City of Toronto   *
HomeContact UsHow Do I...? Advanced search Go
Living in TorontoDoing businessVisiting TorontoAccessing City Hall
 
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 May 11 and 12, 1999


ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 7

1 Pilot Project - Clothing Optional Beach at Hanlan's Point (Ward 24 - Downtown)

2 Millennium Celebrations - Charity Gala Event at Casa Loma (Ward 23 - Midtown)

3 Province of Ontario Announcement Respecting the City's Main Street Ontario Application

4 Toronto, Bombardier and the Third Millennium

5 Proposed Lease of Parks Work Boat (Ward 24 - Downtown)

6 Film Liaison Industry Committee (FLIC)

7 Toronto Island Food and Beverage Concession - Renegotiation of the Centre Island Food Services Ltd. Licence Agreement (Ward 24 - Downtown)

8 U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd., 15 Wallsend Drive Coronation Drive Employment District (Ward 16 - Highland Creek)

9 1999 Business Improvement Area Budgets Supplementary Report No. 2 - Long Branch Business Improvement Area (Ward 2 - Lakeshore-Queensway)

10 American Public Works Association (APWA) 2006 International Public Works Congress and Exposition

11 Other Items Considered by the Committee

City of Toronto


REPORT No. 7

OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

(from its meetings on March 29, April 6, 1999, and April 23, 1999,

submitted by Councillor Brian Ashton, Chair)


As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on May 11 and 12, 1999


1

Pilot Project - Clothing Optional Beach at Hanlan's Point

(Ward 24 - Downtown)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends that the report (April 19, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be adopted subject to amending Recommendation (1) to read:

"(1) that Council approve a pilot project for the summer of 1999 to implement a clothing option beach at a section of Hanlan's Point Beach on Toronto Islands;".

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to investigate ways of attracting naturists to Toronto and report on this matter to the Economic Development Committee.

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (April 19, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose of Report:

The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval to implement a one year pilot project to introduce a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point Beach on the Toronto Island.

Funding Implications:

The implementation of this pilot project will require the installation of signage, landscape screening and temporary fencing in selected locations which will be derived from funds placed in the Capital Budget, to the expected limit of $ 5,000.

Recommendations:

It is recommended:

(1) that Council approve a one year pilot project to implement a clothing optional beach at a section of Hanlan's Point Beach on Toronto Islands;

(2) that a project committee consisting of City Staff, the proponents, the City Solicitor, the Toronto Police Force, the Toronto Island Community and other interested parties be convened to assist in the implementation of the pilot project, the development of evaluation criteria and an education/awareness program;

(3) that an evaluation of this pilot project be conducted and forwarded to the Economic Development Committee by December 1999; and

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

Background:

Staff received a well researched and comprehensive brief from Mr. Peter Simm, a director of TNT!MEN (Totally Naked Toronto Men Enjoying Nudity) and the Hanlan's Point Naturists which proposes the establishment of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point on the Toronto Island. The brief is attached to this report for the information of Committee ("Appendix A").

Under the Uniform Parks By-law, swimming at all beaches within the City is regulated with respect to proper bathing attire. This regulation is not able to be enforced with respect to women who wish to bathe topless due to the Ontario Court of Appeal decision of the Gwen Jakob case.

The proposed location for this pilot project on Hanlan's Point ("Appendix B"), has a long history of use as a clothing optional beach area. From 1894 to 1930, a City by-law specifically authorized Hanlan's Point and two other locations as a clothing optional beach. Although the by-law was rescinded in 1930, Hanlan's Point has continued to be used as a clothing optional beach, and the enforcement of the proper bathing attire requirement of the Uniform Parks By-law have been enforced on only a sporadic basis since the late 1980's.

This proposal has been reviewed by the Toronto Police as well as the Toronto Island Residential Trust, and their comments have been considered in developing the recommendations.

Other Clothing Optional Locations

There are other locations within the City of Toronto which are reported to be frequented by individuals participating in clothing optional sunbathing, nude recreation and swimming. These locations include the Highland Creek Beach Area, and sections of the Tommy Thompson Park located on the Leslie Street Spit. This proposal would provide some meaningful policy framework and an legitimate location for individuals who wish to take advantage of a clothing optional facility. As a part of this proposal, Council could direct that enforcement activities be increased at other unsanctioned locations to attempt to direct people who wish to use clothing optional beaches to the Hanlan's Point location.

Other major Cities in Canada and North America have implemented clothing optional beach locations with little negative implications. Vancouver has had the "Wreck Beach" location as a formally recognized clothing optional beach since 1989, although the site had been used in a similar manner for decades. This beach is used for both active purposes (volleyball, frisbee, etc) and passive uses. The staff of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) report no negative implications of the clothing optional beach from an operational, enforcement or environmental standpoint. The GVRD also has reported that there is strong support and regular liaison with the Wreck Beach Preservation Society, a volunteer based group which is active in the ongoing management of the area in conjunction with staff.

Potential Conflict in Use

This site is currently used by many individuals for clothing optional sunbathing and recreation. It is also used by the general public and the boating community who anchor their boats in the relatively protected waters adjacent to the beach. Further, the beach area is used extensively by the public to view events, particularly the Symphony of Fire Fireworks Competition and the Canadian International Air Show during the CNE. With appropriate signage and screening, and designating only a portion of the beach area as clothing optional, potential conflicts in use can be minimized. There are also other beach alternatives on the Island for those who may be offended by a clothing optional location and wish to use the beach facilities during a visit to the Toronto Islands. The proposed location is quite removed from the residential community and the primary parkland attractions of Centre Island are several kilometres from this proposed location.

There may be more of a concern over illicit or inappropriate behaviour on this site than those concerns from members of the public who might be offended by the prospect of a nude recreation area. In recent years, there have been more instances of enforcement with respect to illicit or inappropriate behaviour of some users of this beach then any other complaints.

Tourism and Economic Impact

The brief provides an overview of the economic impact of establishing a clothing optional beach in Toronto. It indicates a positive impact on the hotel and hospitality sectors within the City. Further, the brief indicates that other locations have reported that a clothing optional beach area can become a draw for international travel and has stimulated businesses that cater to individuals who would use these facilities. Our staff in the Economic Development office are currently evaluating the potential economic impact and could report on this aspect of the proposal in the future.

Impact on Ferry System

The brief also provides an overview of the potential impact on the Ferry System. The brief indicates that as many as 5000 people could use this facility each weekend day during the peak summer season. If this scenario is correct, they indicate that incremental revenues of up to $400,000 per year is possible. This is an optimistic target and it is clear that net revenues during a pilot project would not be substantial and would build in the longer term. Further, the brief suggests that this increase in ridership of the ferry system would be accomplished on an incremental basis with little or no impact on the cost of providing this service. If the projected numbers of 5000 people per day on summer weekends were realized, several changes and adjustments to the ferry loading and scheduling would have to be considered since this additional load is well beyond the current capacity of boats servicing the Hanlan's Point location. This demand during the pilot period of this summer is not anticipated to be problematic.

Environmental Impact

The Hanlan's Point Location is adjacent to and forms part of an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) which has been designated by the Toronto Region Conservation Authority. ESA number 115 is known for its willow strand and unique plant growth in the sand dunes of the area ("Appendix C"). Further, there has been some significant erosion of the beach area at the South end of Gibraltar Point due to high lake levels over the last several years. A shoreline protection initiative is planned in conjunction with the construction of the deep lake cooling water initiative which will commence construction on the Island this summer.

It is clear that the active use of the beach strand area could have a negative effect on the ESA unless adequate management measures are employed in the planning and implementation of the clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point. Specifically, appropriate signage, screening and additional plantings will be necessary and, there may be the requirement to fence certain areas of the ESA in order to prevent trespassing and consequent damage of this delicate ecosystem. Staff believe that the appropriate planning and management of this area, and the education of those individuals who use the area about the sensitive nature of the ESA and the appropriate usage of the area will be required. Clear enforcement requirements of the trespassing clauses of the Parks By-Law can also be evoked.

Implementation Costs

A one year pilot of a clothing optional area at Hanlan's point can be implemented with a total upset cost of $5,000. This would include the requirement for signage, temporary fencing, temporary screening, and an education brochure respecting the environmental sensitivity of the site. These costs could be funded from a capital program allotment set aside for the Toronto Islands in the 1999 Capital Budget.

There is one lifeguard station currently located on the Hanlan's Point Beach and we would recommend that it be relocated outside of the designated clothing optional area. This area will have to be properly signed to indicate that it is an unsupervised area from a safety supervision standpoint. There are also no washroom or change facilities located in the beach area and some consideration must be given to the potential of portable toilet facilities to be located there for the summer season. There is a full service washroom facility and concession area near the site which will provide an acceptable level of service for the area.

