1 Provision of Litter Bins with Advertising in East York

2 Public Meeting Held in Accordance with the Planning Act with respect to Zoning By-law Amendements to Reduce the Parking Requirements for Restaurants in Commercial Zones

3 Public Meeting Held in Accordance with the Planning Act with respect to Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications regarding 157 Dawes Road

4 Request for Direction on Minor Variance Appeals: 30 Athlone Road; and 15 Fairland Road

5 Traffic Concerns on McRae Drive

6 Request for a Disabled Parking Space adjacent to 21 Dunkirk Road

7 Agnes Macphail Award Community Selection Committee

8 Appointment of Member of Council to the Jenner Jean-Marie Community Advisory Board

9 Heritage Community Recognition Program

10 Other Items Considered by the Community Council

in East York

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, amended this Clause:

(1) in accordance with the following recommendations embodied in the report dated June 3, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

"It is recommended that:

(1) the Request for Proposals for the replacement of existing litter bins with new bins with advertising that is to be issued, in accordance with the terms of reference adopted as amended by Council, include all existing street allowance litter bin locations within the City except the Community Council areas of Scarborough and Etobicoke, Ward 19 - High Park, Ward 23 - Midtown and the Bloor-Yorkville Business Improvement Area; and

(2) Council approve all the recommendations of the Community Councils, with the exception of Recommendations Nos. (3) and (4) of Toronto Community Council which would result in increased costs to service the additional bin locations."; and

(2) by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to submit a report to the Works Committee outlining a plan for the reallocation of the existing litter bins which will become available, including the financial implications.")

The East York Community Council supports replacing existing litter bins with new bins with an advertising component and recommends that the new litter bins be located near commercial areas and on major streets.

The East York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to submit a report to the Works Committee and the East York Community Council with respect to:

(1) existing contracts between the former Borough of East York and private companies regarding the provision of litter bins and benches in East York; and

(2) the possible re-use and/or recycling of the old litter bins.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (May 3, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

To request the Community Councils' direction on replacement of existing litter bins with new bins including an advertising component.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Provision of litter bins with an advertising component by the private sector would reduce or eliminate the cost to maintain, replace and clean existing City-owned bins and could potentially generate revenue from the sale of advertising space.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the Community Councils, except Etobicoke, advise Toronto Council as soon as possible whether they support replacing existing litter bins with new bins with an advertising component and, if so, whether there are any existing bin locations in the Community Council Area that should be excluded.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of February 2, 3 and 4, 1999, City Council approved a number of recommendations pertaining to issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the provision of litter bins with advertising.

At its meeting of April 21, 1999, the Works and Utilities Committee recommended to Council the adoption of the Terms of Reference for the Request for Proposals embodied in the report dated March 15, 1999, copy appended, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, subject to:

(a) deleting the last sentence in No. (9) and striking out No. (17) of the Terms of Reference, as previously directed by the Works and Utilities Committee;

(b) providing that at least two firms be recommended for the program;

(c) any bin or furniture being proven, and including a multi-compartment component, so that recyclables can be separated; and

(d) the firm having at least one year of experience in the provision of such equipment.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The RFP will solicit proposals from the private sector to supply, install and maintain new litter bins with an advertising component, at no cost to the City, which will replace existing litter bins at various locations within the public road allowances in the City. Subject to Council approval, the new bins will have three compartments to accommodate litter and recyclables; i.e. litter, paper and containers. It is anticipated that Toronto will retain responsibility for emptying the containers. Proponents will also be requested to specify how much revenue will be paid to the City as a result of selling advertising space on the bins.

The RFP will be broken down into separate contracts by Community Council Area (except Etobicoke and a section of Danforth Avenue in Ward 25 which are currently involved in litter bin projects with OMG Media), and will include a detailed listing of the locations that the successful proponents can place the new bins. Therefore, in order to issue the RFP we need to know whether each Community Council Area, excluding Etobicoke, is interested in participating in the litter bins with advertising program and, if so, whether there are any locations within each Community Council Area that the Council do not wish included. A listing of the current litter bin locations, which are under consideration for new litter bins with advertising, is appended.

Business Improvement Areas and other interested parties that we are aware of have been notified that the issue of litter bins with advertising in their community will be on this meeting's agenda. Once this issue is dealt with by each Community Council, we would appreciate if the recommendations could be forwarded to Toronto Council for their consideration.

Conclusions:

An RFP for the provision of new litter bins with an advertising component will be issued after we receive direction from the Community Councils and Toronto Council as to which Community Councils would like to participate in the litter bins with advertising program and whether there are certain areas or locations that should not be included in the RFP.

Contact Name:

Tim Michael

Manager - Waste Diversion

Solid Waste Management Services

Metro Hall

Phone: (416) 392-8506

Fax: (416) 392-4754

E-mail: Tim_Michael@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

(A copy of the report (March 15, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the listing of current litter bin locations which are under consideration for new litter bins with advertising in Ward 1, referred to in the foregoing report, were included with the agenda for the meeting of the East York Community Council held on May 26 and 27, 1999 and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (June 3, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

To report on the resolutions of the Community Councils related to the replacement of existing litter bins with new bins with advertising.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Provision of litter bins with an advertising component by the private sector would likely eliminate the cost to maintain, replace and clean existing City-owned bins and generate revenue from the sale of advertising space. Once responses to the Request for Proposals are received, we will be able to report on the financial implications of the various proposals.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Request for Proposals for the replacement of existing litter bins with new bins with advertising that is to be issued, in accordance with the terms of reference adopted as amended by Council, include all existing street allowance litter bin locations within the City except the Community Council areas of Scarborough and Etobicoke, Ward 19 - High Park, Ward 23 - Midtown and the Bloor-Yorkville Business Improvement Area; and

(2) Council approve all the resolutions of the Community Councils, with the exception of resolutions (3) and (4) of Toronto Community Council which would result in increased costs to service the additional bin locations.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of February 2, 3 and 4, 1999, City Council approved a number of recommendations pertaining to issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the provision of litter bins with advertising.

At its meeting of May 11, 12 and 13, 1999, Council adopted the Terms of Reference for the RFP embodied in the report dated March 15, 1999, copy appended, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, subject to:

(a) deleting the last sentence in No. (9) and striking out No. (17) of the Terms of Reference;

(b) providing that at least two firms be recommended for the program;

(c) any bin or furniture being proven, and including a multi-compartment component, so that recyclables can be separated;

(d) the firm having at least one year of experience in the provision of such equipment; and

(e) deleting the second sentence in No. (4) so that such item shall now read "Toronto will retain responsibility for emptying the containers".

Council also requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to "submit a report directly to Council for its meeting to be held on June 9, 10, and 11, 1999, on the results of the Community Council consultations on the Request for Proposals (RFP) for litter bins with advertising, in order that the RFP can be issued in June, 1999".

Comments and Discussion:

On May 26, 1999, the Community Councils (excluding Etobicoke which currently has a litter bin contract with OMG Media) had before them a report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services dated May 3, 1999, requesting that the Community Councils advise Toronto Council as soon as possible whether they support replacing existing litter bins with new bins with an advertising component and, if so, whether there are any existing bin locations in the Community Council Area that should be excluded. Business Improvement Areas and other interested parties that we were aware of were notified by the Community Council Clerks that the issue of litter bins with advertising would be discussed at the May 26th meetings.

The following are the resolutions of the Community Councils related to litter bins with advertising:

East York

The East York Community Council advises Council that it supports replacing existing litter bins with new bins with an advertising component and recommends that the new litter bins be located near commercial areas and on major streets.

The East York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to submit a report to Works Committee and the East York Community Council with respect to:

(1) existing contracts between the former Borough of East York and private companies regarding the provision of litter bins and benches in East York; and

(2) the possible re-use and/or recycling of the old litter bins.

North York

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(1) the following report (May 3, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be received;

(2) replacement of the existing free-standing litter bins with new bins with an advertising component, be supported;

(3) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, whose approval is required for the actual placement and orientation of these bins in the specified locations, take into consideration other advertising on the road; and

(4) the Terms of Reference which will form the basis of the Request for Proposals for the provision of litter bins with advertising specifically include a clause that removal or replacement of the bins be at the discretion of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

Scarborough

The Scarborough Community Council recommends that the entire Scarborough community be excluded form the program at this time.

York

York Community Council received the report.

Toronto

The Toronto Community Council recommends that:

(1) all bin locations in High Park and Midtown wards be excluded;

(2) bin locations for the west side of the Downtown ward be approved, subject to Councillor Chow's advice directly to Council, as a result of her consultations with the Community;

(3) the City bins which will be made available as a result of being replaced by the new bins, be relocated to High Park; and

(4) the new bins which are not being utilized in High Park and Midtown wards be relocated to Davenport ward and the east side of the Downtown ward.

