitted to host its own New Year's Day Levee on January 1, 1999; (2)the costs for the East York Community Council New Year's Day Levee be shared equally by the representatives of the East York Community Council and be provided from their respective office budgets; and (3)the communication (October 1, 1998) from Councillor Michael Prue, East York, be received. The East York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having directed that a copy of this report be referred to the City Clerk for consideration in conjunction with the Mayor's New Year's Day Levee. The East York Community Council submits the following communication (October 1, 1998) from Councillor Michael Prue, East York: "For the entire history of the Council of the Borough of East York a New Year's Day Levee was held at the East York Civic Centre. This annual event is a time for members of council to meet with the public. January 1999 will be the first levee for East York's three councillors in the new city. Hundreds of residents attend to shake the hands of all their elected representatives while wishing each other well in the New Year. The New Year's Day Levee is also an opportunity for residents to talk about issues of importance to them, meet other members of the community and staff of the new city in attendance. The average cost of a levee is approximately $2,000 to $2,500. I believe that this is a cost that we could share and pay for through our individual office budgets. As Chair of the East York Community Council I would like to propose that the East York Community Council host its own New Year's Day Levee on January 1, 1999. I hope that all members of community council will support this East York tradition while the opportunity still exists. Also, if there is a Mayor's New Year's Day Levee, arrangements could be made for our levee to take place at a convenient time during that same day." 5 Deletion of an old Easement Agreement for 7 Curity Avenue (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September29, 1998) from the Director, Transportation Services, District One: Purpose: This is to report to the October 14, 1998, East York Community Council meeting and to obtain authorization to rescind an old easement agreement at 7 Curity Avenue. Financial Implications: The City has a deposit from the applicant to cover all expenses associated with the deletion of the old agreement. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1)the 1981 easement agreement be rescinded; and (2) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. Discussion: There is an existing water course as well as an existing storm sewer running through the 7CurityAvenue lands. In 1997, the development of the lands by the new owner required that a new sewer easement agreement be registered on title. A new legal survey of the easement was made since the old survey lacked the necessary detail to define the actual location of the easement in the field. The new survey revealed that some sections of the water course as well as the storm sewer were not centered within the old easement. A new agreement was prepared with a new detailed legal survey and registered on title. The old 1981 agreement still remains on title and needs to be deleted. Council authorization is required before the old agreement may be rescinded. Conclusions: The old easement agreement needs to be removed from title and the appropriate City Officials require authorization to execute the deletion. Contact Name and Telephone Number: Frank Pugliese, Coordinator of Engineering Services (416)778-2226 6 Pedestrian Crossover Installations in East York (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September30, 1998) from the Director, Transportation Services, District One: Purpose: To report to the October 14, 1998, meeting of the East York Community Council regarding prioritized locations for pedestrian crossover installations in East York. Financial Implications: The proposed work can be accommodated in the 1998 Operating Budget. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1)(i)a pedestrian crossover not be installed at the intersection of Barker Avenue and Coxwell Avenue in 1998; and (ii)a pedestrian crossover be installed at the intersection of Eastdale Avenue and Goodwood Park Crescent utilizing the funds that were approved for the installation of a pedestrian crossover at the intersection of Barker Avenue and Coxwell Avenue; and (2)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. Background: The Council of the former Borough of East York, at its meeting of July 8, 1996, approved the installation of a pedestrian crossover at the intersection of Barker Avenue and Coxwell Avenue. This installation was not supported by staff since the technical warrants for the installation of pedestrian crossovers was not met. Subsequently, on April 21, 1997, a staff recommendation to install a pedestrian crossover at the intersection of Eastdale Avenue and Goodwood Park Crescent was held by the former Council to allow the former Ward Two Councillors the opportunity to meet with the Commissioner of Development Services to resolve the issue of the installation date for the pedestrian crossover. Funds were available for only one pedestrian crossover installation in 1998. Therefore, the Ward Two Councillors