1 Appeal of Committee of Adjustment Decisions for (1) 20-30 Sandcliffe Road; and (2) 3524 Dundas Street W., Ward 27, York Humber

2 Sale of Surplus Spadina Property at 539 Arlington Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton

3 Sale of Surplus Spadina Property at 126 Everden Road Ward 28, York Eglinton

4 Request for Removal of City Tree at 139 Everden Road Ward 28, York Eglinton

5 Tree Removals in Ward 27, York Humber and Ward 28, York Eglinton

6 Request for All-Way Stop Control at Bala Avenue and Bartonville Avenue - Ward 27, York Humber

7 Encroachment Application for 29 Kersdale Avenue Ward 27, York Humber

8 McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Ave.W. to Rogers Road (1) Draft By-law regarding Installation of Speed Humps; and (2) Poll Results Ward 21, Davenport and Ward 28, York Eglinton

9 Draft By-law - Alteration of Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West to St. John's Road Traffic Calming Plan - Ward 27, York Humber

10 164 Vaughan Road, Zoning By-law Amendment Application Owner and Applicant: T. Cornacchia Ward 28, York Eglinton

11 Lands at Rear of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West OPA and Rezoning Application Applicant: Forest Green Homes; Owner: Lexington Green Homes Ward 27, York Humber

12 Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan Ward 28, York Eglinton

13 Sign By-law Amendment relating to Sign Permit Applications at Various Locations in the former City of York filed by the Pattison Sign Group Ward 27, York Humber

14 Other Items Considered by the Community Council

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, amended this Clause, by striking out Recommendation No. (1) of the York Community Council and inserting in lieu thereof the following new Recommendation No. (1):

"(1) the Director, Community Planning, West District, be authorized, on behalf of Council, to withdraw the appeal of Committee of Adjustment decisions B-39/99YK to B-44/99YK with respect to 20-30 Sandcliffe Road, conditional upon the applicant submitting to the City Solicitor, by October 20, 1999, with each existing tenant evidencing a ten-year lease of the premises currently occupied by the tenant on the terms of the tenant's existing lease, or in a form otherwise satisfactory to the tenant, such lease to be registered on title, to be terminable by the tenant on 60 days notice and to grant to the tenant a right of first refusal to purchase the premises during the term of the lease, all such documentation to be a form and content satisfactory to the Solicitor for each tenant and the City Solicitor.")

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1) the Director, Community Planning, West District, be authorized on behalf of Council, to withdraw the appeal of Committee of Adjustment decisions B-39/99YK to B-44/99YK with respect to 20-30 Sandcliffe Road, conditional upon the applicant submitting to City Council for its September 28 meeting, satisfactory documentation indicating that agreements have been entered into with the existing tenants to provide security of tenure for all existing tenants should they wish to remain tenants, and the right of first refusal should they wish to purchase their homes, and indicating that such agreements have been registered on title;

(2) recommendation (3) in the report dated August 17, 1999 from the Director, Community Planning, West District, be approved; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (August 17, 1999) from the Director, Community Planning, West District:

Purpose:

To provide information regarding Committee of Adjustment decisions that have been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and recommend whether or not legal and staff representation is warranted.

Financial Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The financial costs associated with appeal of the consent applications for 20 - 30 Sandcliffe Road are limited to the $250.00 appeal fee. There is no financial cost associated with the appeal for 3524 Dundas Street West.

Recommendations:

It is recommend that:

(1) Council endorse the appeal of Committee of Adjustment decisions B-39/99YK to B-44/99YK for 20-30 Sandcliffe Road filed by Urban Planning and Development Services staff on behalf of Council;

(2) Legal and staff representation be authorized to attend the Ontario Municipal Board in support of the appeal noted in the preceding recommendation; and,

(3) Legal and staff representation not be provided for the appeal regarding application No. A-60/99YK for 3524 Dundas Street West.

Comment:

The applications and appeals are summarized as follows:

(1) Address: 20 - 30 Sandcliffe Road (Ward 27- York Humber)

Applicant: Inaugural Source Inc.

Appellant: City of Toronto

Hearing Date: To be determined by the OMB

Application: B-39/99YK to B-44/99YK. The applicant proposes to sever a site containing six existing lawful nonconforming rental townhouses into six freehold lots each containing an existing townhouse. (see appendix A and B)

The Committee of Adjustment on July 26,1999 granted consent for the severance of an existing townhouse portion of land into six (6) residential lots with a condition requiring the applicant to pay 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland. The subject property presently consists of six (6) two-storey rental townhouses that are lawful non-conforming uses in an R2 Zone. Planning staff commented that new policies contained within Official Plan Amendment (OPA) No.2 relating to the preservation and maintenance of residential buildings, particularly rental buildings, apply to these consent applications. The amendment was adopted by City Council on March 2, 3, and 4 but is currently under appeal.