There may be other potential costs of this initiative including patrol and enforcement of inappropriate behaviour on the site by the Toronto Police and the Marine Unit.

In the longer term, if this proposal is extended to be a more permanent location and depending on the response and number of visitors to the area, it is possible that on-site washroom and changeroom facilities may be required along with other infrastructure improvements to the site.

Requirement for Community Involvement

Staff believe that one of the critical factors in this pilot project will be the involvement of the broader community in the implementation of the project. This is a cornerstone of the operating principles of the Department, and based on the Vancouver experience with the Wreck Beach location, the Wreck Beach Preservation Society has been instrumental in the apparent success of that location. This team, in the initial pilot period will require extensive involvement from City Staff including the City Solicitor, Health Department and both the Marine Unit and 52 Division of the Toronto Police Department. This team will also assist in the development of evaluation criteria, site requirements, education and awareness programs.

Conclusion:

The proposal from TNT!MEN and the Hanlan's Point Naturists has been well researched and is presented in a cogent and thoughtful manner. Given that Toronto is a major world class City, we should recognize that there is an element of the population who enjoy nude sunbathing and recreation. In contrast, there are others who will be offended by this proposal and feel that any public park is not an appropriate location for a clothing optional facility.

Recognizing the apparent demand for this type of facility, there is some merit to designating one location for this activity in order to minimize the conflicts of use and perception to one location. Aside from the presence of the ESA at this location, the beach at Hanlan's Point is a very appropriate location for this pilot project. It is remote enough to any residential and children's play areas on the Islands that the public who may be offended by a clothing optional beach can avoid the area, while it is close enough to the City and the Hanlan's Point Ferry Docks to make it accessible. The physical area can be adequately screened and appropriately signed to ensure that individuals do not stumble into the area unknowingly.

The ESA provides the biggest challenge to the establishment of the clothing optional beach at this location. Some significant signage, temporary fencing, and landscape screening must be installed to ensure that there is no trespassing of individuals into the ESA. Further, some aggressive education of the importance and delicate nature of the ESA will be required along with an enforcement component for those found to be trespassing within the most delicate areas of the ESA.

Contact:

John A. Macintyre

Director of Parks and Recreation

397-4451

--------

The Economic Development Committee also had before it the following communications, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:

- Appendix "A" - Brief submitted by Peter A. Simm, titled "Enhance Toronto Tourism & Recreation: Restore Clothing-Optional Status to Hanlan's Point Beach";

- Appendix "B" - Map of Toronto Island Park identifying the proposed location of the clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- Appendix "C" - Environmentally Significant Areas Study from the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority;

- (April 12, 1999) from Robert A. Phillips, Toronto, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 11, 1999) from Ted and Lesley Thompson, Ottawa, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 9, 1999) from A. W. Hatch, Newmarket, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 12, 1999) from A. W. Hatch, Newmarket, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (March 7, 1999) from G. N. Jerry Ford, Toronto, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (March 31, 1999) from Douglas Simpson, Guelph, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (undated) from Dr. Paul Rapoport, Ancaster, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 11, 1999) from David Basford, Federation of Canadian Naturists, Etobicoke, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 9, 1999) from Judy E. Williams, Canadian Naturist Action Committee Member, Public Relations Director and Government Affairs Officer, Federation of Canadian Naturists, and Chair, Wreck Beach Preservation Society, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 10, 1999) from Stephen Biggs and Tanya Gerber, Toronto, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 20, 1999) from Peter Klungel, Toronto, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (undated) from Geremy Vincent, Toronto, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 14, 1999) from John Pazynik, Burlington, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 19, 1999) from Petra Scheller, Mississauga, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 13, 1999) from Carl Hills, Toronto, in opposition to a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 21, 1999) from Connie and Jim Sellen, Pickering, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 21, 1999) from Alison Stewart, Toronto, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (April 20, 1999) from Jim Hodder, Treasurer, The Federation of Canadian Naturists, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point;

- (undated) from Dave Fleming, Hanlan's Beach Naturists, in support of a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point; and

- (April 23, 1999) from Sivahuru Nathan, Toronto, in opposition to a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Beach.

--------

The following persons appeared before the Economic Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Peter Simm;

- David Drasic;

- Zak Kahn;

- Karina Matthews;

- Jim Hodder;

- Linda Deschenes;

- Dominic Carlo; and

- Karl Dorey.

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (May 11, 1999) from Councillor George Mammoliti, North York Humber, forwarding a submission from Ms. Brenda James, dated May 9, 1999, pertaining to the Pilot Project - Clothing Optional Beach at Hanlan's Point.)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, communications from the following persons requesting deferral of the recommendations of the Economic Development Committee with respect to the pilot project for a clothing optional beach at Hanlan's Point:

(i) (April 30, 1999) from Terry Russell;

(ii) (April 30, 1999) from M. Burgess;

(iii) (April 30, 1999) from Hrant Keskek;

(iv) (April 30, 1999) from Roxanne James;

(v) (April 30, 1999) from Brenda James; and

(vi) (May 3, 1999) from Elaine Letford.)

2

Millennium Celebrations - Charity Gala Event at Casa Loma

(Ward 23 - Midtown)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Millennium Task Force contained in the report (April 2, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendations:

(1) that the report (March 29, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, be adopted, noting that $10,000.00 to $20,000.00 may be raised for other City Millennium initiatives through sponsorship initiatives for this event;

(2) that City Council be requested to ask Casa Loma to provide the facility to the City for the entire day of December 31, 1999; and

(3) that Members of Council be invited to participate in this event.

Background:

The Millennium Task Force had before it a report (March 29, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, requesting endorsement from the Millennium Task Force for the Charity Gala event at Casa Loma scheduled for December 31, 1999, as a City Millennium celebration.

Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto, appeared before the Millennium Task Force informing that the proceeds from this event will be earmarked for Variety Village with 10 percent of fundraising efforts to be forwarded to the Millennium Task Force to support other City driven Millennium activities.

--------

(Report dated March 29, 1999, addressed to the Millennium Task Force,

from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.)

Purpose:

This report seeks endorsement from the Millennium Task Force for the inclusion of a charity gala event at Casa Loma in the City's Millennium celebrations.

Source of Funds:

There are no financial implications arising out of this report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the Millennium Task Force consider endorsing inclusion of the charity event at Casa Loma in the City's Millennium celebrations.

Council Reference/Background/History:

A millennium gala charity event scheduled for December 31, 1999, is being organized at Toronto's Casa Loma. The organizing committee has requested that the Millennium Task Force endorse their event as a city millennium celebration. There would be no financial obligation or staff resources dedicated to the coordination or execution of this event. This would be a very exciting way to mark the beginning of the next millennium by featuring a spectacular event in Toronto's historic castle. As well this endeavour is supporting an important children's charity Variety Village and proceeds will be earmarked for this organization.

The City had initially envisioned a city-wide Millennium celebration at several high profile venues including Casa Loma, as noted in the Millennium Task Force Resolution Item No. (10). The City had planned to "immediately book appropriate venues such as Roundhouse Park, Metro Convention Centre and Casa Loma for the Millennium celebrations." The city is not able to fulfill this vision on its own, however, this group is willing to coordinate this important endeavour at no cost to the City. The organizing committee has also advised that they will contribute 10 percent of their fundraising efforts to the Millennium Task Force to support other city driven Millennium activities.

Contact Name

Jaye Robinson, Director Special Events

395-7310

3

Province of Ontario Announcement Respecting

the City's Main Street Ontario Application

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following recommendations of the Millennium Task Force:

(1) that the Province of Ontario be notified immediately of the City's intention to submit its application to the Main Street Ontario Program in September, 1999;

(2) that staff be directed to prepare an application inclusive of departmental initiatives which are thematically linked to the Main Street Program and meet with the Program's eligibility criteria; and

(3) that the Millennium Task Force approve the application prior to its submission to Economic Development Committee and Council in the Fall of 1999.

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (April 2, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Millennium Task Force on April 1, 1999:

(1) adopted the report (March 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and directed that it be forwarded to Economic Development Committee and Council for consideration: and

(2) received the report (January 8, 1999) from the Acting Project Manager, Millennium Project.

Background:

The Millennium Task Force had before it the following reports:

(i) (January 8, 1999) from the Acting Project Manager, Millennium Project, providing details of the Province of Ontario's millennium program, Ontario 2000, and requesting direction respecting the City's application to the Main Street Ontario Program, which was deferred from the January 29, 1999 meeting; and

(ii) (March 22, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, wherein it is recommended:

(1) the Province of Ontario be notified immediately of the City's intention to submit its application to the Main Street Ontario Program in September, 1999;

(2) staff be directed to prepare an application inclusive of departmental initiatives which are thematically linked to the Main Street Program and meet with the Program's eligibility criteria; and

(3) the Task Force approve the application prior to its submission to Economic Development Committee and Council in the Fall of 1999.