were to meet with the Commissioner to discuss the relative priorities of the installation of the pedestrian crossovers at Eastdale Avenue and Goodwood Park Crescent and at Barker Avenue and Coxwell Avenue. This meeting did not occur before the 1997 municipal elections, therefore the issue remains outstanding. Comments: Neither of these pedestrian crossovers have been installed to date. It is staff's opinion that the pedestrian crossover at the intersection of Eastdale Avenue and Goodwood Park Crescent should take priority in installation since it actually meets the technical warrants for pedestrian crossovers. Conversely, the proposed pedestrian crossover at Barker Avenue and Coxwell Avenue is not warranted. This location can still be considered for a pedestrian crossover if Council wishes to include funds for its installation in the 1999 current budget deliberations. Copies of Item 1, Report No. 10 (1997) of the Regulatory and Development Committee, regarding the request for a pedestrian crossover at Eastdale Avenue and Goodwood Park Crescent, and Minute No. 2.249 (1996) and Item 14, Report No. 17 (1996) of the Regulatory and Development Committee regarding the pedestrian crossover request at Barker Avenue and Coxwell Avenue are attached, detailing the studies conducted at that time. Contact Name and Telephone Number: Bryan Muir, Transportation Technologist; (416) 778-2227. The East York Community Council also had before it for consideration Minute No. 2.249, 1996, ItemNo. 14, Report No. 17 of the Regulatory and Development Committee, 1996 and Item No. 1, ReportNo. 10 of the Regulatory and Development Committee, 1997. 7 Parking Restrictions on Randolph Road between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September29, 1998) from the Director, Transportation Services, District One: Purpose: To report to the October 14, 1998, meeting of the East York Community Council regarding a request to remove parking restrictions on Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and MarkhamAvenue. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1)the Clerks Department be directed to conduct a formal poll of the residents of Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue to determine support for the removal of the existing "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." restriction; (2)the Clerks Department be directed to conduct a formal poll of the residents of Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue to determine support for the implementation of overnight permit parking; and (3)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. Background: The East York Community Council at its meeting on July 22, 1998, received a petition from residents of Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue, requesting that the parking restrictions within this block be lifted. The East York Community Council subsequently requested that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services report on the concerns and requests of the residents as outlined in the petition. Comments: Parking on Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue, is presently regulated by a signed "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on both sides of the street. There is also a "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the east side of the street between McRae Drive and a point 88.5 metres south (across the street from the fire station), a "15 Minute Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the west side of the street between McRae Drive and a point 47 metres south of McRae Drive, and a "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the west side from a point 47 metres south of McRae Drive to a point 67.5 metres south of McRae Drive (adjacent to the fire station). Appendix "A" illustrates the existing parking regulations. The "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction is a common regulation in effect on both sides of Randolph Road from Kenrae Road to Parkhurst Boulevard. The restriction was implemented on each block presumably to address concerns of motorists regularly parking on Randolph Road to visit the adjacent commercial areas on Laird Drive and on McRaeDrive. 1. Removal of Signed Parking Restriction The petition submitted by the residents of Randolph Road states that they wish to remove the existing "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the block between McRaeDrive and Markham Road. This restriction was implemented in 1992 following the receipt of a petition from the residents to change the previous "One Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the west side of the street to a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction because visitors to the adjacent commercial properties used this block to park, often longer than the permitted one hour. Since enforcement of a time-restricted parking regulation requires that parking enforcement staff attend a location twice to tag an offender that stays beyond the one-hour limit, the Police at that time had difficulty in providing this enforcement. Therefore, the petition was submitted by the residents to change the one-hour parking regulation to a "NoParking" restriction. The residents should be aware that if this "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction is removed, the street will be regulated by the unsigned 3-hour parking bylaw, which is enforced on a complaint basis. It is possible that the parking concerns that residents had prior to 1992, regarding vehicles from the commercial areas parking on the street, may return if this "NoParking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction is removed. Therefore, staff recommend that the Clerks Department conduct a formal poll of all residents on the block to ascertain support for removal of the signed "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction. 