It should also be noted that the Bloor-Yorkdale Business Improvement Area (BIA) has written Councillor Kyle Rae, Chair of the Toronto Community Council, subsequent to the May 26th meeting, requesting that their BIA be excluded from the litter bin with advertising program. While the majority of this BIA is in the Midtown ward, it also includes part of the Downtown ward.

Based on the resolutions of the Community Councils, we recommend that the RFP for replacement litter bins with advertising include all existing bin locations with the exception of the Community Council areas of Scarborough and Etobicoke, Ward 19 - High Park, Ward 23 - Midtown and the Bloor-Yorkdale Business Improvement Area. With respect to the resolution from the Community Council area of East York that the new bins be located on major streets or located near commercial areas, this is consistent with the intent of the RFP that the new bins with advertising will not be placed in residential areas.

There may also be some existing bin locations that may end up being unsuitable for the new litter bins with advertising. For example, some current locations have small litter bins mounted on poles and there may not be adequate space in the immediate vicinity for the larger 3-compartment bins. Another example of a location which could be deemed as unsuitable is if a new bin with advertising is to be placed in such close proximity to another advertising structure under contract with the City (such as the transit benches with advertising in North York) that it blocks the advertising message on the structure already there. The RFP contains a provision that requires the location of each and every bin to be approved by the Commissioner Works and Emergency Services prior to installation. Therefore, if certain locations listed in the RFP turn out to be unsuitable, the successful proponent(s) will be advised by the Commissioner to refrain from putting new bins with advertising in those locations.

Subject to approval of this report by Council at its June meeting, we will issue the RFP before the end of the month.

Resolutions (3) and (4) of Toronto Community Council recommend that some of the old litter bins that are being replaced by the new bins with advertising be relocated to the High Park ward and that some of the new bins that would have been utilized in the High Park and Midtown wards be relocated to the Davenport and Downtown wards. At this time, we recommend that these resolutions not be approved due to the additional costs that would be incurred. The purpose of the RFP is to replace existing City-owned litter bins as opposed to adding new locations. These resolutions would result in additional bin locations that would require regular emptying by City staff, thus increasing costs.

Conclusion:

Once this report is approved by Council, we will proceed with issuing the RFP for the replacement of existing litter bins with new bins with advertising.

Contact Name:

Tim Michael

Manager - Waste Diversion

Solid Waste Management Services

Metro Hall

Phone: (416) 392-8506

Fax: (416) 392-4754

E-mail: Tim_Michael@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca)

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council, based on the findings of fact and conclusions, recommends the adoption of the report (May 10, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District.

The East York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 26, 1999, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (May 10, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report presents a proposal to amend Zoning By-laws No. 1916 and No. 6752 to change the parking requirement for restaurants in commercial strip areas in the East York Community.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Council approve amendments to Zoning By-law No. 1916 and Zoning By-law No. 6752 to change the minimum parking requirement for restaurants in commercial strip areas in the East York Community, except on Bayview Avenue and Overlea Boulevard, to one parking space per 47 square metres of gross floor area.

Background:

Since 1992, staff have prepared a series of reports assessing the zoning by-law standards for restaurants in various commercial strip areas in East York. The studies started with the Pape Avenue commercial strip as a pilot area. As a result of the study, Council passed an amendment to the zoning by-law on January 18, 1993 to reduce the parking requirement for restaurants on Pape Avenue from one parking space per 4.8 square metres of public floor area to one parking space per 47 square metres of gross floor area. This standard is the same as the requirement for retail and office uses. The change permits restaurants, retail and office uses to occupy existing commercial buildings interchangeably in the commercial strips, without requiring additional parking. It recognizes that it is not financially feasible to provide additional parking on most properties in the commercial strip, and eliminates the need for Committee of Adjustment approval and cash-in-lieu of parking agreements for new restaurants on the street.

Since that time, staff have undertaken similar studies on the commercial strips on Donlands Avenue, Coxwell Avenue, Woodbine Avenue, O'Connor Drive, Bayview Avenue, and Broadview Avenue. These studies have resulted in similar amendments to the zoning by-law for each strip except Bayview Avenue. Borough of East York Council reviewed the parking standards for restaurants on Bayview Avenue on September 15, 1997, and decided not to change the zoning requirement.

This report addresses the remaining commercial strip areas and several pockets of commercial-zoned land in the East York Community.

Lands Affected:

This proposal addresses all properties zoned "C" (commercial) in Zoning By-law No. 6752, except the commercial strips that have already been addressed in previous studies. It also addresses all properties zoned "Commercial-General C1" and "Commercial-Local C2" in Zoning By-law No. 1916, except on Bayview Avenue and Overlea Boulevard. The Bayview Avenue strip was excluded because of the Borough of East York Council's decision in 1997 to maintain the existing parking standards there. The properties on Overlea Boulevard are also excluded because the pattern of commercial development is different from traditional commercial strip development in the rest of East York. A parking study has not been undertaken relating to the conditions in the Overlea Boulevard area.

The parking studies for Pape Avenue, Coxwell Avenue, Donlands Avenue, Woodbine Avenue, O'Connor Drive, and Broadview Avenue resulted in changes to the by-law to require one parking space per 47 square metres for restaurants. There is a separate requirement in Zoning By-law No. 6752 for each street. These separate requirements should be replaced with one general parking standard for restaurants on all streets. In the case of By-law No. 1916, Bayview Avenue and Overlea Boulevard would be the only exceptions.

Comments:

Most of the commercial strip areas in East York supply a range of uses which varies from street to street. Generally these areas serve the daily needs of local residents only. Among the strip areas studied, only Bayview Avenue regularly draws customers from an area larger than the immediate neighbourhood.

In 1997, in conjunction with the study of Woodbine Avenue, O'Connor Drive and Bayview Avenue, staff did follow-up counts on Pape Avenue and determined that the parking occupancy rates were still acceptable five years after the restaurant parking standard was changed. Follow-up counts have not been done on the other streets, however, no new parking problems are apparent on these streets, and the changes appear to have been successful.

Given the past successes on other streets, staff are recommending that the parking requirement for restaurants be changed to one space per 47 square metres of gross floor area on commercial strips throughout East York, except on Bayview Avenue and Overlea Boulevard.

The recommended change is consistent with the changes recommended on other streets, and permits uses to interchange in existing commercial units where the parking supply would otherwise not comply with the by-law requirements. It also eliminates the need for additional municipal approvals, and the inherent time delays, except for building permits and Metro licenses.

Community Consultations:

Notice of this public meeting was given by publication in the Toronto Star.

Conclusion:

In the opinion of staff, a general change to the restaurant parking standard is warranted. The inherent delays in the approvals process is a disincentive to the economic revitalization of the commercial strip areas. Past studies in East York have shown that the parking supply in the strip areas is sufficient to support additional parking demand.

Staff are recommending that Zoning By-laws No. 1916 and No. 6752 be amended to change the parking standard to one parking space per 47 m² of gross floor area in all commercial strip areas, except on Bayview Avenue and Overlea Boulevard.

Contact:

Paul Galvin, Planner

Phone: (416) 778-2043

Fax: (416) 466-9877

pgalvin@borough.eastyork.on.ca

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

- Mr. M.E. Merkur, East York, in favour of the proposed Zoning By-law amendments, and recommending that the proposed Zoning By-law amendments also include Bayview Avenue;

- Ms Maryaleen Trafford, East York, in favour of the proposed zoning By-law amendments;

- Mr. Donald MacMillan, The Wee Jaggy Nettle, East York, in favour of the proposed Zoning By-law amendments; and

- Ms. Carol Maclure, East York, advised of the problems respecting parking on Bayview Avenue.

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council, based on the findings of fact and conclusions, recommends the adoption of the report (April 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District.

The East York Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on May 26, 1999, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (April 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

To review applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments that will permit the development of the south-east corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court with 12 multiple-attached (townhouse) dwellings and 2 pairs of semi-detached dwellings (see Figures 1 to 4 inclusive).

Financial Implications:

Costs associated with this development will be assumed by the developer.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(1) subject to Recommendation No. 2, approve the applications by Inaugural Source Inc., the City of Toronto and Toronto Hydro for the lands at the south-east corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court to amend East York's Official Plan and East York Zoning By-law No. 6752 by:

(a) adopting the attached Official Plan amendment intended to delete Section 3.15.19 - Special Policy Area 19, which permitted the development of a 4 storey, 36 unit apartment building; and,

(b) enacting the attached Zoning By-law amendment, which rezones these lands from Residential Site Specific R3A.23 to Residential - Site Specific R2A.37 zoning and which sets out specific development standards intended to facilitate the development thereon of 12 freehold multiple attached (townhouse) dwellings, and 2 pairs of semi-detached dwellings, substantially in the form attached; and

(2) authorize the introduction of the bills to amend the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law No. 6752, after satisfactory proof has been received by the City Solicitor of the conveyance to Inaugural Source of the City of Toronto and Toronto Hydro lands.