In particular, policy 135.1 within OPA No.2 states that it is the policy of Council "to preserve, maintain and replenish the supply of residential buildings, and particularly rental buildings, across the City of Toronto by restricting the demolition of residential property and the conversion of rental units to condominium, and/or freehold, by discouraging the conversions of rental units to equity co-operative, and by encouraging new rental housing production."

Notwithstanding that these new policies are under appeal, they are Council adopted policies. As indicated in planning staff comments dated April 20, 1999 and July 14, 1999, to the Committee of Adjustment in considering matters of consent, the Planning Act provides that regard shall be given, among other matters, to whether the consent conforms to the Official Plan. In light of the above-noted adopted policies, the proposed consent application would not conform with the policies of OPA No.2.

Therefore, in the absence of a Council meeting in August and a limited time frame to lodge an appeal, an appeal was filed of the Committee's consent decision by Urban Planning and Development Services staff, on behalf of Council.

(2) Address: 3524 Dundas St. West (Ward 27 - York Humber)

Applicant: Helen Smoljan

Appellant: Helen Smoljan, 1660 Glenvista Dr. Oakville

Hearing Date: To de determined by the Ontario Municipal Board

Application: A-60/99 YK. The applicant proposes to erect a self-contained, mobile food sales kiosk to be associated with the Brewer's Retail store at the same location (see Appendix C)

The Committee of Adjustment on June 29, 1999 refused the above-noted application to permit a self-contained, mobile food sales kiosk to operate on the subject property. The Planning Department did not have any objections to the application, thus no comments were submitted.

Conclusions:

In regard to the Committee of Adjustment's decisions for 20-30 Sandcliffe Road, the subject appeal is warranted, given the recently adopted city-wide policy regarding rental unit conversions and the lack of conformity with the Official Plan. Legal and staff representation at the Ontario Municipal Board are warranted. Further it should be noted that during periods when Council is not meeting, (August, March etc.) arrangements should be made through the Procedural By-law to authorize the Solicitor to act on behalf of Council where a Council policy is affected.

The subject appeal for 3524 Dundas Street West was also reviewed by staff. There are no substantive planning issues relating to the application. City Legal staff and Planning staff representation at the Ontario Municipal Board is therefore not warranted for this appeal.

Contact Name:

P. Carvalhinho

Assistant Planner,

Community Planning - West District

Tel: 394-2618; Fax: 394-2782

The York Community Council also submits the following communication (September 9, 1999) from Mr. Michael B. Vaughan, Q.C.:

The application concerns six row houses built in 1952. They were constructed as separate homes, each with separate municipal and public services to the street. They were owned as a rental project and over the years have become run down. My client purchased them with the intent of upgrading and renovating the homes as they became vacant, in the normal course. My client discussed his plans with the appropriate City officials and they appeared to be acceptable. Accordingly, he made an application de to sever the row houses into separate ownership, just as an identical row of six townhouses immediately west have been severed into separate ownership homes.

The tenants support the application. It was considered by the Committee of Adjustment on two occasions before it was approved. A number of meetings were held with the neighbours. Those meetings culminated in a settlement agreement with the neighbours represented by Councillor Nunziata, a copy of which is attached. The Committee of Adjustment approved the application based on the settlement agreement as supported by the Councillor.

The policy referred to in Mr. Moretto's letter dated August 9th, came in after my client filed the application to the Committee of Adjustment. The policy is a carry-over of the old City of Toronto "condominium conversion policy", the intent of which was to prevent conversion of highrise rental apartment buildings to condominiums. The policy did not apply to the conversion of row houses to freehold units, such as the case in question. The policy referred to by Mr. Moretto is now before the OMB. It will not be part of the official plan unless, until, and to the extent that it may be approved by the OMB.

In the event that Mr. Moretto's appeal is withdraw, my client is prepared to provide all existing tenants with a written undertaking not to require vacant possession other than for non-payment of rent or cause, should they wish to remain as tenants. As well if they wish to purchase their homes, my client is prepared to offer each of them a right of first refusal.

An OMB hearing would involve the City in substantial expense. Having in mind all the circumstances, particularly the settlement agreement that was negotiated with the neighbours, I would hope that Council would want to keep faith with the neighbours and the Councillor, and not take a step that would undermine the neighbourhood negotiation process. The settlement was reached on a unanimous basis with the neighbours and with the Councillor and to proceed with an appeal would undermine the wishes of the applicant, the neighbours, the Councillor and the process.

On behalf of the applicant may I therefore request that the Community Council recommend that the appeal be withdrawn.