2. Removal of the Unsigned Three-hour Parking Regulation The residents also state in their petition that they want the ban on overnight parking removed. While there is no such ban on overnight parking on this block, this block is regulated by the unsigned three-hour parking regulation outside of the hours when the signed "No Parking, 8:00a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction is in effect. The unsigned three-hour parking regulation is in place on all streets in the City of Toronto that are not otherwise regulated by a signed parking restriction. This regulation enables enforcement measures to be taken in cases where vehicles are left on the street for extended periods. Without it, vehicles could park indefinitely on the street, causing problems for street maintenance, cleaning and snow removal, and for other residents wishing to park on the street. The Uniform Traffic By-law does not provide for the removal of this restriction on specific streets for these reasons. It should also be noted that the three-hour parking regulation is enforced only when a complaint is received from a resident of that block. Otherwise parking enforcement does not take place. To address the concern of the residents who are being tagged for parking more than three hours, it is possible for overnight permit parking to be implemented on the block. By purchasing a permit ($50.00 plus GST for 6 months), residents would be able to park overnight without being subject to tagging. The petition submitted by the residents of Randolph Road did not specifically state support for an overnight permit parking restriction. However, to expedite the process, we recommend that a formal poll be conducted by the Clerks Department to gauge support for the implementation of overnight permit parking on Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue. Conclusion: In 1992, residents of Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue petitioned to change the existing "One Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on the west side of the street to a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction to address concerns about motorists attending the adjacent commercial areas using this block to park all day, and the lack of enforcement of the restriction. Their request was supported by Council and the parking restrictions were subsequently changed. In 1998, approximately 43 percent of the residents are now petitioning to remove the "NoParking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday" restriction on both sides of the street. It should be noted that the concerns raised in 1992 about vehicles parking on the street daily may occur again if the restrictions are removed. Therefore, it is recommended that the Clerks Department conduct a formal poll of all residents of Randolph Road, between McRae Drive and Markham Avenue, to ascertain support of the removal of the signed parking restrictions. With respect to the request of residents to remove the restriction preventing parking overnight, which is actually the three-hour parking regulation, the Uniform Traffic By-law does not provide for the removal of the three-hour parking regulation on specific streets. This is because vehicles would be able to park indefinitely on the street, causing street maintenance, cleaning, and snow removal concerns. If residents wish to park on the street overnight, they may submit a petition showing support for overnight permit parking. By obtaining a permit for $50.00 plus GST for a 6 month period, they may park overnight without being subject to tagging. Although the petition that was submitted did not specifically state support for overnight permit parking, we recommend that the Clerks Department conduct a formal poll to ascertain support in order to expedite the process for the residents. Contact Name and Telephone Number: Bryan Muir, Transportation Technologist (416) 778-2227 Insert Table/Map No. 1 location map 8 Cash-in-Lieu of Parking Application submitted by Mr. Demetrius Pantazis on behalf of 734984 Ontario Limited regarding 312 O'Connor Drive (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 17, 1998) from the Director of Planning, East Division: Purpose: This report reviews an application for Cash-in-Lieu of Parking for the property located at 312O'Connor Drive. (Exhibit No. 1) Recommendation: It is recommended that East York Community Council approve this Cash-in-Lieu of Parking application, subject to the owner entering into an agreement with the City of Toronto for the payment of $8,279.25 in lieu of 9 parking spaces. We also recommend that Council exempt payment for the first two spaces as per the City of Toronto (East York Office) Policies