--------

(Report dated March 22, 1999, addressed to the Millennium Task Force,

from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.)

Purpose:

To request the Task Force's approval of the following recommendations respecting the City's Main Street Ontario application.

Recommendations:

(1) the Province of Ontario be notified immediately of the City's intention to submit its application to the Main Street Ontario Program in September, 1999;

(2) staff be directed to prepare an application inclusive of departmental initiatives which are thematically linked to the Main Street Program and meet with the Program's eligibility criteria; and

(3) the Task Force approve the application prior to its submission to Economic Development Committee and Council in the Fall of 1999.

Discussion:

The Workgroup at its meeting in February, 1999, discussed various options regarding the City's application to this funding program. While the group voted to support an application for a two-phased City Millennium Grants Program (to which the City has already committed $500,000.00 for Phase 1), subsequent discussions with Ontario 2000 staff have determined that such an application would not be eligible.

The Workgroup has indicated that its second preferred option is an application for a group of corporate initiatives, which are thematically linked to the Main Street Program.

However, workgroup members expressed concern about the lack of confirmed information for most of the initiatives due to budget uncertainties, and that the selection process should be equitable. At its next meeting on April 6, 1999, the workgroup will discuss further the selection criteria. Given that departmental budgets will not be confirmed until later in the year and many initiatives are in very early planning stages, it is recommended that the City not submit its application until September. This would assume Council approval of the application and receipt of MP letter(s) of support in late July or early September.

Conclusion:

The Main Street Ontario application has generated much discussion from staff and community groups keen to expand on planned Millennium initiatives. As funding for the City has already been earmarked by the Province, the timing of the City's application is less urgent. It is, therefore, recommended that the workgroup be permitted to develop an equitable and manageable selection process and apply it to the range of Corporate Millennium initiatives.

Contact:

Irene Bauer, Acting Project Manager

Tel: 392-4218

--------

(Report dated January 8, 1999 addressed to the Millennium Task Force,

from the Acting Project Manager, Millennium Project.)

Purpose:

To provide the Millennium Task Force with information on the Province of Ontario's millennium program, Ontario 2000 and discuss the City's approach to the Main Street Ontario funding program.

Discussion:

The Province of Ontario has recently announced details of its millennium program (fact sheet attached). The program includes a matching funding program available to municipalities, First Nations and local service boards for one-time, community-oriented projects in the year 2000. Funding will range from $1,000.00 to $350,000.00 for projects which beautify a community, promote tourism or celebrate cultural diversity, history, or achievements in science and technology.

There are a variety of options available to the City regarding a funding application to this program. Each municipality may submit one application, focussing on one project or covering multiple community projects and/or initiatives. The private, public and not-for-profit sectors of the community are encouraged to join together in partnership and funding participation for Main Street Ontario projects. The municipality's matching funds must be committed by the date the application is submitted. Applicants are encouraged to apply as soon as possible; the closing deadline is March 31, 2000.

Given the range of options which exist with respect to the City's application to the Main Street Ontario program, the Task Force's guidance and feedback are requested.

Contact:

Irene Bauer, Acting Project Manager, Millennium Project - Tel: 392-4218.

(A copy of the fact sheet referred to in the foregoing report and the news release was forwarded to all Members of Council with the April 23, 1999 Agenda of the Economic Development Committee, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

4

Toronto, Bombardier and the Third Millennium

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, amended this Clause by:

(1) striking out Recommendation No. (3) of the Economic Development Committee, viz.:

"(3) the GTA be requested to endorse the 'Bring the CRJ-700 and BRJ-X to Toronto' project and to meet with Bombardier to identify how Toronto can make these projects viable;";

(2) deleting Recommendation No. (6) of the Economic Development Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"(6) a Strategic Planning Group be established to develop a strategic plan on lobbying key decision makers, and the following Members of Council be appointed to this Group:

- the Mayor, or his designate;

- the Chair of the Economic Development Committee (Councillor Ashton);

- Councillor Brown;

- Councillor Moscoe; and

- Councillor Walker;"; and

(3) adding thereto the following:

It is further recommended that any expansion of the DeHavilland plant be accomplished within the provisions of the Downsview Secondary Plan endorsed by Council.")

The Economic Development Committee recommends that:

(1) Council endorse bringing the CRJ-700 ad BRJ-X aircraft production to Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area (GTA);

(2) a briefing be obtained from knowledgeable persons (i.e. aviation analysts such as Ted Larkin of HSBC Securities and union and industry representatives) to identify the opportunity and the process;

(3) the GTA be requested to endorse the "Bring the CRJ-700 and BRJ-X to Toronto" project and to meet with Bombardier to identify how Toronto can make these projects viable;

(4) liaison be undertaken with the provincial and federal governments to ensure there is upgraded training in aviation in the post-secondary sector and that funding is available to ensure there will be a sufficiently large pool of properly trained potential employees;

(5) a plan be developed to address the needs and concerns of Bombardier;

(6) a plan be developed to lobby key decision makers (Toronto-based shareholders, Bombardier senior management, others) for the project; and

(7) Canada's major airlines, Air Canada and Canadian Airlines, be encouraged to place early orders for these new aircraft.

The Economic Development Committee submits the communication (March 23, 1999) from Councillor Michael Walker, Ward 22 - North Toronto:

Attached, please find a copy of a report I have developed regarding production of the new Bombardier CRJ-700 and BRJ-X commercial aircraft. Bombardier is the world's third largest civil aviation producer. The new BRJ-X will likely be the next replacement for the world's fleet of older, similar aircraft such as the DC-9 and Boeing 737.

While the company's production headquarters are in Montreal, research indicates that this facility currently has a five-year backlog of orders for Challenger business jets and other CRJ aircraft. They will be looking for a new facility to produce these new aircraft.

Our goal should be to develop an initiative aimed at understanding Bombardier's needs regarding these new aircraft and ensuring that they select Toronto as the location for production of a major portion of the CRJ-700 and BRJ-X aircraft.

This presents Toronto with a unique and viable opportunity to bring a top notch, high tech industry to our City for the production of cutting edge aircraft and technology while securing a large number of skilled, long-term jobs for the year 2000 and beyond.

As Toronto moves into the next millennium, we will need to identify and encourage these types of businesses to come to Toronto and set up shop. This is our opportunity to be proactive in an area that lends itself to major expansion of a high tech industry that has, in my opinion, an unlimited future. All the ingredients are already in place here in the largest, most affluent, and best city in the country, Toronto!

I would appreciate your taking the time to review this report. I ask for your comments, your suggestions and especially, your support.

--------

Bombardier and Toronto in the 21st Century

Submission: Councillor Michael Walker

March 22, 1999

Executive Summary:

Bombardier is now the world's third largest civil aviation producer, with a line of aircraft that includes the CL-415 waterbomber, the 50 seat Canadair Regional Jet, the 70 seat CRJ-700, the deHavilland family of Dash 8 aircraft (37-, 50- and 70- seat turboprop airliners), and a wide range of corporate jets (Learjet, Challenger and Global Express).

Bombardier is evolving into a producer of larger aircraft, notably the new 70-seat CRJ-700 and the proposed 90-seat BRJ-X. The latter aircraft could prove to be the next replacement for the world's fleet of older DC-9, Boeing 737, BAe 146 and Fokker F-28 aircraft.

With respect to the future of our city's aerospace industry, a key question is what portion of these aircraft could be built and/or assembled in Toronto. This is important given the uncertainty surrounding the future of Boeing's Malton facility and the fact that the Downsview production output of Dash 8s has been slowing. Now is the time to understand Bombardier's needs regarding these new aircraft types and to ensure that Bombardier selects Toronto as the location for a major portion of the CRJ-700 and proposed BRJ-X production.

Background:

DeHavilland has been building aircraft in Toronto since 1928. During this period of time it has been owned by various groups, including Boeing, the Federal government and Hawker Siddeley of Britain. Today, Bombardier out of Montreal is the sole shareholder. Currently the plant has the mandate to manufacture the Dash 8 aircraft (100, 200, 300 and 400 Series) as well as the Global Express long-range business jet. Bombardier's very popular Canadair Regional Jet (CRJ), is manufactured in Montreal. There are two versions, the 50 seat CRJ and the new 70 seat CRJ-700.

The BRJ-X (Big Regional Jet) is proposed as a new 90 seat aircraft with seating for 5 across. The aircraft will be positioned between CRJ-700 and the smaller versions of the Boeing 737 and the Airbus A319. There is significant demand for such an aircraft given the large fleet of older Boeing 737 and DC-9 aircraft that need to be replaced, as well as the large demand for upgraded aircraft on thinner (lower passenger volume) routes.