Background:

Proposal:

Inaugural Source Inc., in collaboration with Toronto Hydro and the City of Toronto, has submitted applications for Council's permission to amend East York's Official Plan and Zoning By-law No. 6752. The amendments will permit the development of a currently vacant parcel of land at the south-east corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court with 12, 3-storey multiple attached (townhouse) dwellings and 2 pairs of semi-detached dwellings designed around an internal courtyard and accessed from Goodwood Park Court.

The proposal locates:

(1) fourteen of the newly proposed dwellings on lands which belong to the developer;

(2) two of the proposed dwellings on lands which belong to Toronto Hydro, but which are in the process of being sold to the developer;

(3) a portion of an access driveway and one parking space on lands which belong to the City of Toronto, but which are in the process of being sold to the developer; and,

(4) a portion of an access driveway on lands which belong to Ontario Hydro, but which have been secured by the developer via a permanent easement.

To permit the development, the developer requires both an Official Plan amendment to delete the existing Official Plan requirements for an apartment building and a Zoning By-law amendment to allow its re-development with the proposed 12 townhouse and two semi-detached dwellings.

When the application was first submitted, Planning staff indicated that the development should include the surplus Toronto Hydro and City of Toronto lands located adjacent to the corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court. Consolidating all the disparate pieces of land under one ownership will result in a comprehensive and coordinated development.

Shortly thereafter, the developer initiated the acquisition process for these additional lands. On April 28, 1999, the City of Toronto Council declared the City lands to be surplus and it is expected to ratify their sale at its June 9, 1999 meeting. The sale of Toronto Hydro lands is expected to be finalized within that same time frame.

Until the various sale transactions are finalized, and the lands legally transferred, the City and Toronto Hydro have had to be identified as co-applicants. Recommendation No. 2 acknowledges this by requiring that all the conveyances be completed before the bills to adopt the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments are introduced in Council.

Comments:

Site Description and Ownership:

This 2,498 m² currently vacant parcel of land is located at the south-east corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court. It is comprised of a 1, 982 m² parcel of land which belongs to the developer, a 192 m² parcel of land which belongs to Toronto Hydro and lands which amount to 234 m², which belong to the City. (Location/Current Land Ownership map on first page of this report.

The site is relatively flat. However, since it lies at the base of a hill it is shored up at several locations by retaining walls, which, because of their age require extensive reconstruction.

Surrounding uses include: one and two storey ground related residences to the south and west, high rise apartments to the north, and north west, and Ontario Hydro corridor directly to the east.

Official Plan and Zoning:

The property is designated Low Density Residential and Special Policy Area 19 (see Map 2 - "Predominant Land Use", and, Map 7- "Special Policy Areas". The primary residential designation provides for ground oriented housing forms, which would include the proposed townhouse units. The secondary designation implements a previous site specific development application and requires that the land be developed with a 36 unit, four-storey senior's apartment building.

The site is zoned "Residential R3A - Site Specific" permitting a 36 unit seniors' apartment building. If approved the application would require the adoption by Council of a new Zoning By-law Amendment that reflects the current development proposal.

Agency Circulation:

The application was circulated for input to all appropriate agencies and City departments. Responses received from the circulation have been used to modify the project's design and to formulate appropriate by-law standards.

Public Input:

Notice of the application was sent to all residents within 120 metres (400 ft.) of the site and a community information meeting to obtain public input was held on April 26, 1999. The notice and the meeting produced: a request for consideration of an increased setback between unit 7 and the adjoining property line; questions regarding erosion control measures and the location of and the effectiveness of the retaining wall(s) required to facilitate the construction of unit 8; and the visual impact of a blank wall of units 7 and 8 on the two adjoining residences to the south-east.

Other comments consisted of inquiries about the project's tenure and management, and, expressions of support on the basis that the proposed development would result in the site's clean-up and the upgrading of the area's appearance.

Building Height and Design:

The proposed development is located in a largely residential area characterized by a mix of built forms ranging from one and two storey detached residences immediately to the south and south-east, high rise apartment buildings to the north, north-east and north-west, and newly developing townhouses across Dawes Road to the west. Within this context, this three storey residential project provides a suitable transition between the high rise buildings to the north and the ground-oriented residences to the south.

The proposed height of the buildings at 9.75 metres (32 ft.), represents the generally accepted height for townhouses throughout East York. In addition, in this case, building height has less of an impact because this site is located at the base of a hill. Shadow diagrams submitted with this application show a limited impact on the adjoining residences.

The proposed site design orients all the newly proposed dwellings around an internal courtyard which incorporates vehicular (driveway and parking) and pedestrian (sidewalk) facilities and which is flanked on all sides by treed and landscaped front yards. This building siting has the advantage of removing individual vehicular accesses to Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court. Although the houses adjoining Dawes Road are oriented towards the courtyard, the rear (street fronting) facades have been designed to incorporate various features like canopied entrances, third floor decks, and fencing that includes gates to the yard from the sidewalk. These features were introduced to improve the pedestrian street environment.

Excluding windows from most walls that directly abut the existing residences to the south-west has minimized the problem of overlook in that direction. The previously approved four-storey apartment building would have had a similar impact.

With regards to the issue of the setback between unit 7 and the adjoining property to the south, the drawings submitted with the application, which were based on the applicant's survey, site this unit 0.76 m (2.5 ft.) away from the adjoining property. The standard side yard setbacks for single density residential zones range from 0.6 m to 0.9 m (2 to 3 ft.). In addition, unit 7 is separated from the actual wall of the adjoining building by a 2.6 m (8.5 ft.) driveway and a 0.24 m (8 in.) setback from its south wall to the edge of the existing fence line.

The design of the site and the built form will be reviewed in a separate Site Plan report, which will be considered by the Director of Community Planning for the East District. The Site Plan review will ensure that all functional elements such as lighting, landscaping, retaining wall design etc., are addressed.

Access and Parking:

Entrance to the site is obtained from Goodwood Park Court via a two-way, 6 metre (20.0 ft.) wide private driveway leading to an internal courtyard. The resident parking is located in the central courtyard adjacent to the dwelling. The visitor parking is located in the northeasterly portion of the site, near the project's entrance (see Figure 1 Parking Spaces P17 and P18). The development provides 16 resident and two visitor parking spaces. This exceeds the East York By-law requirement for residential dwellings by two parking spaces. The proposed parking spaces are undersized according to the normal requirements of the by-law. However, the City's Transportation Division comments indicate that they found both the proposed access and parking provisions to be acceptable.

Shared Elements:

The design of this project requires shared use of facilities including the driveway leading to the internal court yard, the two visitor parking spaces, the garbage enclosure, the storm drain sewer required to drain excess storm water from the rear yards of dwellings 10 to16 inclusive, as well as the sidewalk encircling the courtyard and the secondary pedestrian access route from the courtyard to Dawes Road. The presence of these shared facilities generally connotes a condominium form of ownership. The applicant, however, prefers to market the project as freehold housing. From his perspective, freehold ownership is supported by current market preferences and will save considerable time and costs associated with a condominium approval.

Since the common elements have to be appropriately managed the future owners of the project will have to enter into private agreement(s) to secure the continuing maintenance of the various elements which have to be held in common.

The City's policy generally discourages freehold housing involving shared elements and suggests that developments, which contain such elements, particularly if they involve a large number of ownerships, should proceed by way of a condominium. Condominium ownership is preferable because it tends to provide greater certainty regarding the legal and financial ability of homeowners to resolve future problems. However, the policy also recognizes that in instances where the risks are minimized by the size of the project or the type and number of shared elements, freehold ownership may be an option.

Staff believes that due to the relatively small number of ownerships, and the type and number of the shared elements, freehold ownership can be supported on this site.

Parkland Dedication:

As per East York By-law No. 85-92, the applicant will be required to make a 5 percent cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication payment.

Site Servicing and Grading:

Works and Emergency Services Staff have commented that servicing of this site can be accommodated by the existing municipal services in the adjacent right of way, and that any servicing within the site would have to be privately held and jointly shared and maintained by all the project's future owners. The comments also indicate that all site drainage will have to be contained on the site, that the project will have to employ infiltration techniques for roof leaders and pump foundation drains to surface areas. Storm sewer connections to the sewer system will only be permitted if there are no other suitable alternatives.

In regards to grading, the developer will have to provide details of the structural design of all the required retaining walls, and obtain the adjacent landowners co-operation should the construction of these walls involve their properties.

The servicing issues and requirements will be reviewed and secured as part of the forthcoming Site Plan approval process.

Solid Waste Collection:

The City will collect garbage and recyclable material. As none of the proposed houses face onto a city street, a single collection point has been provided near the entrance to Goodwood Park Court (see Figure 1). Details concerning this item will be worked out at the time of Site Plan approval.

Conclusion:

The proposed development is suitable for this location because it conforms to, and advances East York's Official Plan's policies, is compatible with surrounding developments, represents a good use of this currently vacant and underutilized site, offers the prospect of reasonably priced homes for a mix of households, and features an attractive building design and landscaping treatment.