and Procedures for Cash-in-Lieu of Parking as Amended. Source of Funds: Not Applicable Background: This application has been submitted by Demetrius Pantazis Barrister & Solicitor on behalf of734984Ontario Incorporated. The application has been submitted in order to request Cash-in-Lieu of Parking for a Donut Shop Use within the existing single storey building. The subject property was previously occupied by three units. The westerly unit was, and will remain a convenience store/gas station. The easterly unit was occupied by a coffee shop that was operating with inadequate parking on site. The middle unit had been used for a hair salon, but has recently been vacated. This proposal will eliminate the middle unit and enlarge both the westerly unit (convenience store/gas station) and easterly units (the proposed donut shop). (Exhibit No. 2) Comments: Alterations to the building will reduce the number of units from three to two and the south facade of the building will be modified. The only proposed change to the site, is the addition of one parking space, which will be added to the five existing spaces south of the building. The existing building will not be increased in size. The increase in required parking spaces is due to the change in use within the existing building. Currently, there are nine parking spaces located on site. The applicant is proposing to add one additional parking space, for a total of ten on-site parking spaces. In this case the combined uses would require 19 parking spaces, whereas the site will only accommodate 10 spaces. The shortfall of 9 parking spaces is the reason for this application. Conclusion: Planning staff have reviewed this application in conjunction with Transportation staff. Transportation staff support this application. They feel that the donut shop will mainly serve residents of the adjacent community and that many of these residents will walk instead of using their vehicles. They also believe that many of the patrons will be in vehicles that will stop for gasoline and the convenient store, which will lesson the demand for parking spaces for the proposed use. In view of the above, Planning staff recommend that this application be approved subject to the owner entering into a Cash-in-Lieu of Parking Agreement with the City of Toronto. The Agreement will stipulate that the maximum floor area for any restaurant uses, including the donut shop, will be restricted to 60m². Contact Name: Ron Lisabeth Planning Technician Urban Planning and Development Services East York Planning Division ph- 778-2044 rlisabeth@borough.eastyork.on.ca -------- Mr. Demetrius Pantazis, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing. Insert Table/Map No. 1 Location Map Insert Table/Map No. 2 Location Map 9 Parking Concerns on Fulton Avenue from Pape Avenue to the former City of Toronto Boundary (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends that: (1)the City Clerk be requested to conduct a poll of the residents of Fulton Avenue from Pape Avenue to the former City of Toronto boundary to determine support for the implementation of Overnight Permit Parking; and (2)the following communication (October 2, 1998) from Ms. Sandra L. Johnston, EastYork, be received: "In the midst of amalgamation, the residences of Fulton Ave from Pape Ave to the prior boundaries of Toronto find it had to understand why we have been selected to subsidize ongoing costs through a barrage of repealed parking citations. I personally have been the recent recipient of PI#'s 36524886 and 37257780. We do not have Permit parking. I explained this to Mr. Bryan Muir who was very co-operative. He assured me he would be contacting the appropriate divisions to inform them of that fact. I understand that change takes time, however you must understand our position. Toronto has access to bilateral evening street parking. We feel we deserve the same privilege. The By-law must be addressed and now, not in six, eight, or eighteen months. Provisions must be made or a total suspension of ticketing should occur. We should not be penalized for being East Yorkers or for the time factors involved. Many of the vehicles occupying our only options are extensions from further up the street. This situation is ludicrous and not insurmountable. It involves a simple revision. We were led to believe on amalgamation that the mission was to link-up communities, and facilitate "better for all." Councillor Prue, I trust you will act on our behalf." 10 Request by the East York Gymnastic Club to use the former Borough of East York Logo (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends that: (1)the East York Gymnastics Club be permitted to use the former Borough of East York logo on their girls' and boys' competitive leotard and singlet; and (2)the following communication (October7,1998) from Ms. Verna Robertson, East York Gymnastic Club, East York, be received: "The East York Gymnastic Club requests permission to use the East York logo on our girls' and boys' competitive leotard and singlet. In the case of the girls it will be placed on the lower left hand side of the leotard, the E and the flag in silver, and the Y in black. For the boys it will be used on the competitive singlet." 