Objective:

Toronto, and the adjacent municipalities, perhaps under the Greater Toronto Services Board, should ensure that the Greater Toronto area has a significant share of this 21st century project. The Montreal facilities of Canadair are now filled with a large backlog for Challenger business jets and orders for more than 480 CRJ aircraft (together equal to more than five years of output at current production levels).

The economic spillover of jobs from major work at deHavilland for the CRJ-700 and BRJ-X as well as the subcontractor-supplied components being manufactured would provide a boost of skilled work for the city's population, including young graduates of technical schools. In addition, the economic multiplier from such a long-term skilled workforce would be significant.

Challenges:

The major problem is to ensure that Toronto gets a fair hearing for the building of the CRJ-700 and the BRJ-X. Issues which will impact on this will include:

- Bombardier may be under significant pressure to build these aircraft in Quebec given its federalist perspective;

- Bombardier may have other facilities in mind (Belfast, Kansas or even the former Fokker facility in the Netherlands) for production of this aircraft;

- Downsview is presently suitable for final assembly but its long term viability may be impacted by the Technodome project; and

- availability of other facilities, such as McDonnell-Douglas/Boeing facility at Malton for manufacture and assembly of components for the aircraft itself.

Bombardier has not given a go-ahead for the production of the 90-seat aircraft (BRJ-X), but in the event it does, it will need a suitable location for manufacture of major components i.e. fuselage and wings as well as final assembly. The Downsview facility could be used for final assembly of either the 70-seat (CRJ-700) or 90-seat (BRJ-X) aircraft.

Analysis

Aviation is a major growth industry for the next century, especially the production of smaller aircraft to replace older larger aircraft and provide better fuel economy per passenger seat kilometre. Bombardier is positioning itself within the global aviation industry as the leading manufacturer of regional airliners (turboprops and jets).

In addition, aviation is a clean, relatively non-polluting source of industrial development that creates long-term skilled jobs in design, parts and component manufacturing, assembly, sales and after-sales service.

The aviation sector in Toronto has fallen behind that of Montreal and with the potential closing of the McDonnell Douglas/Boeing plant at Malton, it could slip further. The Dash 8 project, well into its second decade, has seen lower levels of orders as regional airline operators move to jets. The Global Express long-range business jet programme at Downsview has orders for 80 aircraft, and 36 units are expected to be built per year. However, the real prize for Toronto would be either the CRJ-700 and/or the BRJ-X.

Also, if Toronto wants an economic engine with long-term potential to replace the Olympics and its McJobs, the Bombardier project may warrant a concerted effort by federal, provincial, GTSB and Toronto politicians and their respective public servants.

Several steps would appear to be in order:

(1) obtain a briefing from knowledgeable persons (i.e. aviation analysts such as Ted Larkin of HSBC Securities and union representatives, industry reps) to identify the opportunity and the process;

(2) Toronto City Council endorse bringing the CRJ-700 and BRJ-X production to Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area (GTA);

(3) arrange for the Greater Toronto Services Board (GTSB) to endorse the "Bring the CRJ-700 and BRJ-X to T.O." project and to meet with Bombardier to identify how Toronto can make these projects viable;

(4) liaise with the federal and provincial governments to ensure there is upgraded training in aviation in the post-secondary sector and funding is available to ensure there will be a sufficiently large pool of properly trained potential employees;

(5) develop a plan to address the needs and concerns of Bombardier;

(6) develop a plan to lobby key decision makers (Toronto-based shareholders, Bombardier senior management, others) for the project; and

(7) encourage Canada's major airlines, Air Canada and Canadian Airlines, to place early orders for these new aircraft.

--------

The Economic Development Committee submits the joint communication (April 16, 1999) from Councillor Michael Walker, Ward 22 - North Toronto, and Councillor Brian Ashton, Chair, Economic Development Committee and Councillor, Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs, addressed to Mr. Jerry Dias, National Aerospace Coordinator, Canadian Auto Workers:

The purpose of this letter is to advise you that the Economic Development Committee of the City of Toronto has recently been updated on developments in the aerospace industry in Canada and in particular the trends affecting Bombardier, including its deHavilland operations at Downsview.

Recently, we jointly sponsored an aviation sector briefing at City Hall. The briefing, held on April 12th, addressed the overall strength and size of the aviation sector in Canada and also considered the situation for Bombardier, both at deHavilland and Canadair. The briefing was conducted by Mr. Ted Larkin, the transportation sector analyst for HSBC Securities, and Mr. Charles Smedmor, a chartered accountant with investment attraction experience. A copy of their material, together with other material distributed at the briefing, is attached.

The Economic Development Committee and the Department of Economic Development are very interested in developing this key sector of Toronto's economy. We would very much like to work with the CAW as a key partner in attracting this additional investment and employment to Toronto. We understand that you will be out of Toronto until after the next meeting of the Economic Development Committee (April 23). However, we and the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Mr. Joe Halstead, would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you informally to learn of your views and those of the CAW on this matter and to discuss how we can appropriately move ahead together on this opportunity.

Please call either of us at 416-392-4052 (Brian Ashton) or 416-392-7906 (Michael Walker) so that we can arrange a suitable time and place for a meeting. We very much look forward to meeting with you.

5

Proposed Lease of Parks Work Boat (Ward 24 - Downtown)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (April 19, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism subject to amending Recommendation (1) to indicate that the Chair, Economic Development Committee be consulted with respect to the elements of the lease.

Purpose:

The report dated March 17, 1999 and discussed at the Economic Development Committee meeting of March 29 and April 6, 1999 was referred back to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism with a request to approach other boat operators to ascertain their interest in the Parks and Recreation Division Work Boat and report back to the Committee with the findings.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) staff negotiate a lease agreement for the Parks work boat "P and P1" with Toronto Tours Limited for the period May 1, 1999 to September 30, 1999;

(2) a full Request For Proposal process be undertaken for the year 2000 operating season; and

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

Background:

The Economic Development Committee requested further information on the proposal to lease the Parks and Recreation Division Work Boat (P and P1) to Toronto Tours Limited from May 1, 1999 to September 30, 1999. Other boat operators in the Toronto Harbour area were approached to determine if there was an interest in leasing the vessel for the 1999 season. Charter companies, the water taxi service and the Island Amusement Park operator declined to express an interest in leasing the vessel for the 1999 season.

Toronto Tours Limited has confirmed that the vessel would be made available for special tours, visiting dignitaries or economic development activities. The 1999 season is rapidly approaching and it is essential that the proposal be considered by the Committee if this proposal is to be implemented for the forthcoming season. In the fall of 1999 a Request For Proposal involving the Finance Department will be arranged for the year 2000 season.

Conclusions:

The proposal to lease the "P and P 1" by Toronto Tours Limited is a favourable one, and should be implemented on a pilot basis this summer.

Contact Names:

Doug McDonald John Macintyre

Operations Support Coordinator Director of Parks and Recreation

Parks and Recreation Division Parks and Recreation Division

392-8578 397-4451

6

Film Liaison Industry Committee (FLIC)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (April 16, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism subject to amending Recommendation (2) to read:

"(2) that six Councillors who are interested in the film and television industry be appointed to FLIC with preference being given to achieving a geographical balance, and that the Clerk be requested to canvass Councillors for their interest in being appointed to this Committee, and submit a list of interested members to the Striking Committee for its consideration;".

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (April 16, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

To confirm the Film Liaison Industry Committee role, terms of reference, membership and to request Councillor representation on this committee.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Council recognize the important work of the Film Industry Liaison Industry Committee (FLIC) and adopt the Terms of Reference outlined in Appendix 1; and

(2) six Councillors, one from each of the Community Councils, who are interested in the film and television industry be appointed to FLIC.

Background/History:

In recognition of the importance of Toronto's film and television industry, City Council established the Film Liaison Industry Committee (FLIC) in 1992. The committee is made up of members of the industry's labour, management, service and financial organizations as well as elected representatives from the former Toronto and Metro Councils.

The purpose of the Committee has been " to act on City Council's policy of support and encouragement for the film industry in Toronto". To this end it has served as a forum for discussion, problem resolution and communication. It has provided advice to Council on issues related to the film and television industry and worked to enhance the success of Toronto in this business. It has successfully lobbied Queens Park and Ottawa on behalf of the city. Participation of members of Council has been important in achieving success.