Contact Names:

Jean Besz

Senior Planner East York District Office

(416) 387-4647 -tel. no.

(416) 397-4582 -fax no.

Planning@borough.eastyork.on.ca

Authority: East York Community Council Report No. Xx Clause No. Xx,

as adopted by Council on 1999

Enacted by Council:

City of Toronto

By-law No. [ ]

To Adopt Amendment No 19 to the Official Plan for the Former Borough of East York Affecting the Lands Located on the South - East Corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court.

Whereas the authority is given to Council by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as amended, to pass this By-law; and whereas Council of the City of Toronto has provided adequate information to the public and has held at least one public meeting in accordance with the Planning Act;

The Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:

That the attached Amendment No. 19 to the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York consisting of Part Two of the accompanying document, is hereby adopted pursuant to the Planning Act 1990.

Enacted and Passed this day of , A.D. 199 .

Mayor City Clerk

(Corporate Seal)

Amendment No. 19 to the Official Plan

For the former Borough of East York

Part One - Preamble, does not constitute part of this Amendment.

Part Two - The Amendment, consisting of the text contained therein and the map attached thereto as Schedule "A" constitute Amendment No. 19 to the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York.

Part One

Preamble

(1) Title

This is Amendment No. 19 to the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York.

(2) Purpose

The purpose of this amendment is to delete the policies of "Special Policy Area 19" of the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York Planning Area. The policies, of "Special Policy Area 19" were applied to this location in September 1992, to permit a development project comprised of a four storey, 36 unit senior's apartment building. These policies are no longer needed because the new development proposal for the land does not involve an apartment project.

(3) Location

The lands affected by this Amendment are outlined in a heavy black line identified as "Area Subject to Amendment" on Schedule "A" attached hereto, and are located at the south-east corner of Dawes Road and Goodwood Park Court.

(4) Basis

The lands affected by this amendment are designated "Low Density Residential". This designation provides for ground oriented housing forms such as detached, semi-detached and row house dwellings as well as non-ground oriented housing forms such as stacked townhouses and plexes. The proposed development which comprises of townhouse and semi-detached dwellings meets these requirements.

However, Schedule 7 - "Special Policy Areas" of the Official Plan also shows this property as "Special Policy Area 19". This designation reflects Council approval in September 1992, of a site specific Official Plan Amendment which permitted a 36 unit seniors apartment building. That proposal has been abandoned and the Special Policy Area designation is no longer required given the current proposal to develop the site in accordance with the "Low Density Residential" provisions of the Official Plan.

Part Two

The Amendment

(1) All of this part of the document entitled "Part Two - The Amendment" consisting of the following text and the attached Schedule "A" constitute Amendment No. 19 to the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York.

(2) The lands affected by this Amendment are shown on Schedule "A" to this Amendment as "Area Subject to Amendment".

(3) Map 7 - " Special Policy Areas" to the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York, is hereby amended by deleting therefrom the designation identified as "Special Policy Area 19".

(4) The text of the Official Plan for the former Borough of East York is hereby amended by deleting Section 3.15.19 "Special Policy Area 19" in its entirety .

Authority: East York Community Council Report No, XX, ( ), 1999

Intended for first presentation to Council: , 1999

Adopted by Council:

City Of Toronto

Bill No.

By-law No. -99

To amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law No. 6752,

as amended, of the former Township of East York.

Whereas authority is given to Council by Section 34 of the Planning Act, RSO 1990, c.P. 13, as amended, to pass this by-law, and whereas Council of the City of Toronto has provided adequate information to the public and has held at least one public meeting in accordance with the Planning Act;

The Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:

(1) the lands subject to this By-law are those lands outlined by a heavy black line and identified as "Area Subject to Amendment" as shown on Schedule "1" attached hereto;

(2) Schedule "A" to By-law No. 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zoning category for the lands identified as "Area Subject to Amendment" on Schedule "1" of this By-law from "Residential R3A - Site Specific (R3A.23)" Zone to"Residential R2A - Site Specific (R2A.37)" Zone;

(3) Zoning By-law 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting Section 7.7.5.23 R3A.23 Zone in its entirety; and

(4) Zoning By-law No. 6752, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a new Section 7.5.4.37 immediately after Section 7.5.4.36 of the By-law as follows:

7.5.4.37 157 Dawes Road R2A.37 Zone

7.5.4.37.1 Area Restricted

The provisions of this Section shall only apply to those lands being Part of Lot B Registered Plan 1193 and Part of Lots 46 and 56, Registered Plan 781 City of Toronto (Formerly Borough of East York) designated R2A.37 on Schedule "A".

7.5.4.37.2 General Provisions

On those lands referred to in Section 7.5.4.37.1 of this By-law, no person shall use, occupy, Erect, alter, cause to be used, occupied, Erected or altered, any Building, Structure or land or part thereof except in accordance with the following provisions:

(1) Permitted Uses:

(a) residential - Semi-detached Dwellings;

(b) residential - Multiple Attached Dwellings;

(c) buildings and Structures Accessory to the foregoing;

(2) Development Requirements:

(a) maximum number of Semi-

Detached Dwellings 4 Dwellings

(b) maximum number of Multiple-

Attached Dwellings 12 Dwellings

(c) maximum number of

Dwellings per Lot 1 Dwelling

(d) minimum Lot Area

for developed with Multiple-

Attached Dwellings 89 m²

(e) minimum Lot Area

for Semi-Detached Dwellings 119 m ²

(f) siting of all Dwellings or Structures

or portions thereof wholly within the Building envelope shown on Schedule "1" to Section 7.5.4.37, except that the provisions of Section 5.6 of this By-law shall apply to any projections or encroachments into Yards

(g) maximum Floor Space Index

(i) for Multiple-Attached

Dwellings 1.5 x the Lot Area

(ii) for Semi-Detached Dwellings 1.0 x the Lot Area

(h) maximum Lot Coverage

(i) for Multiple-Attached Dwellings 60%

(ii) for Semi-Detached Dwellings 42 %

(i) maximum Building Height

(i) for Dwelling

on Lot 1 10.2 m

(ii) for Dwellings located on

Lots 2 to16 9.8 m

(j) minimum number of Parking Spaces 18 Parking Spaces 2 of which shall be reserved for visitors

(k) minimum Parking Space size 2.8 m x 5.5 m

15.4 m²

(l) Section 4.23 of the By-law 6752 does not apply to the lands shown in Schedule 1 attached

(3) Other Provisions of the By-law:

(a) Except as amended in this By-law all the other provisions of By-law 6752 with the exception of Sections 7.5.1 to 7.5.3 inclusive, shall apply to the lands referred to in Section 7.5.4.37.1;

(4) The following additional uses shall be permitted on the lands:

(a) temporary sales trailer which shall:

(i) only be used to sell the Buildings located within the limits of the area identified on Schedule "1" to Section 7.5.4.37;

(ii) provide at least 1 temporary parking stall; and,

(iii) be removed within 60 days after the completion of the last Building.

Enacted and Passed this day of ,A.D.

Mel Lastman Novina Wong

Mayor City Clerk

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

- Mr. Michael Vaughan, Solicitor, on behalf of the Applicant;

- Mr. Michael Denyak, East York, neither in opposition nor support of the proposed development;

- Mr. Kenneth Miller, East York, in opposition to the proposed development;

- Mr. Brian Barron, President, Ward 2 Property Owners' Association, East York, in support of the proposed development; and

- Ms. Deirdra Drazich, East York, in support of the proposed development.

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that the following report (April 14, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, be received:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to seek direction from Council regarding appeals of the two Committee of Adjustment decisions described below. This report is for the consideration of the East York Community Council at its meeting on May 26, 1999.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Comments:

(1) Variance Application A.7/99EY

M. J. Design Consultants

Re: 30 Athlone Road

The owners of 30 Athlone Road are proposing to demolish the existing dwelling and construct a new two-storey detached dwelling. They applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a variance from the maximum floor space index requirement. The Committee refused the application at their hearing on March 16, 1999. The owners appealed the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Staff did not take a position on this application, and do not recommend that Council direct staff to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing.

(2) Variance Application A.21/99EY

Craft Construction Group Inc.

Re: 15 Fairland Road

The applicants are proposing to demolish the existing dwelling and detached garage at 15 Fairland Road, and construct a new two-storey detached dwelling. They applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a variance from the maximum floor space index requirement. The Committee refused the application on February 16, 1999. The applicants appealed the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Staff did not take a position on this application, and do not recommend that Council direct staff to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing.