Between: Inaugural-Source Inc. (Hereinafter called "Inaugural")

OF THE FIRST PART

OF THE SECOND PART

For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. If the applications before the Committee of Adjustment today concerning 20-30 Sandcliffe Road and 30A and 30B Sandcliffe Road are approved and not appealed, Inaugural agrees:

(a) to build one house instead of two houses on the new lots at 30A and 30B Sandcliffe Road;

(b) to set back the new house at least 6 feet from the west property boundary abutting the right-of-way to the west;

(c) to construct no fence along the west property boundary abutting the right-of-way to the west;

(d) to apply to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to a 6-foot wide right-of-way in favour of the neighbours abutting to the west, and to pave the parking lot on the land to the west;

(e) to try to reduce the height of the proposed new house

2. This agreement is binding on the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns of the parties.

Inaugural-Source Inc. Neighbours

Per: George Herczeg Per: Frances Nunziata

The York Community Council also had before it during consideration of the above matter, the following three similar letters dated September 13, 1999, submitted by Mr. Michael Vaughan, Solicitor, and signed by the tenants of 20, 26 and 30 Sandcliffe Road:

We are familiar with the application that was approved by the Committee of Adjustment and wanted to forward a letter explaining why, as tenants of the property, we are in favour of the Committee's decision to approve the severance of these properties.

A successful severance would finally give us the ability to purchase our home and make the change from tenants to homeowners. We have indicated to the owner that if the severance was successful, it would give us the ability to own our unit and we would be interested in doing such.

We are in favour of this severance application.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (September 24, 1999) from Mr. Michael B. Vaughan, Q.C., Barrister and Solicitor, submitting, as requested by the York Community Council, a copy of the agreement as registered on title providing security of tenure and right of first refusal for the sitting tenants of 20-30 Sandcliff Road.)

(A copy of the agreement referred to in the foregoing communication is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (August 16, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To authorize the disposal of the property municipally known as 539 Arlington Avenue.

Financial Implications:

Revenue of $152,000.00, less closing costs and the usual adjustments, subject to the revenue sharing agreement with the Province pursuant to the former Metropolitan Corporate Administration Committee Report No. 25, Clause No. 1, approved on December 4, 1996.

Recommendations:

It is recommended, subject to Provincial concurrence that:

(1) the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services or the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate be authorized to accept the offer in the amount of $152,000.00 as detailed herein;

(2) Council, pursuant to Clause No.14, Report No. 36 of the former Metropolitan Management Committee adopted on September 28,1994, waive the minimum required deposit of 10 percent of the purchase price;

(3) authority be granted to direct a portion of the sale proceeds on closing to fund the outstanding balance of Costing Unit No. CA700CA2459

(4) the City Solicitor be authorized and directed to take the appropriate action, in conjunction with the Province of Ontario Officials and/or agents, to complete the transaction on behalf of the City of Toronto and be further authorized to amend the closing date to such earlier or later date as considered reasonable; and

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

Background:

The Province of Ontario is the owner of 539 Arlington Avenue, subject to a ninety-nine year lease in favour of the City of Toronto. By its adoption of Clause No. 1 of Report No. 3 of the Corporate Administration Committee on February 12 and 13, 1997, Metropolitan Council declared the property surplus pursuant to By-law No. 56-95 and authorized its disposal. The processes with respect to By-law No. 56-95 have been complied with, a utility canvass has been completed and no requirements have been identified.

Comments:

Pursuant to the February 12 and 13, 1997 authority, negotiations were conducted with the tenant, Gary Scrutton, and the following offer was received:

Property Address: 539 Arlington Avenue

Legal Description: Lot 68, Plan 1527,City of Toronto, designated as Parts 11 and 12 on 64R-7313

Approximate Lot Size: 7.62 metres (25 feet) fronting onto Arlington Avenue 44.50 metres (146 feet) depth

Location; East Side of Arlington Avenue, west of Strathearn Road, south of Eglinton Avenue West

Improvements: Detached, 2-bedroom brick bungalow

Occupancy Status: Tenanted

Recommended Sale Price: $152,000.00

Deposit: $500.00 (personal cheque)

Purchaser: Gary Edmund Scrutton

Closing Date: February 29, 2000

Terms: Cash on closing, subject to the usual adjustments

Accounts (Costing Units) have been put in place to charge costs directly related to the maintenance and sale of City owned properties, and include such items as sales commissions, surveying and registration of the sale. A recommendation is included in this report to direct a portion of the sale proceeds to close out the account for this property.

By the adoption of Clause No. 5 of Report No. 9 of The Corporate Services committee, Council at the meeting held on July 8, 9 and 10, 1998 directed that comparable sales data be provided in future reports of property sales. Appendix "A" identifies three comparable properties located in the vicinity that have recently sold.

Conclusion:

Completion of the transaction detailed above is considered fair and reasonable and reflective of market value.