Appendix 1 contains the amended Film Liaison Industry Committee Terms of Reference.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Film Liaison Industry Committee meetings are held at Toronto City Hall once a month and the staff of the Toronto Film and Television Office act as its secretariat. The Film Liaison Industry Committee has been instrumental in dealing with a number of concerns. The committee:

- helped the Toronto Historical Board establish a filming policy;

- worked closely with the Metropolitan Toronto Police force on policy for Paid Duty Officers;

- is actively involved in lobbying the provincial and federal levels of government on taxation issues;

- supported OFTSOA (Ontario Film and Television Studio Owners Association) on their successful appeal to the regional assessment office regarding business and realty taxes;

- organized all interested parties on the issue of the Gardiner East Dismantling to ensure all groups are in agreement with the procedures/outcome; and

- had input into the reports on amalgamated guidelines/by-laws/code of conduct and user fees.

Conclusions:

At the November 27, 1997 FLIC meeting the members endorsed the continuation of this committee unanimously. Even though all committees were suspended at the end of 1997 the membership of FLIC decided to continue to meet to deal with the challenges that the industry faced through amalgamation. In 1998 and the beginning of 1999 Councillors who were formerly members of FLIC have continued to attend on an intermittent basis. The industry members feel that Councillor representation is essential to deal with the issues facing the industry today.

Contact Name:

Rhonda Silverstone, 392-1333

Peter Finestone, 392-3376

Brenda Librecz, 397-4700

--------

Appendix 1

Film Liaison Industry Committee

Terms Of Reference

Purpose:

The purpose of the Committee is to act on City Council's policy of support and encouragement for the film and television industry in Toronto.

Activities:

(a) to promote a positive atmosphere for location filming in the City of Toronto; assist in improving the public image of Toronto's film and television industry;

(b) to assist the operation of Toronto Film and Television Office to provide its services to the film and television industry by providing advice on processes that may impede growth of this sector;

(c) to meet representatives of relevant city departments, agencies and boards, as well as other levels of government and similar private sector organizations, from time to time, in order to encourage cooperation and support for the activities of the film and television industry;

(d) to take positive action which will assist individual film and television companies to resolve problems which they may be facing at their present locations;

(e) to act as a forum through which the industry can communicate their views to Council on matters of interest to them;

(f) to advise Economic Development Committee on matters affecting the film and television industry in Toronto;

(g) to review all policy proposals and emerging policies of Council which may have implications for the film and television industry in Toronto;

(h) to advertise the existence of the Committee and make known its objectives and the services it provides; and

(i) to make deputations and lobby senior levels of government on behalf of the industry.

Membership:

(a) one Councillor appointed from each Community Council;

(b) one representative from each of the following:

- Ontario Film Development Corporation;

- ACCRA - Alliance of Canadian Cinema Television & Radio Artists;

- IATSE Local 411 Production Coordinators - International Alliance of Theatrical Employees;

- IATSE Local 667 International Photographers - International Alliance of Theatrical Employees;

- IATSE Local 873 Technicians - International Alliance of Theatrical Employees;

- NABET AFC Local 700 - National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians (Association of Film Craftsmen);

- CFTPA - The Canadian Film and Television Production Association;

- Location Managers;

- Film Studio owner/operators;

- Production Managers;

- Lawyers;

- Bankers;

- Insurance Agents;

- Post Production Facility owners/operators;

- CPAT - Commercial Producers Association of Toronto;

- CANDO - Community Alliance for Neighbourhood Development Opportunities;

- Film Service business owner/operators;

(c) six members at large; and

(d) a total membership of 29.

Meetings:

(a) that meetings be regularly scheduled on the last Thursday of every month at 12:30 p.m. and not more than six weeks should elapse between meetings;

(b) that minutes of the meetings be taken;

(c) that two co-chair be elected from among the membership;

(d) that the Committee be coordinated by staff of the Toronto Film and Television Office;

(e) that reports of the Committee be presented to the Economic Development Committee;

(f) that the Committee would have power to add to its membership; and

(g) that the presence of seven members, including at least one co-chair, would constitute a quorum.

--------

Appendix 2

Present Membership

Councillor Betty Disero

Councillor Tom Jakobek

Councillor Mario Silva

Councillor Anne Johnston

Kathryn Reed-Garrett

Mimi Wolch, IATSE-Local 873

Ken Leslie-Smith, IATSE Local 667

Linda Gardon, NABET/AFC Local 700

Robin Chetwynd, ACCRA

Heather Blais, DGC

Marcus Handman, DGC

Byron Martin, DGC

Paul Kenyon, CPAT

Peter Lukas, Ontario Film & TV Studios

Keith Danby, William F. White Limited

Konrad Dowling, Aon/Ruben-Winkler Ent. Ins.

Susan Murdoch, Production Manager

Andy Sykes, Medallion/PFA

Sherry Wolfson, Location Manager

David Plant, Silicon Graphics Canada

William Fell, P.S. Prod. Services Ltd.

Cra Martin, CFTPA

Manny Danelon, Production Manager

Nick Gray, Production Manager

Gail Thomson, OFDC

Rick Perotto, IATSE Local 667

Robert Morrice, Royal Bank of Canada

David Zitzerman Goodman Phillips & Vineberg

Bonnie Taylor, CAN DO

7

Toronto Island Food and Beverage Concession - Renegotiation

of the Centre Island Food Services Ltd. Licence Agreement

(Ward 24 - Downtown)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends that the report (April 19, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be adopted, subject to amending Recommendation (1) by indicating the reduction in the licence agreement be for 1999 only, so as to read:

"(1) the Economic Development Committee approve an addendum to the existing licence agreement to reduce the percentage of gross sales payable over and above the basic annual rental fee from 22.25% to 14% in 1999, to waive the basic annual rental fee for 1999, to adjust the percentage payable in subsequent years so as to make up the shortfall in revenues experienced in 1999, and direct the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to bring this matter forward to the Economic Development at the appropriate time for consideration of extending a reduction in the licence agreement for a further year;".

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (April 19, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose

To provide a report on the request from Centre Island Food Services Ltd. to amend the terms of the Licence Agreement between the City of Toronto and CI Food Services Ltd. for the operation of food and beverage services on the Toronto Island.

Financial Implications

Anticipated revenue reductions in 1999 and 2000 of $149,000 and $105,000 respectively. These revenues would be recovered over the life of the agreement.

Recommendations

It is recommended that:

(1) the Economic Development Committee approve an addendum to the existing licence agreement to reduce the percentage of gross sales payable over and above the basic annual rental fee from 22.25% to 14% in 1999, and from 22.5% to 17% in 2000; to waive the basic annual rental fee for 1999 and 2000; and to adjust the percentage payable in subsequent years so as to make up the shortfall in revenues experienced in 1999 and 2000;

(2) the City Solicitor be authorized to prepare and execute the necessary addendum as outlined above in point 1 to give effect thereto;

(3) as a condition of this adjustment, CI Foods be required to submit to staff, prior to June 1, 1999, a Business Plan outlining a "turnaround strategy" which would allow the terms of the amended licence agreement to be met;

(4) staff continue to monitor the performance of CI Foods, and that if the terms of the amended agreement are not met, the agreement shall revert to its original terms; and

(5) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism report back on the results of a comprehensive concession review now being undertaken by the Parks and Recreation Division.

Background

By the adoption of Clause No. 9 of the Report No. 14 of the Parks, Recreation and Property committee on August 15, 1991, Metropolitan Toronto Council authorized the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the operation of the food services (two restaurants and six snack bars) on the Toronto Islands. The RFP required that the concessionaire undertake to refurbish the concession areas as part of the lease arrangements and ensure that the areas met all applicable codes and regulations. It was also indicated that major renovations would be required for the Island Paradise restaurant and the Iroquois Coffee Shop in order to meet safety codes and to provide the standard of service Metro had for its park users. At the concessionaire's option, complete or partial rebuilding of the two structures was to be considered.

Five responses to the proposal call were received, of which three complied with the stipulated requirements:

(1) The Whaler's Group Inc.;

(2) William Beasley Enterprises Ltd.; and

(3) H.S. Food Services Ltd.

Each of the proponents provided information on projected sales in the food and beverage operations, and on the proposed rent to Metropolitan Toronto based on the a percentage of gross revenue and minimum guarantee. The proposed rents from H.S. Food Services Ltd. were based on a projected increase in gross sales. All three companies were asked to present their proposals to a review panel comprised of Metro staff and Marshall Macklin Monaghan, the external consultant.