Contact Name:

Paul Galvin, Planner

(416) 397-4648

(416) 397-4582

pgalvin@borough.eastyork.on.ca

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the report (May 12, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communications with respect to a four-way stop sign, submitted by Councillor Jane Pitfield, to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, with a request that he submit a report thereon to the East York Community

Council:

- (May 25, 1999) from Mrs. Debbie Hodgson, East York; and

- (May 25, 1999) from Ms. Mary Bailey, Second Debute Shoppe, Toronto.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (May 12, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To report to the East York Community Council on traffic concerns on McRae Drive, between Airdrie Road and Laird Drive

Financial Implications:

The cost to install the necessary signs to enact the proposed parking regulations is estimated at $600.00. These funds are contained in the Transportation Services Division 1999 Current Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the existing "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the north side of McRae Drive, between Randolph Road and Laird Drive, be replaced with a "One Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday" restriction;

(2) the existing "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the north side of McRae Drive, between Sutherland Drive and Randolph Road, be replaced with a "One Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday" restriction, and;

(3) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of the necessary bill in Council.

Comments:

The Works and Emergency Services Department received a request from an East York resident on July 30, 1998, for the implementation of all-way stop control or a pedestrian crossover at either McRae Drive and Randolph Road, McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive, or McRae Drive and Airdrie Road. A subsequent request was received from Councillor Prue on November 4, 1998, for all-way stop control at McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive.

McRae Drive, between Airdrie Road and Laird Drive, is 7.8 metres (26.0 feet) wide. The boulevard on both sides of the street is paved and varies block-to-block from 3.3 metres wide to 4.8 metres wide. Angled parking is permitted on the paved boulevard on the south side. This area is regulated by a "One Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except Sunday" restriction between Airdrie Road and Sutherland Drive, a "One Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., except Sunday" restriction between Sutherland Drive and 47 metres east of Randolph Road, and a "15 Minute Parking, 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday inclusive" restriction between a point 47 metres east of Randolph Road and Laird Drive. There is presently a "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the paved boulevard area on the north side of the street from Laird Drive to Sutherland Drive. The existing conditions are illustrated in Appendix 'A'.

The intersection of McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive has been the subject of three requests for all-way stop control since 1996. In each case, all-way stop control has not been warranted based on traffic volumes and reported collision data. A main concern was the speed of vehicles on this portion of McRae Drive, thus the requests for all-way stop control. However, excessive vehicular speeds in this area can be attributed to the perceived excess width of the street created by the paved boulevards that were intended for parking when McRae Drive was reconstructed in 1991. The lack of side friction on the street, specifically the north side where the "No Parking Anytime" restriction exists, that is created by the presence of parked vehicles creates the impression of a wide street which causes drivers to be comfortable travelling at speeds greater than the signed 40 km/h speed limit.

There are a variety of physical measures that can be considered to reduce vehicle speeds on streets. Staff have studied several options in an effort to reduce vehicular speeds on McRae Drive and facilitate pedestrians crossing McRae Drive. The following options were studied:

(1) all-way stop control;

(2) pedestrian crossover, and

(3) implementing parking on the north side of McRae Drive.

(1) All-way Stop Control

Transportation Services staff conducted traffic and pedestrian counts at the intersections of McRae Drive at Randolph Road, McRae Drive at Sutherland Drive, and McRae Drive at Airdrie Road on typical days to ascertain the feasibility of all-way stop control. The all-way stop warrants are illustrated in Appendices B, C and D respectively. These studies revealed that all-way stop control is not warranted at either Randolph Road or Airdrie Road.

At the intersection of McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive, the traffic volumes meet the required values for all-way stop control. However, when the intersection consists of a collector street and a local street, the traffic volume ratio between collector street and local street should not exceed 70 percent/30 percent due to the resultant queuing and time delays that would be experienced on the collector street. These delays, in turn, lead to a disregard for stop signs by motorists travelling on the collector street who do not perceive the need for the stop control. The split for traffic volumes on McRae Drive compared to Sutherland Drive is 85 percent/15 percent. Therefore, for the above reasons, all-way stop control is not suitable at this location.

Following a traffic investigation conducted in June 1998 to evaluate the feasibility of all-way stop control at McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive, staff determined that illegally parked vehicles on the south side of McRae Drive inhibited the sightlines for northbound motorists on Sutherland Drive. This issue was addressed through the installation of bumper blocks on the southeast area of the angled parking zone on McRae Drive to augment the existing painted hatch markings, thereby eliminating illegal parking in that area. Similarly, hatch markings will be painted in the southwest area of the angled parking zone on McRae Drive in the summer of 1999 to augment the existing "No Parking Anytime" corner restriction sign.

Staff studied the reported collisions at the intersections in this area for the five-year period from November 1, 1993 to November 30, 1998. At the intersection of McRae Drive and Randolph Road, eight reported collisions occurred, three of which could be susceptible to correction by all-way stop control. At the intersection of McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive, 15 reported collisions occurred during this period, eleven of which could be susceptible to correction by all-way stop control. It should be noted that following the elimination of sight obstructions in June 1998, there have been no reported collisions at this intersection up to November 30, 1998.

(2) Pedestrian Crossover

Transportation Services staff conducted a pedestrian crossover study on McRae Drive at Sutherland Drive on a typical day to ascertain if a pedestrian crossover was warranted in the area. Pedestrian volumes crossing McRae Drive were observed in the area from Airdrie Road to east of Randolph Road. The results of this study revealed that a pedestrian crossover is only 19 percent warranted. Furthermore, a review of reported collision records revealed no collisions involving a pedestrian on McRae Drive, between Airdrie Road and Laird Drive, for the five-year period from November 1, 1993 to November 30, 1998.

(3) Implement Parking on the north side of McRae Drive

When McRae Drive was reconstructed in 1991, parking lay-by's were installed on both sides of McRae Drive from west of Airdrie Road to Laird Drive. An existing "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the north side of the street remained in place through this section of McRae Drive.

In 1996, we approached the condominium corporation at 352-356 McRae Drive to ascertain their opinion in allowing parking within the lay-by adjacent to their building. Ultimately, the condominium corporation did not want parking in the lay-by. East York Council subsequently decided to maintain the "No Parking Anytime" restriction (Item 10 of Report No. 17 of the Regulatory and Development Committee (1996)).

The lack of parking in this area leads to motorists perceiving a wide travelled portion of McRae Drive. This has been identified as a cause of increased speeds. Parked vehicles can reduce the perceived pavement width resulting in motorists slowing down. Staff recommend that parking be implemented on the north side of McRae Drive to reduce the perception of a wide McRae Drive and ultimately reduce vehicle speeds. Seven parallel parking spaces can be implemented on the north boulevard area between Laird Drive and Randolph Road, and four parallel parking spaces can be implemented on the north boulevard between Randolph Road and Sutherland Drive.

Conclusions:

Vehicular speeding on McRae Drive, between Airdrie Road and Laird Drive, has been a regular concern of area residents. In an effort to reduce speeding, requests for the implementation of all-way stop control at McRae Drive and Sutherland Drive have been received. Investigations conducted by Transportation Services staff have revealed that all-way stop control is not suitable at this location, or other intersections in the vicinity.

This Department has investigated alternate methods to address pedestrian safety in this area, including a pedestrian crossover and allowing parking on the paved boulevards. At this time the most reasonable solution is to allow parking on the paved boulevards on the north side of McRae Drive, similar to the parking in place on the south side of the street. To address past concerns about visibility for motorists exiting from driveways, we recommend implementing parallel parking spaces instead of angled parking. By implementing parking, the perceived excess width of McRae Drive in this area will be reduced, which is expected to reduce vehicle speeds.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Bryan Muir, Work Zone Coordinator

397-4588

bmuir@borough.eastyork.on.ca

Appendix 'B'

All-way Stop Warrant - McRae Drive at Randolph Road

Appendix 'D'

All-way Stop Warrant - McRae Drive at Airdrie Road

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that:

(1) Schedule 'E' of By-law No. 34-93, entitled "To provide for disabled person parking permit holders", as amended, be further amended to implement a disabled parking space adjacent to 21 Dunkirk Road, and that such signage be located on Mr. Ferreira's property;

(2) this disabled parking space be removed when Mr. Louis Ferreira no longer resides at 21 Dunkirk Road; and

(3) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action, including the introduction of the necessary Bill in Council, to give effect thereto.

The East York Community Council submits the following report (May 4, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To report to the East York Community Council on a request for a disabled parking space adjacent to 21 Dunkirk Road.

Financial Implications:

There are no financial implications associated with the recommendations in this report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Comments:

The Works and Emergency Services Department received a request from Councillor Prue dated April 9, 1999, to prepare a report for the East York Community Council regarding a request from Mr. Louis Ferreira, 21 Dunkirk Road, to install a disabled parking space adjacent to his home.

Dunkirk Road, between Binswood Avenue and Glebemount Avenue, is 7.3 metres (24.0 feet) wide and is regulated by "No Parking Anytime" restriction on the north side of the street and a "No Parking, 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., Monday to Friday inclusive" restriction on the south side. At other times, the south side of the street is regulated by the unsigned three-hour parking regulation. The property at 21 Dunkirk Road is located on the south side of the street.

Mr. Ferreira had initially submitted a letter dated January 11, 1999, requesting a disabled parking space on the street adjacent to his residence at 21 Dunkirk Road. He stated in his letter that he is having increased difficulty using his garage, and is therefore parking on the road. An investigation conducted by Transportation Services staff revealed that the property has access to parking on the property via a public lane at the rear of the property.