11 Basement Flooding in the Stag Hill Drive Area (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (October14, 1998) from the Director of Quality Control and System Planning: Purpose: This report is to the East York Community Council for its meeting of October 14, 1998. It responds to a request for a report on the modifications/improvements to the existing sewer system required to solve the basement flooding problem in the Stag Hill Drive area, and an estimate of the associated cost. Financial Implications: The two alternatives to solve the basement flooding problems in the Stag Hill Drive area, and the estimated financial implications of each are as follows: Option 1Modification/improvement to the sewer system Cost: $1,375,000.00 Option 2Installation of back-flow valves with access chambers at the two basement flooding impacted houses. Cost: $15,000.00 Annual maintenance cost: $200.00 Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1)the City use back-flow valves to solve the basement flooding in the Stag Hill Drive area; and (2)the City enter into an agreement with the two residents experiencing basement flooding to allow the City to install and maintain back-flow valves at their residences. Council Reference/Background/History: Community Council at its September 16, 1998 meeting requested a report on the cost to solve the basement flooding problems in the Stag Hill Drive area by improvement to the existing sewer system. Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification: Basement flooding in the Stag Hill Drive area, in the block between Leander Court and Hale Court, first surfaced during a storm on July 10, 1975. To ameliorate/solve the problem, the existing relief storm sewer along Stag Hill Drive was extended westward to encompass the problem area. Despite the relief sewer extension, basement flooding persisted. A further review of the problem carried out by Gore and Storrie (1980) revealed that 'The extent of the flooding in the Stag Hill Drive area appears to have worsened since the construction of the relief sewer'. The continuing problem was believed to have been caused by the lack of transmission capacities to accommodate the flow from the relief sewer in both the Glenwood Crescent trunk storm sewer and its outfall to Massey Creek. The Stag Hill Drive relief sewer exits to the Glenwood trunk storm sewer. The respective capacities were calculated to be 1.47 m³/sec for the Glenwood Crescent trunk sewer and 1.98 m³/sec for the outfall, versus 4.44 m³/sec required to handle the runoff from the currently used five-year design storm. It should be noted that in the last five years, complaints/reports of basement flooding in the subject area were received from only two residences. To solve the storm sewer surcharging in the Stag Hill Drive area, and thus the basement flooding problems, it will be necessary to build a relief trunk storm sewer and an outfall parallel to the existing Glenwood Crescent trunk storm sewer and its outfall to Massey Creek. The new sewer and outfall will have capacities of about 3 m³/sec. Furthermore, the drainage from the area upstream of the new sewer must be serviced by a common structure to split the flows. The existing Stag Hill Drive relief sewer will have to be enlarged and new storm sewers will be installed along Leander Court, HaleCourt and Glen Gannon Drive. A precise cost of the required works will be derived during the design stage. In the interim, preliminary cost estimates of the project components are as follows: Relief trunk storm sewer from St. Clair Avenue, East to Glenwood Terrace$ 725,000.00 Outfall from Glenwood Crescent to Massey Creek$ 245,000.00 Enlargement to the existing Stag Hill relief storm sewer$ 265,000.00 Installation of storm sewers along Leander Court, Hale Court and Glen Gannon Drive$ 140,000.00 Total Project Cost $1,375,000.00 The foregoing project had not been included in the current and past capital works programs because of the high cost and the low number of homes reporting basement flooding. Two alterative solutions to the basement flooding problems in the subject area, discussed previously, are as follows: Disconnecting downspouts at homes in the vicinity, advocated and encouraged during the construction and expansion of the Stag Hill Drive relief sewer, will relieve local sewer surcharging and should still be encouraged. However, this will not solve local basement flooding, because flows from the Stag Hill relief sewer will not be able to enter the Glenwood Crescent trunk storm sewer when it surcharges during heavy storms. On the contrary, the Stag Hill Drive relief sewer will likely act as a relief sewer to the Glenwood Crescent trunk storm sewer during heavy storms. This is the probable reason for the previously mentioned statement by Gore and Storrie about the worsening basement flooding problem. The Stag Hill Drive area could be a candidate area, should the City decide to extend the former Cityof Toronto's free downspout disconnection program city-wide. In response to inquiries or proposals to use back-flow valves to prevent basement flooding, the then Commissioner of Works (1987) advised that the former Borough would not encourage or discourage their use because of problems encountered by other former local municipalities. It is staff's opinion that the foregoing should not preclude their use. Experience