By its adoption of Clause No.1 of Report No. 18 of the Management Committee of May 6, 1992, entitled "Food and Beverage Concession on the Toronto Islands", authority was granted by the Metropolitan Toronto Council to enter into a licence agreement with H.S. Food Service Ltd. For the operation of the food and beverage concession on the Toronto Islands for the term of twenty years (1993 up to and including 2012). Pursuant to the Agreement, the licensee was required, at its sole expense, to effect a capital program related to the renovation of the Iroquois Coffee Shop and the six concession buildings in 1992/93 (Phase I), and to subsequently demolish and construct a replacement building for the Paradise Restaurant in 1993/94 (Phase II). Phase I of the work was successfully completed, but prior to the completion of Phase II, the Licensee came to an arrangement whereby it sold its assets to CI Food Services Ltd..

Following completion of the sale, and by its adoption of Clause 9 of Report No. 13 of the Management Committee on April 6, 1994 entitled "Assignment of Licence Agreement - Refreshment Concessions, Toronto Islands", Metropolitan Toronto Council granted authority for the assignment of the Licence Agreement from H.S. Food Services Ltd. to C.I. Food Services Ltd. which authority was embodied in a Consent and Assumption Agreement dated the 8th day of April 1994 among all three affected parties. C.I. Food Services Ltd. assumed all of the obligations of the Licensee under the Licence Agreement, both operating and capital.

On October 8, 1998, a formal request to re-negotiate the terms of the License Agreement between the City of Toronto and C.I. Food Services Ltd. was received from Morrison Brown Sosovitch, Barristers and Solicitors, accompanied by a "Proposal to Amend the Rental Amount" (Appendix #1). This proposal suggested a rental structure commencing in 1999 of 12% of gross sales.

The current terms of the lease are:

(1) for each of the years 1998 to 2012, a basic annual rental fee of $375,000; and

(2) for 1998 to 2012, a percentage fee of 22% to 25.5% (on increments of 0.25% annually) of the licensee's gross sales, which exceed the basic rental fee amount.

The Parks and Recreation Division is in the process of a comprehensive food service and concessions review, conducted by an external consultant, FHG International Inc. After receiving the "Proposal to Amend the Rental Amount", the Parks and Recreation Division included the assessment the current C.I. Foods operation and the proposal in the terms of reference of the concessions study.

Comments

The report from FHG International confirmed the contention of C.I. Foods that it will be unlikely to recover the cost of its investment over the life of the Licence Agreement. In the opinion of the consultant however, this is because of lower than industry accepted sales levels, a lack of reinvestment in the facilities being operated, and the fact that C.I. Foods, in the estimation of the consultant, paid a very high price for the business resulting in a high level of debt. In addition, FHG indicated that the concessionaire, in meeting the capital development obligations of the lease, overbuilt the Paradise Restaurant while investing too little in the smaller concession facilities. Finally, FHG reported that the rents being charged by the City to C.I. Foods are well within industry norms, and are not the root cause of C.I.'s difficulties.

Notwithstanding the above, both the consultant, FHG International Inc., and staff believe that, if the current terms of the License Agreement are left to stand, the operation will not be viable over the life of the agreement. It is the opinion of staff that failure of the business will be likely to create significant operational problems for the City and may leave the City with significant losses. Given the substantial investment made in the business by C.I. Foods, it is suggested that the operator be given the opportunity to turn the business around and get on a firmer financial footing.

Consequently, it is proposed that C.I. Foods be provided with some relief from rent over the next two years, in order to remedy their operating deficiencies and to implement a turnaround strategy. Once the operation is back on track, it is suggested that rental rates be adjusted so that the financial shortfall over the next two years would be recovered over the balance of the Licence Agreement.

The former municipalities which now form the City of Toronto provided food services within their parks and recreation facilities using a variety of arrangements and agreements. The Parks and Recreation Division is undertaking a comprehensive review of its food service operations and will be bringing a report forward to the Committee, with recommendations this summer.

Conclusion

The operation of food and beverage services on the Toronto Islands and at other City Parks and Recreation venues is an integral service that complements the delivery of programs and services to the Division's customers. It is also a potential source for significant net revenues, if managed properly. It is critical that the City take appropriate actions to maintain high quality, profitable food operations at its Parks and Recreation operations.

Contact Name

John Macintyre Andy Wickens

Director Central Service and Waterfront District Manager of Business Services

397-4451 392-8231

--------

(A copy of Appendix 1 attached to the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the April 23, 1999 agenda of the Economic Development Committee and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

8

U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd., 15 Wallsend Drive

Coronation Drive Employment District (Ward 16 - Highland Creek)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the report dated May 10, 1999, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted:

'It is recommended that:

(1) authority be granted for the introduction of a by-law under section 221(2) of the Ontario Municipal Act to charge U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd. with a water rate that will be sufficient to recover all of the capital costs associated with the construction of a new water main as will be specified in the by-law; and

(2) appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to give effect thereto.' ")

The Economic Development Committee recommends that the joint report (April 7, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be adopted, subject to:

(1) deleting the words "in principle" in Recommendation (1), so as to read:

"(1) Council approve the installation and expansion of water services to U.S.E. Hickson Products Limited"; and

(2) deleting Recommendation (2).

The Economic Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested appropriate staff to report directly to Council for its meeting on May 11, 1999 with respect to the cost of the financial security to both parties with respect to Recommendation No. (3) of the above-noted report.

The Economic Development Committee submits the following joint report (April 7, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek approval of Council for the installation and up-front financing of a new water main to upgrade services to U.S.E. Hickson's manufacturing operation at 15 Wallsend Drive.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement

The preliminary estimated cost of installing the water main ranges from $90,000.00 to $110,000.00. The advance to U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd. would be repaid at current interest rates over a period of ten years. The method of repayment would be through the property tax billing system.

Recommendations

It is recommended that:

(1) Council approve in principle the installation and expansion of water services to U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd.;

(2) the City enter into an agreement with U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd. to construct the water main at the City's cost to be repaid with interest by U.S.E. Hickson over ten years;

(3) this matter be referred to the City's Treasurer, Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the City Solicitor to determine the feasibility of installing and expanding the water services to U.S.E. Hickson and to report back on the most appropriate method of proceeding; and

(4) that the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History

U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd. applied for a building permit to expand its operations on September 23, 1998 but could not proceed because the existing City water main was insufficient to meet the needs of the existing and future expanded building. An acceptable water sprinkler system was not possible using the existing main on Wallsend. The company requested the assistance of Economic Development to facilitate the installation of a water main of sufficient capacity along Wallsend Drive.

A meeting was held October 8, 1998 with representatives from Works and Emergency Services to discuss the feasibility of installing such a line. Staff agreed that installation was technically feasible. U.S.E. Hickson has indicated that its financial institution would not extend financing for this project, as the water main would not be an asset of the firm. Therefore, the company has requested that the water main be installed using the City's water reserve fund and the cost applied to the company's property tax bill over a period of ten years. Appropriate interest rates would apply.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification

Over the past 5 years U.S.E. Hickson has invested $9,000,000.00 in property and equipment at its Wallsend site and the company is allocating a further $3,000,000.00 to cover future investments. The installation of a water main was not included in the company's long term business forecast and plan. The cost and installation of the water main was not anticipated since the company assumed that water mains in the City were of sufficient capacity to service industrial users.

Another important factor in the company's requirement for a sprinkler system is insurance coverage. A new demand by the insurer has been placed on the company requiring it to fully sprinkler the existing and future buildings or suffer the possible withdrawal of coverage. The outcome of such an action would be the closure of the premises with the concomitant loss of taxes and jobs.

In the same context, there is a real concern on the part of the company that a less than sufficient water flow could jeopardize the safety of the on-site work force. The attached letter provides additional information with respect to U.S.E. Hickson's request.

The Finance and Legal Department will be required to establish the necessary financial terms and review the text of the agreement in order that an appropriate billing system is established with the company to install the water main.

Conclusions

The City's agreement to the proposal from U.S.E. Hickson would result in a physical expansion on site of approximately 10,000 square feet generating new property tax revenue in excess of $30,000.00 annually. The company currently pays more than $241,000.00 in realty taxes so the total tax bill would generate over $270,000.00 annually. Further, the expansion would allow the company to hire 12 new employees bringing its total complement to approximately 100 people.

Contact Names

D. Ronald Rea Mike Price

Senior Business Development Officer General Manager, Water & Waste Water

396-5141 Services

Works and Emergency Services Department

392-8200

Alan Shultz F. Bruce Graham

Director, Accounting Services Director, Business Development & Retention

Finance Department Economic Development

395-6701 392-3381

Wanda Liczyk Barry Gutteridge

Chief Financial Officer Treasurer Commissioner of Works and Emergency

of Finance Services

--------

Map Page

City of Toronto

Scarborough District

(A copy of the communication (March 8, 1999) attached to the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the April 23, 1999 agenda of the Economic Development Committee and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (May 10, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To present a mechanism that is acceptable to the City and U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd. for financing the construction of a new water main.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The funds for the water main construction will be provided in accordance with section 221 of the Municipal Act and recovered from the company through the water rate charge by-law.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

  • authority be granted for the introduction of a by-law under section 221(2) of the Ontario Municipal Act to charge U.S.E. Hickson Products Ltd. with a water rate that will be sufficient to recover all of the capital costs associated with the construction of a new water main as will be specified in the by-law; and
  • appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to give effect thereto.