Disabled parking spaces are installed on the street for disabled residents who do not have any available parking on their property, in order that they can have nearby access to their vehicle. Since the property at 21 Dunkirk Road has available parking via a public lane at the back, this Department advised Mr. Ferreira in a letter dated February 19, 1999, that he was not eligible for a disabled parking space on the street.

In a subsequent telephone conversation on February 26, 1999, between a resident and Bryan Muir of this office, the resident stated that the garage at the rear of the property is 40 feet from the rear of the house whereas the curb space on the street is 20 feet from the front of the house. Mr. Muir reiterated that since parking is provided on the property, they are not eligible for a disabled parking space, and suggested relocating the parking at the rear to a point closer to the house or installing a disabled parking space.

Mr. Ferriera subsequently sent a follow-up letter to Councillor Prue dated March 22, 1999, regarding the results of the Transportation Services Division's investigation, advising of the proximity of a telephone pole at the front of the house that would prohibit the installation of a parking pad, and of the costs involved to relocate the parking space at the rear of the property closer to the house. In fact, a parking pad of approximately 2.44 metres (8.0 feet) by 6.1 metres (20.0 feet) may be feasible with the telephone pole in its present location, if Mr. Ferriera wishes to install one, since there is no clearance area required beside telephone poles.

He also stated that vehicles parking on the street are not being tagged on a regular basis for parking infractions. The Toronto Police Service - Parking Enforcement Unit, enforce the three-hour parking restriction on a complaint basis only. Therefore, Mr. Ferriera can contact the Parking Enforcement Unit a 808-6600 to request enforcement of the three-hour parking restriction.

Conclusions:

Since the property at 21 Dunkirk Road has available parking from the public lane at the rear of the property, they are not eligible for a disabled parking space on the street. Therefore, no further action is recommended at this time.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Bryan Muir, Work Zone Coordinator - 397-4588.

The East York Community Council also submits the following communication (May 25, 1999) from Louis and Beverley Ferreira, East York:

We are unable to be at the meeting this evening but wanted to state our concerns regarding a request for a disability parking sign at 21 Dunkirk Road.

The property has been inspected, and noted that there is access to a lane and a garage at the rear of the home. There is also room to put a parking pad at the front of our home.

As mentioned in our original request, Louis Ferreira is disabled and has problems walking, and that was the reason for the original request.

We are unable to afford to move the garage closer to the back door, and also unwilling to further reduce the size of our backyard if we went ahead with moving the garage. It would, I am sure reduce the property value of our home, if we reduced the size of our backyard. Also during the winter, lanes are not plowed in the first 24 hours, sometimes it is two - three days before the lane is plowed.

Regarding the installation of a parking pad at the front of our home:

(1) installing a parking pad at the front of our home, would take away all of the front yard, incur an expense that would be difficult for us to manage, and we believe reduce the value of our property;

(2) it would reduce the available parking on the street for both residents, visitors, and hospital employees; and

(3) our neighbour to the west is not in favour of this, as it would be very close to her sidewalk, an eyesore (seeing our van parking hear her front lawn) and she believes it would reduce her property value as well.

We believe that this outlines our position regarding a request for a disabled parking sign.

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that the Membership of the Agnes Macphail Award Community Selection Committee be amended by striking out No. (2) from the Membership List embodied in the report dated May 17, 1999, from Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, Chairperson, Agnes Macphail Committee, and inserting in lieu thereof the following new No. (2):

"the MPP (or representative) for the ridings of Broadview-Greenwood and Beaches - East York;".

The East York Community Council submits the following report (May 17, 1999) from Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, Chairperson, Agnes Macphail Committee:

Purpose:

At its meeting held on October 28, 1999, City Council approved the following recommendation with respect to the Community Council selection Committee for the annual Agnes Macphail Award:

(1) the MPP (or representative) for the riding of York East or such other riding as deemed appropriate by East York Community Council should redistribution of ward boundaries occur.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the East York Community Council adopt the following recommendation:

"That the MPP (or representative) for the riding of Broadview - Greenwood and Beaches - East York be added to the list of Community Selection Committee members."

Background:

At is meeting of October 14, 1999, the East York Community Council endorsed a revised Community Selection Committee for the annual Agnes Macphail Award. The revised membership now includes:

(1) the MP (or representative) for the riding of Don Valley West (the riding which she lived);

(2) the MPP (or representative) for the riding of York East or such other riding as deemed appropriate by the East York Community Council should redistribution of the ward boundaries occur;

(3) one East York citizen who is a current or former member of a Council-appointed board or committee - to be appointed by the East York Community Council;

(4) one former member of the Borough of East York Council - to be appointed by the East York Community Council; and

(5) all previous winners of the Agnes Macphail Award.

Discussion:

At its meeting held on April 22, 1999, the East York Agnes Macphail Committee met and discussed how to address the loss of the provincial riding of York East and its effect on the Community Selection Committee.

After much discussion, the committee agreed to replace the one Provincial representative with the two Provincial representatives for the southern portion of East York.

On June 4, 1999, East York will be divided into three ridings both Federally and Provincially:

(1) Don Valley West covers Leaside, Thorncliffe Park and Governor's Bridge;

(2) Broadview - Greenwood covers East York west of Coxwell Avenue; and

(3) Beaches - East York covers East York east of Coxwell Avenue to Victoria Park.

Participation from each riding is welcome. Federally the MP from Don Valley West participates. Provincially, the committee is seeking participation from both the MPP of Broadview - Greenwood and Beaches - East York. The goal is to have all of East York included.

Conclusion:

The Agnes Macphail Award is a significant one. Key to the process is the Community Selection Committee.

I plan to attend on Wednesday, May 26, 1999, and request permission to address the East York Community Council at approximately 10:30 a.m.

Contact Name:

Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk

Chairperson

East York Agnes Macphail Committee

Phone: (416) 425-4431

Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, Chair, Agnes Macphail Committee, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that Councillor Jane Pitfield be appointed to the Jenner Jean-Marie Community Centre Advisory Board, to replace Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, former Councillor of the Borough of East York, for a term ending on November 30, 2000.

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The East York Community Council recommends that Council sanction the nomination of Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, East York, for the Heritage Foundation's Heritage Community Recognition Program, and direct the East York LACAC to take appropriate steps to facilitate the nomination process.

(City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, received this Clause, for information.)

(a) Election of Chair of the East York Community Council.

The East York Community Council, at a special meeting on May 11, 1999, reports having elected Councillor Jane Pitfield as the new Chair for a term of office commencing the effective date of the new governance structure, i.e., June 14, 1999.

(b) Parking Regulations on Airdrie Road.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services with a request that he prepare a suitably worded "consideration" letter, to be signed by the three Members of the East York Community Council, addressed to the Parking Enforcement Division, Toronto Police Services, which would allow the three affected homes on Airdrie Road to be exempted from the three-hour parking restriction during the months of June, July and August:

(i) communication (May 11, 1999) from Councillor Jane Pitfield, advising that at a meeting with residents on May 10, 1999, the following recommendations were put forward:

(1) that forestry staff visit the street to look at the three Norway Maples where the starlings are nesting from the end of May to the end of August; and

(2) that Transportation staff investigate the possibility of preparing a letter which would allow the three affected homes on Airdrie Road to be excused from tagging during the months of June, July and August;

(ii) Clause No. 5 of Report No. 5 of the East York Community Council entitled "Parking Regulations on Airdrie Road" which Council, at its meeting on May 11 and 12, 1999, referred back to the East York Community Council for further consideration; and

(iii) report (May 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, responding to Councillor Pitfield's request that forestry staff inspect the three Norway Maples on the public road allowance on Airdrie Road at No. 31 and vicinity and recommending that the Urban Forestry staff remove or prune the trees to alleviate the gathering of starlings.

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

Mr. Gary Gardiner, East York; and

Ms. Peg Holloway, East York.

(c) Preliminary Evaluation Report Application

for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments -

submitted by Rasch Architect Ltd. on behalf of

655924 Ontario Ltd. For 41 - 63 Halsey Avenue.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following report to the City Clerk with the request that she convene a Public Meeting (under the Planning Act) of the East York Community Council in the evening of September 14, 1999, to consider the Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application; and that public notice of such meeting be provided by circulation:

(April 23, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, Providing a preliminary report on a new application for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the property known municipally as 41-63 Halsey Avenue; advising that costs associated with this development will be assumed by the developer; and recommending that East York Community Council:

(i) convene a Public Meeting (under the Planning Act) to consider the Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application and that the public meeting be scheduled for the third quarter of 1999; and

(ii) instruct the City Clerk to provide public notice by circulation.

Mr. Bernard Rasch, on behalf of the Applicant, appeared before the East York Community Council with respect to this matter.