since reveals that despite the possibility of failure/problems, their use in instances where the alternative is very expensive is appropriate. Staff have estimated the costs to install and maintain a back-flow valve as follows: Cost of valve, installation, including access chamber $ 7,500.00 Annual maintenance cost$ 100.00 Conclusions: It is much more economically feasible to use back-flow valves to solve the basement flooding problems in the Stag Hill Drive area then it is to modify/improve the local sewer system. Contact Name: Kim Choo-Ying, Environmental Engineer East York Civic Centre Tel. No.: (416)778-2218; Fax No.: (416)466-9877 12 Request to Name Fire Station No. 2 in Honour of Former Fire Chief John Miller (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The East York Community Council recommends that: (1)the request by Mr. Robert O'Hallarn, Richmond Hill, to name Fire Station No. 2 in honour of the former Borough of East York Fire Chief, Mr. John Miller, be approved; and (2)the following communication (undated) from Mr. Robert O'Hallarn, Richmond Hill, be received: "I would like to request that Station 2 in the former municipality of East York be named in honour of former Fire Chief John Miller. I believe that the only cost involved would be the cost of a plaque similar to the ones at the two other stations. Presently Station 3 on Woodbine Ave. Is named for the first full time Fire Chief in East York, TomPavling. Station 1 in Leaside is named for Ernest Bell, the first full time Fire Chief in Leaside. Other municipalities in former Metro Toronto have halls named for former Fire Chiefs. These designations are honourary and do not affect the running of the Fire Department. John Miller was the Fire Chief in East York when the building of Station 2 was passed by Council. He was instrumental in convincing Council that a new fire station was necessary. He is the only person to serve as Fire Chief in East York after Station 2 was built. He is also the last person to hold the position of Fire Chief in the former municipality of East York. I believe that the above facts coupled with more than 37 years of exemplary service with the Boroughof East York justify the extending of this honour to John C. Miller. Should you require any further information or clarification in this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you in advance, for your consideration of this request." 13 Other Items Considered by the Community Council (City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, received this Clause, for information.) (a)New City Councillor Ward One, East York. The East York Community Council reports having congratulated Ms. Jane Pitfield on her victory in the recent By-election held in East York for the third Councillor for Ward One, East York. (b)Snow Clearing in Commercial Areas in Ward One. The East York Community Council reports having: (1)requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to submit a report to the East York Community Council on the feasibility of having the windrows of snow removed from the commercial areas in Ward One, East York, and whether the business owners in the area would be willing to fund this service; and (2)received an oral deputation from Ms. Donna-Lynn McCallum, East York. -------- Ms. Donna-Lynn McCallum, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing. (c)Traffic Concerns on Hanna Road and Millwood Road. The East York Community Council reports having: (1)referred the following communication (September 25, 1998) from Councillor Case Ootes, Ward One, together with the petition from Ms. Vesna Harvey, EastYork, to the City Clerk for consideration with Clause No. 6 of Report No.13 of the East York Community Council which will be before City Council on October 28, 1998; (2)reconfirmed its previous recommendation as contained in Clause No. 6 of Report No. 13 of the East York Community Council to City Council in this regard; and (3)referred the following motion to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for a report thereon to the next meeting of the East York Community Council to be held on November 12, 1998, on the cost implications thereof: Moved by Councillor Prue: "It is recommended that, in future, when the installation of traffic control devices are being considered, the staff report in this regard be circulated to all residents within a 60metre radius of the proposed location advising that deputations will be heard by the Community Council." (September 25, 1998) from Councillor Case Ootes, Ward One, submitting a letter regarding the installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Hanna Road and Millwood Road and forwarding a petition (September 22, 1998) from Ms. Vesna Harvey with approximately 29 signatures of residents in the area who are opposed to the installation of an all-way stop control at this location. -------- Mr. Doug Raddford, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing. (d)Problems Arising from a Growing Raccoon Population. The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communications (October 12, 1998) from Mr. James O'Mara and Ms. Joan O'Mara, East York; and (October 11, 1998) from Mr. David Reynolds and Ms.GlendaReynolds, East York, to the Medical Officer of Health for a report to the East York