Background:

At its meeting held on April 23, 1999, the Economic Development Committee gave consideration to the report dated April 7, 1999 from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services seeking the approval of Council for the installation and up-front financing of a new water main to upgrade services to U.S.E. Hickson's manufacturing operation at 15 Wallsend Drive in Scarborough.

The Economic Development Committee:

(1) recommended to Council for its meeting on May 11, 1999 that the report (April 7, 1999) be adopted subject to:

(a) deleting the words "in principle" in Recommendation (1), so as to read:

"(1) Council approve the installation and expansion of water services to U.S.E. Hickson Products Limited;"; and

(b) deleting Recommendation (2); and

(2) requested appropriate staff to report directly to Council for its meeting on May 11, 1999 with respect to the cost of the financial security to both parties with respect to Recommendation (3) of the above-noted report.

Comments/Discussion:

Section 221(2) of the Ontario Municipal Act RSO 1990 states:

"The council of a local municipality, in authorizing the construction of sewage works or water works, may by by-law impose a sewer rate or water works rate upon owners or occupants of land who derive or will or may derive a benefit therefrom sufficient to pay all or such portion of the capital costs of the works as the by-law may specify."

In consultation with the City Solicitor, I am recommending that the City finance the construction of the new water main that will benefit the property currently occupied by U.S.E. Hickson Products Limited (Hickson) and pass a by-law that will impose a charge sufficient to recover the entire capital cost of construction, including interest, at no cost to the City. Although other occupants or owners of adjacent land may also benefit from the new water main, Hickson has stated that they will be responsible for the entire capital cost and agree that any portion will not be recoverable from other sources, including the City.

It is being proposed that the capital cost, estimated in the report to Economic Development Committee at between $90,000 and $110,000, will be amortized over a ten year period at an interest rate of 6.00% per annum. The interest rate, as specified and defined by section 221(11) of the Municipal Act, should represent the City's actual cost of issuing debentures if they are used to finance the project or the City's cost of funds if the financing is to be provided from other sources. Due to the size of the expenditure, debenture authorization is not being requested as the financing will be provided from the City's own funds and a rate of 6.00% per annum will be charged. Based upon the above cost estimates, a monthly charge of approximately $992 to $1,212 would be added to Hickson's water bill in order to recover the entire capital cost, including interest, over the ten year amortization period.

Conclusion:

After reviewing various available financing options, it has been determined that the passage of a by-law under section (221) of the Municipal Act would provide the most cost-effective and efficient means for the City to recover the capital cost, including interest, of the approved installation and expansion of water services for U.S.E. Hickson Products Limited over a ten year term.

Contact Names:

Martin Willschick, Manager, Treasury 392-8072

E-mail: mwillsch@mta1.metronet.metrotor.on.ca

Len Brittain, Director, Treasury and Financial Services 392-5380)

9

1999 Business Improvement Area Budgets Supplementary

Report No. 2 - Long Branch Business Improvement Area

(Ward 2 - Lakeshore-Queensway)

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, received this Clause, having regard that this matter was considered and approved by Council at its Special Meeting held on April 26, 27 and 28, 1999.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of Recommendations Nos. (1) and (3) of the report (April 19, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having forwarded a copy of the foregoing report to Budget Committee for its information.

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (April 19, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

This report brings forward the proposed 1999 operating budget for the Long Branch Business Improvement Area (BIA) for Council's approval. Council approval of this budget is required by the Municipal Act to permit the City to collect funds on behalf of the BIA through a special tax levy.

Source of Funds:

No City funding is required since Business Improvement Area budgets are raised by a special levy on members.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Economic Development Committee adopt and certify to City Council the 1999 expenditures of the Long Branch Business Improvement Area of $85,750;

(2) a copy of this report be forwarded to the Budget Committee for its information; and,

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

Long Branch BIA Budget:

The Long Branch BIA's proposed 1999 budget was approved by its Board of Directors on March 16, 1999 and by its general membership on April 7, 1999, and further approved, as revised to reflect delays in commencing expenditures budgeted in 1998, by the Board of Directors on April 16, 1999.

Appendix A sets out the Long Branch BIA's proposed 1999 budget, including the net 1999 levy requirement.

Appendix B sets out the current status of BIA budget submissions.

Contact Name:

Joe Borowiec, Budget Services Division, Finance Department, 397-4298

--------

Appendix A

Long Branch BIA Budget Summary

1998

Approved

Budget

$

1998

Projected

Actual

$

1999

Budget

Request

$

Revenue:

- Prior Years' Surplus

- Net Levy Requirement

- Other Revenue

Total:

5,500

50,000

1,500

57,000

0

50,000

6,261

56,261

33,546

50,000

2,204

85,750

Expenditures:

- Administration

- Capital

- Maintenance

- Promotion & Advertising

- Contingency

Total:

5,750

18,000

18,250

15,000

0

57,000

2,015

0

12,804

7,896

0

22,715

15,750

28,000

17,000

25,000

0

85,750

(Surplus)/Deficit

0

(33,546)

0 --------

APPENDIX B

Status of Business Improvement Area Budget Submissions

Business Improvement Area Former Municipality Stage in Budget Process

(Expected Date of Submission)

Bloor/Bathurst-Madison Toronto A
Bloor by the Park Toronto A
Bloorcourt Village Toronto A
Bloordale Village Toronto A
Bloor West Village Toronto A
Bloor-Yorkville Toronto A
Corso Italia Toronto A
Danforth by the Valley Toronto A
Dovercourt Village Toronto NA (no 1998 budget)
Eglinton Way Toronto A
Elm Street Toronto NA (no 1998 budget)
Forest Hill Village Toronto NA (May/June)
Gerrard India Bazaar Toronto A
Greektown on the Danforth Toronto A
Harbord Street Toronto A
Hillcrest Village Toronto NA (May/June)
Junction Gardens Toronto A
Keele-Eglinton York A
Kennedy Road Scarborough A
Kingsway Etobicoke A
Lakeshore Village Etobicoke A
Little Italy Toronto A
Long Branch Etobicoke B
Mimico by the Lake Etobicoke NA (no 1998 budget)
Mimico Village Etobicoke A
Mount Dennis York NA (no 1998 budget)
Old Cabbagetown Toronto A
Pape Village East York A
Parkdale Village Toronto A
Queen/Broadview Village Toronto NA (May/June)
Roncesvalles Village Toronto A
St. Clair Gardens Toronto NA (no 1998 budget)
St. Lawrence Neighbourhood Toronto A
Upper Village Toronto C
Upper Village (York) York A
Village of Islington Etobicoke NA (May/June)
Village of Weston York A
Yonge/Queen-Dundas Toronto NA (no 1998 budget)
York-Eglinton York NA (no 1998 budget)

A - Budget Reported Previously

B - Budget Included in this Report

C - Budget awaiting approval at annual general membership meeting

NA - No budget submitted

10

American Public Works Association (APWA)

2006 International Public Works Congress and Exposition

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (April 22, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

To seek Council's endorsement, in principle, for Toronto as the host city for the APWA 2006 International Public Works Congress and Exposition.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement

No immediate financial implications.

Recommendations

It is recommended that:

(1) Council confirm its support, in principle, for Toronto as the host city for the APWA 2006 International Public Works Congress and Exposition;

(2) Economic Development Division staff provide support, in co-operation with Tourism Toronto and the Works and Emergency Services Department, to the local organizing committee in their efforts to secure the Congress and Exposition; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History

Representatives of the Ontario Chapter of the American Public Works Association have met with Economic Development Division staff concerning their efforts to attract the APWA 2006 Congress to Toronto. The Chapter has succeeded in having Toronto short-listed as a candidate for the 2006 event and will be hosting the Selection Committee during their site visit on June 24 - 25, 1999.

The local bid committee has staff representation from the City's Works and Emergency Services Department. The Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Chair of Works and Emergency Services Committee have indicated their support for this bid.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification

Comprised of 30,000 members, the APWA is the leading organization of it's kind in the world. The Association's primary mandate is to provide professional development educational forums for public works professionals in North America. The annual Public Works Congress and Exposition is the largest public works forum and equipment exposition in North America. It is anticipated that the Toronto conference would draw an estimated attendance of 10,000 delegates.