Contact Name:

Melanie Hale Carter, Valuator/Negotiator, Real Estate Services,

Tel: (416) 397-0585 Fax: (416) 392-1880

The following three addresses represent comparable sales of properties that are quite similar to the residence which forms the subject matter of this report. These properties are 5 room, detached, brick bungalows with 2 bedrooms:

Approximate

Address lot Size Sale Price Date of sale

565 Arlington Avenue 27' x 93' $161,000.00 August 5, 1998

549 Arlington Avenue 25' x 118' $166,500.00 November 4, 1998

532 Arlington Avenue 25 x 137' $139,900.00 April 7, 1998

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (August 16, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To authorize the disposal of the property municipally known as 126 Everden Road.

Financial Implications:

Revenue of $215,000.00, less closing costs and the usual adjustments, subject to the revenue sharing agreement with the Province pursuant to the former Metropolitan Corporate Administration Committee Report No. 25, Clause No. 1, approved on December 4, 1996.

Recommendations:

It is recommended, subject to Provincial concurrence that:

(1) the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services or the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate be authorized to accept the offer in the amount of $215,000.00 as detailed herein;

(2) Council, pursuant to Clause No.14, Report No. 36 of the former Metropolitan Management Committee adopted on September 28,1994, waive the minimum required deposit of 10 percent. of the purchase price;

(3) authority be granted to direct a portion of the sale proceeds on closing to fund the outstanding balance of Costing Unit No. CA700CA2505

(4) the City Solicitor be authorized and directed to take the appropriate action, in conjunction with the Province of Ontario Officials and/or agents, to complete the transaction on behalf of the City of Toronto and be further authorized to amend the closing date to such earlier or later date as considered reasonable; and

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

Background:

The Province of Ontario is the owner of 126 Everden Road, subject to a ninety-nine year lease in favour of the City of Toronto. By its adoption of Clause No. 1 of Report No. 3 of the Corporate Administration Committee on February 12 and 13, 1997, Metropolitan Council declared the property surplus pursuant to By-law No. 56-95 and authorized its disposal. The processes with respect to By-law No. 56-95 have been complied with, a utility canvass has been completed and no requirements have been identified.

Comments:

Pursuant to the February 12 and 13, 1997 Authority, the property was listed with Savvy Realty Corp. on June 2, 1999 at an asking price of $224,900.00. As a result the following offer was received:

Property Address: 126 Everden Road

Legal Description: Lot 91, registered Plan 2339, City of Toronto, together with and subject to a right of way and easement as shown on Plan 64R-7314

Approximate Lot Size: 7.62 metres (25 feet) fronting onto Everden Road 40.23 metres (132 feet) depth

Location: West Side of Everden Road, west of Strathearn Road, south of Eglinton Avenue West

Improvements: Detached, 2-bedroom brick bungalow

Occupancy Status: Vacant

Recommended Sale

Price: $215,000.00

Deposit: $12,000.00 (certified cheque)

Purchaser: Ron Chichora

Closing Date: December 16,1999

Terms: cash on closing, less the usual adjustments

Listing Broker: Savvy Realty Corp.

Selling Broker: Sutton Group-Central Realty Inc.

Commission: Four (4) percent, plus GST, payable on closing of the transaction.

The purchaser has disclosed he is also the selling agent.

Accounts (Costing Units) have been put in place to charge costs directly related to the maintenance and sale of City owned properties, and include such items as sales commissions, surveying and registration of the sale. A recommendation is included in this report to direct a portion of the sale proceeds to close out the account for this property.

By the adoption of Clause No. 5 of Report No. 9 of The Corporate Services committee, Council at the meeting held on July 8, 9 and 10, 1998 directed that comparable sales data must be provided in future reports of property sales. Appendix "A" identifies three comparable properties located in the vicinity that have recently sold. While comparable sales information can be included as part of the staff report, this property was listed for sale on the TREB multiple listing service and the forces of the market place have determined the true market value.

Conclusion:

Completion of the transaction detailed above is considered fair and reasonable and reflective of market value.

Contact Name:

Melanie Hale Carter, Valuator/Negotiator, Real Estate Services,

Tel: (416) 397-0585 Fax: (416) 392-1880

The following three addresses represent comparable sales of properties that are quite similar to the residence which forms the subject matter of this report. These properties are 5 room, detached, brick bungalows with 2 bedrooms:

Approximate

Address lot Size Sale Price Date of sale

376 Winnett Avenue 29 x 133 $195,000.00 June 21, 1999

30 Flanders Road 30 x 95 $236,250.00 May 6, 1999

496 Atlas Avenue 28 x 100' $190,500.00 June 30, 1999

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the approval of recommendation (1) in the following report (August 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

Staff was requested to report on Ms. Judy Everson's request to have the City owned Chinese elm fronting 139 Everden Road removed.

Source of Funds:

No funding required.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the City tree fronting 139 Everden be retained; or

• if Council approves the tree's removal, it be with the stipulation that the owner pay for removal and replacement planting costs and the value of the tree prior to the tree's removal. The sum of these values is $3,400.00.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Councillor Mihevc requested this report in his letter to the York Community Council dated June 22, 1999. The City tree in question is a 58 cm diameter Chinese elm that is in fair condition. The tree does not qualify for removal as it is not dead, dying or hazardous. Tree species is not used as criteria to qualify trees for removal.