Community Council on the problems currently being experienced with the raccoon and fox population in the City of Toronto and the steps that are being taken to address this issue: (October 12, 1998) from Mr. James O'Mara and Ms. Joan O'Mara, East York, submitting a letter expressing concerns with respect to the growing raccoon population in the vicinity of Taylor Creek Park and requesting assistance from the City of Toronto to limit the population of racoons and other wild animals in residential areas. (October 11, 1998) from Mr. David Reynolds and Ms. Glenda Reynolds, East York, expressing concern regarding raccoon problems they are experiencing in their neighbourhood. (e)Noise By-law. The East York Community Council reports having received the oral deputation from Ms. Sally Spofforth, East York, in regard to excessive noise related to house construction on Mallory Crescent. -------- Ms. Sally Spofforth, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing. (f)Harmonizing Animal Care and Control Legislation The East York Community Council reports having: (1)requested the Medical Officer of Health to submit a consolidated report to the Board of Health meeting scheduled for November 10, 1998, which shall incorporate recommendations from all Community Councils, including the following: (a)the adoption of the City of Toronto By-law Respecting Animals as appended to the joint report (August 26, 1998) from the Medical Officer of Health and the City Solicitor, subject to amending such By-law: (i)in accordance with the recommendations embodied in the joint communication (October 14, 1998) from Ms. Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance of Canada (AAC), Toronto; Mr. Barry MacKay, International Programme Director, Animal Protection Institute, (API), Markham; Ms.AinslieWillock, Director, Canadian Alliance of Furbearing Animals, (CAFA), Toronto; and Ms.HollyPenfound, Director, Zoocheck Canada Inc., East York: (1)Part II, Prohibited Animals, Section 3: That the Toronto Wildlife Centre should be added to the list of facilities exempt from the prohibition; (2)Part III, The Care of Animals, Section 5: That the wording in this section be replaced with "Every person who keeps an animal within the City's boundaries shall provide the animal or cause the animal to be provided with adequate and appropriate living conditions including care, food, water, shelter, exercise, attention and veterinary care as may be required to meet the species-specific needs of the animal and to keep the animal in good health"; (3)Part IV, Dogs, Section 13(1) be amended by adding the words "euthanized for humane reasons"; (4)Part V, Cats, Section 19 be amended to delete the word "trespass" and replace it with "roaming at large on private property other than that of the owner on a complaint basis"; (5)Part V, Cats, Section 20(1) be amended by deleting the word "trespassing" to "roaming at large on private property other than that of the owner, on a complaint basis" and by adding the words "euthanized for humane reasons"; (6)Part VI, Spay/Neuter Clinics, be amended by adding Section 24 which would read "A special fund be set up by the City from the cat registration revenues to assist the elderly and poor with the cost of pet sterilization"; and (7)That a new section be added to read "No one shall be permitted to set a snare, leghold, body-gripping or similar trap in the Cityof Toronto" and that Council request enabling legislation from the Provincial government, similar to that held by the former City of Toronto and City of Scarborough, in order to provide the new City of Toronto with the power to enact this section of the by-law; (ii)by adding to subsection 11(3), under Part IV, "Dogs", after the words "leash which shall not exceed two (2) metres in length", the words "or any hand held spring device", so that such subsection shall now read as follows: "11(3)No person shall keep a dog off the premises of the owner other than on a leash which shall not exceed two (2) metres in length, or any hand held spring device, except where consent is given by the person owning the property where the dog is found"; (iii)by including in Part VII, "Pigeons": (1)very clear restrictions on how pigeons are to be maintained outside and how the areas in which they are kept are to be disinfected; (2)restrictions on where the food supplies are to be stored and the manner in which the birds are to be fed, in order to eliminate the attraction of vermin and rodents; and (3)a provision which would limit the maximum number of pigeons that may be kept by an individual to sixty (60) during the racing seasons and forty (40) during the non-racing season; (iv)by substantially increasing the licence fees for animals that are not spayed or neutered, particularly cats, in order to encourage pet owners to have their animals spayed or neutered; and (v)by adding an exemption for individuals who provide "fostering" care for animals; and (b)that, if there is any available space in any municipally-owned animal shelter, consideration be given to permitting animal rescue agencies the use of this available space, free of charge or for a nominal fee, for adoption facilities; and (2)referred all submissions received by the East York Community Council in regard to the proposed By-law Respecting