(d) A Harmonized Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS)

By-law for the City of Toronto: Community Input Process.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(A) referred the following recommendations with respect to the Policy Options and Recommendations discussion document (April 6, 1999), to the Medical Officer of Health and City Solicitor for consideration and recommendations back to the Board of Health at its meeting on June 28 and 29, 1999:

(1) that Recommendation No. 1 be adopted;

(2) that Recommendation No. 2 option (ii) be adopted subject to deleting (a) and adding the following provisions:

(a) no restaurant, banquet hall, bowling centre, bar, bingo or billiard hall, or casino shall allow smoking if it opens for business after the implementation of the proposed harmonized ETS by-law;

(b) that existing restaurants, banquet halls, bowling centres, bars, bingo and billiard halls, and casinos be grand fathered, provided they have 75 percent of their space for non-smoking and the business remains in the ownership of the person or corporation as it was on the date the ETS by-law takes effect, until May 3, 2004; and

(c) on May 4, 2004, all restaurants in the City of Toronto shall be smoke-free unless, in the opinion of the Medical Officer of Health and with the concurrence of City Council, adequate ventilation apparatus has been developed and is installed in such restaurants;

(3) that Recommendation No. 4 be adopted subject to deleting the last sentence; and

(B) requested the Medical Officer of Health to submit a report to the Board of Health for its meeting to be held on June 28 and 29, 1999, with respect to the following:

(1) other cities in Canada where there is a total ban on smoking in restaurants, bars, bowling centres, casinos, billiard and bingo halls;

(2) the problems that arose when the former City of Toronto tried to implement an ETS by-law several years ago and providing comment with respect to enforcement costs, etc.;

(3) the feasibility of private clubs having 75 percent of their space smoke-free;

(4) after May 3, 2004, allowing 25 percent of public space for smoking where the smoking section can be adequately ventilated and sealed-off from the non-smoking section;

(5) that restaurant guides indicate which restaurants provide a smoke-free or smoking environment;

(6) signage be posted at entrances of restaurants, etc., indicating a smoke-free or smoking environment; and

(7) the impact on tourism by the proposed ETS by-law.

(i) report (April 6, 1999) from the Secretary, Board of Health, advising that the Board of Health, on April 6, 1999, adopted the report (March 26, 1999) from the Medical Officer of Health with respect to the community input process for a Harmonized Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) By-law for the City of Toronto; and forwarding such report for staff presentation and deputations on the policy options and recommendations paper attached thereto, at the Community Council meetings scheduled to be held on May 26 and 27, 1999, with recommendations from the Community Councils to be referred to the Medical Officer of Health and the City Solicitor for consideration and recommendations back to the Board of Health at its meeting on June 28 and 29, 1999;

(ii) report (May 6, 1999) from the Secretary, Board of Health, advising, for information, that the Board of Health, on May 6, 1999, adopted a report (April 28, 1999) from the Chair, Board of Health, recommending that the Ontario Restaurant Association provide the Medical Officer of Health with specific details on ventilation technology and that the Medical Officer of Health report to the Board of Health by June 28, 1999 regarding the appropriateness of including a ventilation option in the proposed ETS By-law; further advising that the Board requested the Medical Officer of Health to:

(1) report back to the next meeting of the Board on whether the Ontario Restaurant Association has responded; and

(2) circulate the final consolidated report on the ETS By-law in sufficient time to provide members of the Board the opportunity for review prior to the Board meeting on June 28 and 29, 1999;

(iii) communication (undated) from Mr. and Mrs. H. Kane, Downsview;

(iv) communication (May 18, 1999) from Ms. Pauline Culley, East York;

(v) communication (May 25, 1999) from Ms. Judith Myrvold, Chair, Council for a Tobacco-Free Toronto;

(vi) communication (May 25, 1999) from Mr. Roger Marrelli, Vice-President, Food and Beverage, Bowlerama Limited, Toronto; and

(vii) communication ((May 26, 199) from Terry Mundell, President, Ontario Restaurant Association, Toronto.

Ms. Liz Janzen, representing the Medical Officer of Health, gave an overhead slide presentation with respect to the proposed harmonized Environmental Tobacco Smoke By-law.

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

- Mr. Danny Gayle, Richmond Hill;

- Mr. Victor Miller, Bartending School of Ontario, Toronto;

- Mr. Steven Mastoras, Whistler's Restaurant, East York;

- Mr. Donald MacMillan, The Wee Jaggy Nettle, East York;

- Mr. George Konidis, Mr. Greek, Toronto;

- Mr. Sean Meehan, The Beach Bar, Toronto;

- Mr. Peter Viris, The Donlands Restaurant, East York;

- Ms. Barbara McEachern, East York;

- Ms. Lisa Sparrow, East York;

-. Mr. Byron Yankou, Toronto;

- Ms. Donna-Lynn McCallum, East York;

- Mr. Steven Williams, Downsview; and

- Mr. Brian Scott, Toronto.

(e) Schedule of Meetings of City Council, Community Councils

and Committees.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(April 22, 1999) from the City Clerk, forwarding, for information, the revised 1999-2000 Schedule of Meetings of the City of Toronto Council, Community Councils and its Committees, commencing on June 14, 1999, as adopted by City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999.

(f) Parking Concerns near Schools and Dogs on School Property.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(May 17, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, reporting, as requested by Councillor Prue, on the parking concerns in the area of Westwood Junior High School and Chester Elementary School, which are being caused by groups who permit the sports fields in the evenings; and also the concerns about people walking their dogs on school property; advising that staff will monitor the parking situation over the next month to ensure that the groups use the school parking lots; and recommending that this report be received for information.

(g) New Applications Received.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(April 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising of new applications received within the last 30 days; and recommending that the report be received for information.

(h) Request for a Disabled Parking Space at 390 Sammon Avenue.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communication to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services with a request that he submit a report thereon to the next meeting of the East York Community Council scheduled to be held on June 22, 1999:

(May 5, 1999) from Councillor Michael Prue, East York, submitting a communication from Ms. Priscilla Schimpfle, East York, requesting a disabled parking space at 390 Sammon Avenue.

Ms. Priscilla Schimpfle, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(i) Traffic Concerns At Gardens Crescent and Westview Boulevard.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following report to the City Clerk with a request that she conduct a formal poll with respect to the installation of stop signs at the intersection of Gardens Crescent and Westview Boulevard; and, further requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to provide an information package, regarding the pros and cons of stop signs, to the residents on Westview Boulevard between Dohne Avenue and St. Clair Avenue:

(May 12, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, reporting on the feasibility of implementing all-way stop control and throat narrowings at the intersection of Gardens Crescent and Westview Boulevard; advising that there are no financial implications associated with the recommendations of this report; concluding that the collision history, traffic volumes and speed do not justify a curb realignment at Gardens Crescent and Westview Boulevard at this time; that it is appropriate to include this type of work at this and other intersections in this area when the streets are resurfaced at a future date; and recommending that this report be received for information.

Mr. Allen Gaw, President, Topham Park Homeowner's Association, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(j) Sidewalk on the South Side of Don Mills Road

from O'Connor Drive to the Don Valley Parkway Exit Ramp.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communication to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services with a request that he submit a report thereon to the meeting of the Community Council scheduled to be held on July 15, 1999:

(May 11, 1999) from Councillor Jane Pitfield, recommending that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to report to the July 15, 1999 meeting of this Community Council with respect to the feasibility and costs associated with the installation of a sidewalk on the south side of Don Mills Road from O'Connor Drive to the Don Valley Parkway exit ramp.

(k) Installation of a Footbridge Over the CP Rail Track and

Construction of Sidewalks along Millwood Road

by IPCF Properties.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following report back to the Director, Community Planning - East District, and the Director Transportation Services, District 1, with a request that they:

(1) consult further with IPCF Properties Inc. and Loblaws to determine their intention with respect to developing the site at 11 Redway Road; that IPCF Properties Inc. and Loblaws be advised that the East York Community Council is anxious that they proceed to install a sidewalk on the south side of Millwood Road; and

(2) submit a report thereon to the East York Community Council, such report to include:

(i) an estimate of how much it would cost to install such sidewalk; and

(ii) the results of a pedestrian traffic count.

(Undated) from the Director, Community Planning, East District and the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, responding to a request from Councillor Pitfield regarding the installation of a footbridge over the Canadian Pacific rail tracks adjacent to Redway Road, and, on the possibility of putting in a sidewalk on the west side of Millwood Road between the entrance to Leaside Memorial Gardens and the Canadian Pacific Rail Overpass; and recommending that the report be received for information.

(l) Streetscaping Priorities for Businesses in East York.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication; and, further, requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to investigate and submit a report to the East York Community Council on the accumulation of water behind the medical centre on O'Connor Drive:

(May 11, 1999) from Councillor Jane Pitfield, East York, submitting, for information and comments, a consolidated "wishlist" of streetscaping priorities for businesses in East York, collected as a result of consultation with representatives of the business, commercial and industrial areas/organizations.