Comments:

Ms. Everden has been requesting the removal of this tree for a number of years. There are two privately owned Chinese elms, one at the front of the property and one at the rear. Both are larger than the City tree. The contradiction in requesting the removal of the City Chinese elm while retaining the two private Chinese elms has previously been pointed out to Ms. Everden.

Conclusion:

The tree should be retained. Qualifying it for removal on the basis of its being an elm would set a precedent that could quality thousand of other elm trees for removal.

Contact Name:

Dean Hart

394-8549

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (August 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to request Community Council to approve removal of City owned trees. The properties and reasons for removal are described in this report.

Funding Source, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Removal and planting costs are approved in the 1999 operating budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Legal Services Division be requested to prepare a by-law for the removal of City owned trees in Wards 27 and 28;

(2) forestry staff begin removal and replacement planting, and

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

Comment:

In accordance with the former City of York policy, Appendix A lists the locations where trees have been removed or are in need of removal and the reason for removal. Replacement planting is scheduled in applicable locations.

Conclusion:

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

Contact Name:

Dean Hart

394-8549

APPENDIX A

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July 27, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To respond to a request from York Community Council to evaluate the need for an all-way stop control at the intersection of Bala Avenue and Bartonville Avenue West.

Funding Sources:

Funds to undertake the necessary signage installation at the intersection of Bala Avenue and Bartonville Avenue West, in the estimated amount of $300.00, are contained in the Transportation Services Division 1999 Operating Budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Uniform Traffic By-law Nos. 196-84 and 2958-94 be amended to install stop signs on Bartonville Avenue West for east and westbound vehicular traffic, at the intersection of Bala Avenue; and

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

Background:

York Community Council, at its meeting of February 17, 1999, approved a request from Councillor Bill Saundercook for a report on the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at Bala Avenue and Bartonville Avenue West (Clause No. 7(p) of Report No. 2).

Comments:

Bala Avenue is classified as a local roadway, operating two-way in a north-south direction between Bartonville Avenue West and Jane Street. Bartonville Avenue West is classified as a local roadway between Weston Road and its westerly terminus, operating two-way in an east/west direction. These streets form a "T" intersection with stop sign control for southbound vehicular traffic on Bala Avenue.

In order for all-way stop control to be justified at an intersection, established warrant criteria must be fulfilled. The criteria include such factors as right-of-way conflicts, vehicular and pedestrian usage of the intersection, physical and geometric configuration, and surrounding area traffic control. A review of the study results, reveals this intersection does satisfy the operational elements for the installation of an all-way stop sign control.

Conclusions:

The installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Bartonville Avenue and Bala Avenue would clearly establish right-of-way for vehicular traffic and would also enhance safety for pedestrians.

Contact Person:

Jacqueline White, Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1

Tel: 397-5021; Fax: 392-8504

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (August 24, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

To present comments from applicable departments concerning this encroachment application.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Encroachment application first made June 16, 1999. Refacing of side wall from metal siding to 4" face brick.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the encroachment application be approved and that the City enter into an agreement with the owner of 29 Kersdale Avenue, with terms to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor; and

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

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Bell Canada "I have reviewed the encroachment application for 29 Kersdale Avenue. I have no objection to the application as shown on the attached sketch."

Consumers Gas "We have indicated on the attached print our existing and/or proposed underground plant. We have no objection to the above proposal, provided our standard clearances of 0.3m minimum vertically and 0.6m minimum horizontally are maintained."

Hydro Commission "As per your request dated June 16, 1999, the existing encroachment does not conflict with our existing plant. We would expect that this encroachment will be covered by the City of Toronto (York) Standard Encroachment Agreement which makes provision for our future installations. Subject to the above, we have no objection to the encroachment."

Planning Department "I have no comment."

Building Department "The Building Department has no objection regarding the encroachment application for the above noted property."

Operations Department "This is in reply to your memo dated June 16, 1999 and wish to inform you that we have no objection to the encroachment application at 29 Kersdale Avenue."

Conclusion:

That the encroachment application for 29 Kersdale Avenue be approved.

Contact:

Nadia Bartha

Acting Property Co-ordinator

Tel: 394-2511

Fax: 394-2803

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that a by-law in the form of the draft by-law be enacted, and that the necessary Bills be introduced in Council to give effect thereto.

The York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, that pursuant to Clause No. 58 of Report No. 7 of the Toronto Community Council, and Clause No. 7 of Report No. 5 of the York Community Council, titled "McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road - Proposed Installation of Speed Humps", which was adopted without amendment by City Council at its meeting held on May 11 and 12, 1999, and notice with respect to the proposed enactment of the draft by-law as advertised in a daily newspaper on August 23, 30, September 7 and 13, 1999, and no one adressed the York Community Council.