The site selection process is a two-stage effort managed by a Site Selection Committee. Local chapters are invited to submit a letter of invitation responding to a set of site criteria which includes a minimum availability of 2,400 hotel rooms for the preferred dates and availability of suitable convention and exhibit space. The local organizing committee is responsible for recruiting and scheduling volunteers, local promotion, attraction of local exhibitors, providing prizes and mementos, technical tours, publicity support, and planning and implementation of an optional sporting event (golf, fun walk/run, tennis tournament, etc.).

Based on the comprehensive data submitted by each city, candidates are short-listed and then visited by representatives of the committee during the bid process. The Selection Committee will visit Toronto in June 1999 and the Board of Directors will make its final decision in September 1999. The other short-listed city is New Orleans. Previous host cities have included Las Vegas, Chicago, Washington and Philadelphia.

The APWA 2006 Exposition and Congress provides the City of Toronto with an exceptional opportunity, both to capture substantial convention spending by attending delegates, as well as to profile the products and services of local firms interested in reaching decision makers in the vast North American public works marketplace.

Economic impact estimates provided by the International Association of Convention Bureaus (IACVB) puts the direct impact of the anticipated 10,000 delegates to this conference at a value of $11.5 million to the Toronto economy.

The role of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department during the selection process will be to assist the local organizing committee to prepare presentation material, facilitate and host meetings and solicit support from efforts of Toronto Tourism.

Conclusions

This report recommends that the City endorse, in principle, the selection of Toronto as the Host City for the 2006 APWA Congress and Exposition due to the associated economic impacts and economic development opportunities.

Contact Name

Eva Pyatt Bill Forrest

Manager, Sector & Strategic Partnerships Director of Support Services

Economic Development Works and Emergency Services Department

392-3378 392-8395

11

Other Items Considered by the Committee

(City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999, received this Clause, for information.)

(a) Employment Area Revitalization Program

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following report for information.

(January 4, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, introducing members of the Economic Development Committee to the Local Partnership Program which encompasses approaches to revitalizing retail and employment areas, and recommending this report be received for information.

(b) Small Business Enterprise Centre - Update

The Economic Development Committee reports having received a verbal presentation on this matter.

(c) Further Report on Proposed Use of Funds Generated from Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Dedication

The Committee reports having recommended the adoption of the joint report (March 17, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development Culture and Tourism and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, and forwarded its recommendations in this respect to City Council by letter for consideration with Clause 5 of Report 7 of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, titled "Further Report on Proposed Use of Funds Generated from Cash-in-lieu of Parkland Dedication".

(March 17, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development Culture and Tourism and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, responding to City Council's November 12, 1998 request for a joint report from the Commissioners of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and Urban Planning and Development Services, respecting the use of funds received by the City from cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication requirements associated with development applications, and recommending that:

(1) the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be authorized to establish a city-wide reserve fund for cash-in-lieu of parkland collected by the City;

(2) as of January 1, 1999, funds accruing from revenues for cash-in-lieu of parkland be allocated in the Capital Budget Program for the years 2000 and 2001, as follows:

(a) 50% for the purpose of acquisition of land for park purposes,

(i) of this amount, half of these funds (25% of the total) to be retained to acquire land for park or open space purposes in the district where the funds are generated and deficiencies have been identified and,

(ii) the remaining half of this amount (25% of the total) to be allocated on a city-wide basis to purchase land for park or open space purposes in other areas of the City where deficiencies have been identified; and

(b) 50% for the development and upgrading of parks and recreation facilities,

(i) of this amount, half of these funds (25% of the total) to be retained for the development and upgrading of parks and recreational facilities in the district where the funds are generated and deficiencies have been identified, and

(ii) the remaining half of this amount (25% of the total) to be allocated for the development and upgrading of parks and recreational facilities on a city-wide basis, in areas where deficiencies have been identified;

(3) the Budget Committee be advised with respect to Council's action resulting from this report;

(4) this report be forwarded to each Community Council as a communication item; and

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

(d) Hosting of 1999 Conference for Parks and Recreation Ontario

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following report for information and expressed its appreciation to staff.

(April 7, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, informing Members of Council that the City of Toronto Parks and Recreation Division of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department will be hosting the annual conference for Parks and Recreation Ontario from September 26 to 29, 1999. This year's theme is "Leisure Links, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(e) Young Entrepreneurs Program

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following report for information.

(April 8, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, providing an overview of the Young Entrepreneurs Program and training provided by Toronto Small Business Centres and recommending that this report be received for information.

(f) The Lion Park of the Toronto Lion Dance Festival

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following report for information.

(April 7, 1999) from the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, presenting a business development plan with respect to the Lion Park 1999 and to respond to the development of a policy for grants to community operated special events, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(g) Airport Matters

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the recommendations of Etobicoke Community Council as contained in the following transmittal letter.

(February 26, 1999) from the City Clerk, Etobicoke Community Council, forwarding action taken by the Etobicoke Community Council at its meeting on February 26, 1999 and advising that Etobicoke Community Council:

(1) endorsed the recommendations of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee embodied in Clause No. 7 of Report No. 4A, headed "Process to Develop an Agreement on Matters of Mutual Interest Between the City of Toronto and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority to Lester B. Pearson International Airport", which was adopted, as amended, by the Council of the City of Toronto at its Special Meeting held on April 28 and May 1, 1998, such Clause permitting the participation of the Etobicoke Federation of Ratepayers' and Residents' Associations (E.F.R.R.A.) in the development of an accord or contract between the City of Toronto and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), as is required by the GTAA's mandate; and

(2) recommended to the Economic Development Committee that:

(i) a Sub-Committee, with the following mandate, be established to address matters respecting Lester B. Pearson International Airport and the Toronto City Centre Airport:

(a) offer names of appropriate persons to represent City Council as City of Toronto representatives to the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) Noise Management Committee, Community Consultative Committee and the Board of Directors;

(b) receive regular reports and updates from the respective City of Toronto appointed representatives to the GTAA Noise Management Committee, Community Consultative Committee and the Board of Directors;

(c) act as a forum to receive input with respect to Airport matters from Toronto business and resident communities;

(d) receive communications from the GTAA on Airport matters for consideration by the Sub-Committee; and

(e) have Councillor and community representation; and

(3) requested the appropriate staff to immediately develop the City's position on the provisions of the accord, including full E.F.R.R.A. participation.

(4) received the communication (February 17, 1999) from the Etobicoke Federation of Residents' and Ratepayers' Associations, seeking Etobicoke Community Council endorsement of the foregoing.

(h) Presentation by Air Canada and GTAA Board Member

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following communication and requested that staff from Air Canada be invited to appear before a future meeting of the Committee.

(March 4, 1999) from Councillor Mario Silva, Ward 20 - Trinity-Niagara, requesting that representatives from Air Canada and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority give a presentation to the Committee on the operations of the Greater Toronto Airports Authority and the future operating costs resulting from the construction of the proposed new terminal.

(i) Design Exchange Board Composition and Reporting Relationship

The Economic Development Committee reports having referred the following communication to the Commissioner, Economic Development Culture and Tourism and requested him to report back to the Committee on this matter.

(March 4, 1999) from Councillor Mario Silva, Ward 20 - Trinity-Niagara, requesting that a review of the composition and reporting relationship of the Design Exchange and the City be considered by the Economic Development Committee.

(j) Relocation of Advertising Sign from High Park Area to Exhibition Place (High Park and Trinity-Niagara)

The Economic Development Committee reports that, at its meeting on March 29 and April 6, 1999, it adopted Recommendations (1), (2) and (3) of the report (February 1, 1999) from the Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place, appended to her later report (February 7, 1999, and forwarded its action in this respect to City Council for consideration at its May 11, 1999 by seperate letter in conjunction with Clause 1 of Report 7 of the Toronto Community Council.

(i) (February 7, 1999) from Dianne Young, Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place forwarding a report (February 1, 1999) which was considered and approved by The Board of Governors of Exhibition Place at its meeting on 29, 1999, recommending that:

(1) recommendations (1), (2) and (3) of subject report be submitted to the City's Economic Development Committee;

(2) recommendation (4) of subject report be submitted to the Toronto Community Council; and

(3) the reports of the Economic Development Committee and Toronto Community Council related to this sign be submitted to City Council at the same time.

(ii) (April 1, 1999) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Toronto Community Council, on March 30, 1999, in which Toronto Community Council deferred consideration of this matter until its meeting to be held on April 28, 1999 and requested:

(1) The Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to report at that time; and

(2) the City Solicitor to submit the draft by-law(s) at that time.

Respectfully submitted,

BRIAN ASHTON

Chair

Toronto, March 29, April 6, 1999 and April 23, 1999

(Report No. 7 of The Economic Development Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on May 11 and 12, 1999.)

 

   
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
© City of Toronto 1998-2005