Mr. Domenic Colangelo, President, O'Connor Drive Business Association, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(m) Lighting on Talbot Park Path - Top of Hill - West End of Park.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communication to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, with a request that he submit a report thereon to the East York Community Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on July 15, 1999:

(May 11, 1999) from Councillor Jane Pitfield, recommending that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to report to the July 15, 1999 meeting of this Community Council regarding the feasibility and costs associated with lighting on the Talbot Park path located at the top of the hill at the west end of the park.

(n) Naming of Proposed Public Streets - Governor's Hill Drive and

Hampton Park Crescent.

The East York Community Council reports having deferred consideration of the following matter to its meeting to be held on June 22, 1999; and, further, requested that members of the Governor's Bridge Residents' Association, Jasamax Holdings Limited, East York LACAC, East York Historical Society, and appropriate City officials, be invited to attend such meeting to discuss the proposed and alternative names:

(May 12, 1999) from the City Surveyor, Technical Services Division, reporting on a submission by Jasamax Holdings Limited to name two proposed public streets in the proposed subdivision located south of Nesbitt Drive and west of Bayview Avenue; advising that the proposed names are generally acceptable and recommending that:

(1) the proposed public street located west of Bayview Avenue, extending southerly from Nesbitt Drive, be named "Governor's Hill Drive";

(2) the proposed public street extending easterly from Governor's Hill Drive, be named "Hampton Park Crescent"; and

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

(o) Parks and Recreation - Status of Harmonization of

Outdoor Pool Operations - All Wards.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report; and, further, having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to submit a report to the Community Council on a process to allow swimming and wading pools to be open before and after the official opening dates should there be unseasonably hot weather.

(May 17, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism providing for information, a brief update and status report on the harmonization of outdoor pool operations in the Parks and Recreation Division of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department; advising that the full harmonization of aquatic operations will take a number of years to fully implement; that staff are harmonizing the highest priority risk management elements as recommended by the Lifesaving Society; that a harmonized operating season, hours of operation and potential sites for the extension of the extended hours to all districts will be developed for the summer of 2000; and that there may be budget implications for the 2000 Operating Budget.

(p) Traffic Concerns on Krawchuk Lane.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following matter to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services with a request that he direct Transportation Services staff to arrange a meeting with representatives of Canada Post, Members of the East York Community Council, and representatives of the Leaside Property Owners'Association and the Leaside Business Park Association to discuss concerns regarding the postal outlet's access to Krawchuk Lane and submit a report thereon to the Community Council.

(May 17, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, reporting, as requested, on concerns regarding postal trucks using Krawchuk Lane to access the postal outlet on Malcolm Road; and recommending that staff be directed to arrange a meeting with representatives of Canada Post and the Ward 1 Councillors to discuss concerns regarding the postal outlet's access to Krawchuk Lane.

(q) Parking Concerns on Fairside Avenue.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following report to the City Clerk, with a request that she conduct a formal poll of affected residents regarding the requested alterations to the parking restrictions, given that similar parking restrictions already exist on this street; and, further, that the poll advise that the alternate-side parking option be on the east side of the street from November to April, and then alternate side-to-side from May to October:

(May 17, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, reporting on a request to extend the hours of the existing "No Parking" restrictions, implementation of alternate side parking, and enforcement of the three-hour parking regulation on Fairside Drive, between Mortimer Avenue and Barker Avenue; and recommending that this report be received for information.

Ms. Dympna Callaghan, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.

(r) Urban Planning and Development Services Department

- Staff Resources.

The East York Community Council reports having:

(1) advised the Budget Committee that it supports the Recommendations of the Urban Planning and Development Committee embodied in the communication (May 18, 1999) from the City Clerk, subject to confirmation of the backlog of work; and

(2) requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to submit a report to the Budget Committee, for its meeting to be held on June 1, 1999, providing statistics with respect to the backlog of work:

(May 18, 1999) from the City Clerk, advising that the Urban Environment and Development Committee, on May 17, 1999, in considering a report dated May 11, 1999 from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services responding to Council's concern regarding the sufficiency of staff resources in the Urban Planning and Development Services Department to deliver services within the time frames desired by both City Council and the public; among other things, forwarded the action of the Committee, and the aforementioned report from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to the Community Councils for information.

(s) East York Hydro Building.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communication to the President and Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Hydro - Electric Commission, and the Commissioner of Corporate Services with a request that they submit a report thereon to the meeting of the Community Council scheduled to be held on June 22, 1999:

(May 11, 1999) from Councillor Jane Pitfield, East York, requesting that appropriate officials at Toronto Hydro and the Commissioner of Corporate Services investigate and report back to the East York Community Council for its meeting on June 22, 1999, on the future plans for the former East York Hydro building located on the grounds of the East York Civic Centre.

(t) Further Report on Proposed Use of Funds Generated from

Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Dedication.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following matter to the Planning and Transportation Committee for its meeting to be held on June 14, 1999, advising that the Community Council endorses the interim policy as outlined in the joint report (March 17, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(May 18, 1999) from the City Clerk, forwarding Clause No. 5 of Report No. 7 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee, headed "Further Report on Proposed Use of Funds Generated from Cash-in-lieu of Parkland Dedication" which was struck out by City Council at its meeting on May 11 and 12, 1999, and referred back to the Planning and Transportation Committee for further consideration; advising that Council also directed, among other things, that a copy of the Clause be forwarded to the Community Councils with a request that they submit their comments thereon to the Planning and Transportation Committee for consideration at its meeting on June 14, 1999.

(u) 1999 Road Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Program.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(May 19, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Programming and Policy, reporting, as requested, on roads scheduled to be resurfaced in 1999 in the East York area; advising that the cost of this work is accommodated in the Transportation Services 1999 Capital Works program and recommending that the report be received for information.

(v) Parking Issues on Donlands Avenue between O'Connor Drive

and Plains Road.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communication and a survey, submitted by Councillor Pitfield, to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services with a request that he submit a report thereon to the meeting of the Community Council scheduled to be held on July 15, 1999, such report to include comment with respect to the parking meters, length of time on the meters, and fees:

(May 19, 1999) from Councillor Jane Pitfield, East York, requesting appropriate staff in the Transportation Division to investigate and report back to the meeting of the East York Community Council scheduled to be held on July 15, 1999, with respect to a petition from the merchants of Donlands Avenue, requesting that changes be made to the time of the metres and the angle of parking on Donlands Avenue between O'Connor Drive and Plains Road.

(w) Toronto Police Services Divisional Boundaries.

The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(May 21, 1999) from Acting Staff Sergeant J. Schmidt, Corporate Planning, Toronto Police Service, responding to the East York Community Council with respect to issues raised in the deputation of Ms. Shaida Addetia, Family and Children's Services, Thorncliffe Neighbourhood Office, during discussions regarding the proposed Toronot Police Services division boundaries at the East York Community Council meeting held on April 28 and 29, 1999.

(x) Leaside Memorial Community Gardens

Board of Management - Resignation of Chair.

The East York Community Council reports having received Mr. Oyler's resignation and extended its appreciation for his services as Chair of the Board of Management:

(May 15, 1999) from Mr. Peter E. Oyler, East York, Chairman, Leaside Memorial Community Gardens Board of Management, submitting his resignation from the Board of Management, Leaside Memorial Community Gardens.

(y) Appointment of Citizen Members to the Jenner Jean-Marie Community

Advisory Board.

The East York Community Council reports having referred the following communications to the Economic Development and Parks Committee with the recommendation that the following persons be appointed to the Jenner Jean-Marie Community Centre Advisory Board:

- Mr. Rakesh Bhardwaj;

- Mr. Gord Johnston; and

- Ms. Annie Yard.

The East York Community Council also reports having extended its appreciation to the following persons for their past service on the Jenner Jean-Marie Community Centre Advisory Board:

- Mrs. Lorna Krawchuk, former Member of Council, Borough of East York;

- Mr. Michael Malone;

- Miss Maxine Sequin;

- Mrs. Susan Di Pietro; and

- Mr. Robert Axford:

(April 28, 1999) from Mr. Geoff Kettel, and Ms. Hazel Thornton-Lazier, Co-chairs, Jenner Jean-Marie Community Centre Advisory Board, recommending that the following persons be appointed as citizen representatives on the Jenner Jean-Marie Community Centre Advisory Board:

(1) Mr. Rakesh Bhardwaj;

(2) Mr. Gord Johnston; and

(3) Ms. Annie Yarde.

(May 7, 1999) from Mr. Kevin Chisholm, Facility Co-ordinator, forwarding further information with regard to the appointment of three new members to the Jenner Jean-Marie Community Centre Advisory Board; and advising that the following citizen representatives have resigned from the Advisory Board:

Mr. Michael Malone;

Miss Maxine Sequin;

Mrs. Susan Di Pietro; and

Mr. Robert Axford

Respectfully submitted,

MICHAEL PRUE

Chair

Toronto, May 11, 26 and 27, 1999

(Report No. 6 of The East York Community Council, including an addition thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999.)