The York Community Council submits the following Draft By-law from the City Solicitor:

Authority: Toronto Community Council Report No. 7, Clause No. 58, as adopted by Council on May 11 and 12, 1999 and York Community Council Report No. 5, Clause 7, as adopted by Council on May 11 and 12, 1999.

Enacted by Council:

Bill No.

To further amend former City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, being "A By-law To authorize the construction, widening, narrowing, alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations", respecting the alteration of McRoberts Avenue by the installation of speed humps from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road.

WHEREAS notice of a proposed By-law regarding the proposed alteration was published in a daily newspaper on August 23, 30, September 7 and September 13, 1999 and interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard at a public meeting held on September 14, 1999 and it is appropriate to amend the by-law to permit the alteration.

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

1. Former City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, being "A By-law To authorize the construction, widening, narrowing, alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations", is amended:

(1) by inserting in Columns 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, respectively, of Schedule "B-4" (Pavement Alteration/Repair) the following:

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , A.D. 1999.

_______________________ ______________________________

Mayor City Clerk

The York Community Council also submits Clause No. 7 of Report No. 5 of the York Community Council, titled "McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road - Proposed Installation of Speed Humps, Ward 28, York Eglinton", which was adopted by City Council at its meeting held on May 11 and 12, 1999.

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

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 22, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To reduce the speed of traffic on McRoberts Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Rogers Road by the introduction of speed humps.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funds to cover the cost of this work and associated signage in the estimated amount of $18,000. are available in Works and Emergency Services 1999 Capital Fund Code No. 296702.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) approval be given to alter sections of the roadway on McRoberts Avenue, from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road, for traffic calming purposes as described below, with implementation subject to the favourable results of polling of affected residents pursuant to the policy related to speed hump installation as described in the text of this report:

"The construction of speed humps on McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road, generally as shown on the attached print of Drawing No. 421F-5354, dated March, 1999-" (see Appendix A);

(2) Works staff be authorized to conduct the required poll on both portions of McRoberts Avenue, that being the portion in the Toronto Community Council area and the portion in the York Community Council area;

(3) the speed limit be reduced from 40 kilometres per hour to 30 kilometres per hour on McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road coincident with the implementation of speed humps; and

(4) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action is necessary to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that are required.

Comments:

At the request of Councillor Betty Disero and residents of McRoberts Avenue, Works staff investigated the feasibility of installing speed humps on McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to the north limit of Davenport Ward. Upon investigating this request Works staff determined that the remaining portion of McRoberts Avenue between the north limit of Davenport Ward and Rogers Road (approximately 80 metres), which is part of the York Community Council area (York-Eglinton Ward), should be included in the speed hump evaluation.

Mc Roberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road, operates two-way with a pavement width which varies from 7.3 to 7.9 metres and a speed limit of 40 kilometres per hour. The following parking regulations are in effect on Mc Roberts Avenue.

East side

• Parking is prohibited at anytime.

West side

• Parking is prohibited from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday to Friday, from Innes Avenue to a point 106.7 metres south.
• Parking is permitted for a maximum period of three hours except during the hours of permit parking operation from 12:01 a.m. to 7:00 a.m., daily between St. Clair Avenue West and the north limit of Davenport Ward.
• Parking is permitted for a maximum period of three hours except during the hours of permit parking operation from 12:00 midnight to 6:00 a.m., daily between the north limit of Davenport Ward and Rogers Road.

Works staff conducted 24-hour speed and volume counts on Mc Roberts Avenue and found that on average the street carried 1800 vehicles per day. On a daily basis, approximately 26% of vehicular traffic travelled in excess of 55 kilometres per hour.

Mc Roberts Avenue has been evaluated against the primary criteria for speed hump installation contained in the Speed Hump Policy adopted by the former City of Toronto Council at its meeting on August 21, 1997 (Clause 28 in City Services Committee Report No. 10) and it has been determined that the installation of speed humps is warranted.

Under the Policy there are five primary criteria that must be met when a street is being evaluated for speed hump installation.

PRIMARY CRITERIA:

1. The posted speed limit is 40 kilometres per hour or less.

2. The number of travel lanes (excluding bicycle lanes) is less than or equal to two.

3. There are no public transit routes operating on the street or that the street is not a primary emergency response route, unless a design acceptable to the respective emergency service is developed.

4. The number of vehicles per day on the street is between 1,000 and 8,000; and

5. The gradient on a particular section of a street being considered for speed hump installation does not exceed 5%.

In accordance with the Policy, once the primary criteria has been satisfied, a formal poll must be conducted of residents, 18 years of age and older, of households directly abutting McRoberts Avenue and also residents on side streets whose sole access is from Mc Roberts Avenue. Further, at least 60% of returned ballots must be in favour of the installation of speed humps in order to proceed with the proposal. Works staff will conduct this poll and report on the results at a deputation meeting for the project.