Animals to the Board of Health for further consideration in the preparation of the final by-law in this regard; (3)received the following communication (August 28, 1998) from the City Clerk; (4)received the following report (September1,1998) from the Medical Officer of Health; and (September16,1998) from the Interim Contact, Board of Health for the City of Toronto Health Unit; and (5)received the following communications (August 13, 1998) from Mr.GeorgeF.Evens, Managing Director, The North American Council of Advocates for Creatures Land Air Water (CLAW), British Columbia; (October15, 1998) from Ms.DanielaQuaglia, Public Affairs Advisor, Toronto Humane Society, Toronto; (October 14, 1998) from Ms.Leann M. Goodall, President, East York Dogs Owners Association, East York; (October 14, 1998) from Ms.Nathalie Karvonen, Executive Director, Toronto Wildlife Centre, North York; (October15, 1998) from Ms. Dianne Eibner, Professional Dog Walkers Association, Toronto; (Undated) from Ms. Carol Chuhay, East York; (October14, 1998) from Ms.Diane Grell Thow, East York; and (September15,1998) from Ms. Gwenne Dixon, Volunteer, Toronto Cat Rescue, Toronto: The following motion placed by Councillor Ootes was lost on the following division of votes: "That Section 19 and Section 20(1) of Part V of the proposed By-law respecting animals, be deleted." Yeas:Councillor Case Ootes Nays: Councillor Michael Prue, Councillor Jane Pitfield (August 28, 1998) from the City Clerk advising the East York Community Council of the Uniform Policy for Leashed and Unleashed Dogs in Parks and requesting the Community Council to hear deputations on this policy and forward any recommendations to the Board of Health and Economic Development Committee. (September 1, 1998) from the Medical Officer of Health advising the East York Community Council of further policy directions for harmonizing animal care and control legislation in conjunction with the draft by-law entitled "A By-law Respecting Animals". (September 16, 1998) from the Interim Contact, Board of Health for the City of Toronto Health Unit requesting the East York Community Council to obtain comments from the public regarding further policy directions for harmonizing animal care and control legislation. (August 13, 1998) from Mr. George F. Evens, Managing Director, The North American Council of Advocates for Creatures Land Air Water (CLAW), British Columbia, submitting a letter expressing concerns with respect to Animal Rights Legislation. (October 15, 1998) from Ms. Daniela Quaglia, Toronto Humane Society, Toronto, expressing concern with the proposed animal care and control legislation. (October 14, 1998) from Ms. Leann M. Goodall, President, East York Dogs Owners Association, East York, regarding off-leash park areas for dogs. (October 14, 1998) from Ms. Nathalie Karvonen, Executive Director, Toronto Wildlife Centre, NorthYork, providing comments on the proposed animal care and control legislation. (October 15, 1998) from Ms. Dianne Eibner, Professional Dogwalkers Association, Toronto, expressing concern regarding the dog walking limit of three dogs per person for professional dogwalkers. (Undated) from Ms. Carol Chuhay, East York, expressing concerns regarding pigeons. (October 14, 1998) from Ms. Diane Grell Thow, East York, expressing concerns regarding Clauses19 and 20, of the proposed by-law with respect to cats. (September 15, 1998) from Ms. Gwenne Dixon, Volunteer, Toronto Cat Rescue, East York, requesting space in the York Animal Shelter for adoption purposes. -------- The following persons appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing: -Ms. Danielle Quaglia, Public Policy Advisor, Toronto Humane Society, Toronto; -Ms. Leann Goodall, President, East York Dog Owners Association, East York; -Ms. Diane Eibner, Toronto; -Ms. Dianne Grell Thow, East York; -Mr. Henry Thow, East York; -Ms. Carol Chuhay, East York; -Mr. Chris Salmond, East York; -Ms. Chris Girgulis, East York; -Ms. Holly Penfound, Director, Zoocheck Canada Inc. East York; -Ms. Nathalie Karvonen, Executive Director, on behalf of the Toronto Wildlife Centre, NorthYork; -Ms. Andrea Harrison, East York; -Ms. Ferne Sinkins, Toronto Cat Rescue, Toronto; -Mr. Jay Josefo, East York; and -Ms. Allyson Traynor Vanderberg, East York. (Councillor Miller, at the meeting of City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, declared his interest in Item (f), headed "Harmonizing Animal Care and Control Legislation", embodied in the foregoing Clause, in that he has a financial interest in a company that does business with the Toronto Humane Society.) Respectfully submitted, MICHAEL PRUE, Chair Toronto, October 14, 1998 (Report No. 15 of The East York Community Council, including an addition thereto, was adopted, without amendment, by City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998.)
		Please note that council and committee documents are provided electronically for information only and do not retain the exact structure of the original versions. For example, charts, images and tables may be difficult to read. As such, readers should verify information before acting on it. All council documents are available from the City Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@toronto.ca.

City maps | Get involved | Toronto links