It should be noted that the City Clerk for the York Community Council area has been requested, subject to support from York Community Council, to permit Works staff to conduct the required poll for all of McRoberts Avenue to maintain consistency in polling procedures.

The speed hump proposal, as illustrated on the attached copy of Drawing No. 421F-5354 dated March, 1999, consists of 12 speed humps at spacings of 45 to 90 metres apart. A speed limit reduction from the present 40 kilometres per hour to 30 kilometres per hour on Mc Roberts Avenue concurrent with the installation of the speed humps would be appropriate. No alterations to the parking regulations are required nor will the number of on-street parking spaces be affected.

One of these speed humps will be located in the York Community Council area and until a uniform speed hump policy is developed for the City of Toronto it is recommended that the speed hump design and height recommended in the above noted Speed Hump Policy be utilized on the entire section of McRoberts Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road.

The recommended speed hump design is 7.5 to 10 centimetres in height and approximately four metres in length in the direction of travel. This design encourages vehicular crossing speeds of 20 to 30 kilometres per hour and there are no negative impacts to the number of parking spaces.

The intent of Council to enact a by-law to install speed humps on Mc Roberts Avenue constitutes an alteration to a public highway pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act. Consequently, the proposed changes to the roadway must be advertised and be subject to a public hearing. In the interim, consultations with emergency service agencies will be undertaken to ensure that the design and layout of speed humps does not adversely affect their operations.

This project is pre-approved in accordance with Schedule A of Class Environmental Assessment for Municipal Roads Projects.

Contact Name:

Erin Holl, 392-7771

Co-ordinator, Traffic Operations

The York Community Council also submits the following report (September 8, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To report on the results of a speed hump poll of McRoberts Avenue residents and to advise that conditions for the installation of speed humps on the subject section of McRoberts Avenue have been satisfied.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendation:

That this report be received for information.

Background:

City Council at its meeting of May 11, 12 and 13, 1999, in adopting Clause No. 58 of Report No. 7 of the Toronto Community Council and Clause No. 7 of Report No. 5 of the York Community Council, approved the installation of speed humps on the subject section of McRoberts Avenue, subject to the favourable results of polling of affected residents. The proposed enactment of the draft by-law to give effect to the above was advertised in a daily newspaper on four consecutive weeks in August and September 1999, and will be considered by Toronto Community Council and York Community Council at their meetings on September 14, 1999.

Comments:

The former City of Toronto's Speed Hump Policy requires that a poll of adult residents (18 years of age or older) be conducted on streets being considered for speed hump installations and that at least 60 percent of the valid responses to the poll endorse the speed hump proposal.

The results of the poll undertaken on McRoberts Avenue, from St. Clair Avenue West to Rogers Road in August 1999, showed that 265 of the 659 eligible voters responded to the poll (40 percent). Of these, 214 (81 percent) supported the installation of speed humps and 51 (19 percent) did not.

Accordingly, the criteria for the installation of speed humps as set out in the Speed Hump Policy, have been satisfied on the subject section of McRoberts Avenue.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Brian Holditch, Traffic Investigator, 392-7771

Director.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that a by-law in the form of the draft by-law be enacted, and that the necessary Bills be introduced in Council to give effect thereto.

The York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, that pursuant to Clause No. 5 of Report No. 8 of the York Community Council, titled "Traffic Calming Plan on Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West to St. John's Road", which was adopted without amendment by City Council at its meeting held on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, and notice with respect to the proposed enactment of the draft by-law as advertised in a daily newspaper on August 23, 30, September 7 and 13, 1999, and no one adressed the York Community Council.

The York Community Council submits the following Draft By-law from the City Solicitor:

Authority: Clause No. 5 of Report No. 8 of the York Community Council, as adopted by Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999.

Enacted by Council:

Bill No.

To authorize the alteration of Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West to St. John's Road by the implementation of a traffic calming plan.

WHEREAS notice of a proposed By-law regarding the proposed alteration of Humbercrest Boulevard was published in a daily newspaper on August 23, 30, September 7 and 13, 1999 and interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard at a public meeting held on September 14, 1999, and it is appropriate to amend the by-law to permit the alteration.

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

The following alterations are authorized:

1. The alteration of the intersection of Humbercrest Boulevard and St. John's Road, by raising the intersection to a maximum height of 80 mm as shown on the drawing attached as Schedule "A" to this By-law;

2. The alteration of Humbercrest Boulevard at a distance of 124 metres north of St. John's Road, by constructing a speed hump with a maximum height of 80 mm, together with a curbed narrowing, as shown on the drawing attached as Schedule "A" to this By-law;

3. The alteration of Humbercrest Boulevard at a distance 221 metres south of Dundas Street West, by narrowing the highway by the installation of a planter protected by curbs, together with a speed hump with a maximum height of 80 mm, as shown on the drawing attached as Schedule "A" to this By-law; and

4. The alteration of Humbercrest Boulevard at a distance of 52 metres south of Dundas Street West, by constructing a speed hump with a maximum height of 80 mm, together with a curbed narrowing, as shown on the drawing attached as Schedule "A" to this By-law.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , A.D. 1999.

________________________ ______________________________

Mayor City Clerk

The York Community Council also submits Clause No. 5 of Report No. 8 of the York Community Council, titled "Traffic Calming Plan on Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West to St. John's Road", which was adopted by City Council at its meeting held on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999:

(City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July 7, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To provide a traffic calming plan on Humbercrest Boulevard, between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road, for consideration as part of the planned pavement, sidewalk and curb reconstruction contract scheduled for 1999.

Funding Sources:

The Transportation Services Division 1999 Capital Programme includes the reconstruction of the pavement, sidewalks and curbs on Humbercrest Boulevard between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road. The incremental cost of incorporating traffic calming elements in the estimated amount of $125,000.00 can be accommodated in the 1999 Capital Programme account for Traffic Calming.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the City Solicitor be authorized to submit road alteration by-laws on Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West to St. John's Road for traffic calming purposes, described as follows:

"A total of three combination road narrowings and speed humps, on Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West to St. John's Road, and construction of a tabled intersection, with an all-way stop control at Humbercrest Boulevard and St. John's Road.";

(2) the City Clerk provide the necessary public notice to introduce the above-noted traffic calming measures;

(3) the Director of Transportation Services - District 1 report to York Community Council on any changes to traffic regulations and parking required as a result of the implementation of the Humbercrest Boulevard traffic calming plan; and

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

Background:

In conjunction with an application to permit the re-development of the lands on the southwest corner of Humbercrest Boulevard and Dundas Street West for a Loblaws supermarket and concerns expressed by local residents in the area, Council authorized a neighbourhood traffic study to be undertaken. (Clause No. 145 of Report No. 18 of the Land Use Committee, approved as amended by York Council on October 2, 1996.)

The scope of the neighbourhood traffic study included the following:

(i) determine existing traffic volumes and speeds on local roads in the vicinity of the site;

(ii) determine the existing level of traffic infiltration;

(iii) identify traffic calming measures for the neighbourhood;

(iv) monitor traffic volumes, speeds and traffic infiltration on local roads, after store opening and recommend traffic control measures, if warranted; and

(v) implement approved traffic control measures within one year of the store opening.

A contribution of $30,000.00 was made by IPCF Properties Inc. towards the study.

Comments:

As a result of the foregoing Council directive a traffic committee comprising of area residents, representatives of the developer and City Transportation and Economic Services staff was formed. A comprehensive volume and speed study on all of the local streets, within the area bordered by Dundas Street West to the north, Baby Point Road to the south, Gooch Avenue to the west and Jane Street to the east was undertaken.

Upon completion of these studies, staff presented to the traffic committee the results, which concluded speeding was an issue on each of the local streets. Staff were directed to prepare a comprehensive traffic calming plan for the study area. This plan is still subject to further review by the traffic committee and public consultation.

During this process, a new sewer was constructed on Humbercrest Boulevard between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road in 1998, with planned pavement, sidewalk and curb reconstruction work scheduled for this year. This work provides an opportunity to include traffic calming on Humbercrest Boulevard between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road in a cost-effective manner.

To facilitate the introduction of traffic calming on that portion of Humbercrest Boulevard between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road, a fast-track approach to the development of that portion of the plan is necessary. However, as noted further in this report, through the public consultation process this portion of the traffic calming plan can be refined as necessary.

Existing Conditions:

Humbercrest Boulevard traverses in a north/south direction between Dundas Street West and Humberview Road, providing two-way vehicular flow. The street is classified as a collector roadway, with a pavement width of 8.5 metres and a legal speed limit of 40 km/h. Daily traffic volumes are 1,733 vehicles, within that particular portion of the street.

An analysis of the speed data taken over a seven-day period revealed an average speed of 41.7 km/h and an operating speed (the speed at which 85 percent of the motorists travelled at or below) of 49.5 km/h, with 6 percent of these vehicles exceeding 55 km/h.

On-street parking is legally permitted on the east side of the street exclusively. A daytime parking prohibition is in effect between Dundas Street West and the southerly property limits of St. James Catholic School, between the hours 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, with a three hour maximum duration for all other times.

Traffic Calming Opportunities:

The traffic calming proposal on Humbercrest Boulevard includes the following measures:

(a) three combination speed humps with road narrowings uniformly spaced between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road;

(b) an impressed pedestrian crossing area on Humbercrest Boulevard at the intersection of Dundas Street West; and

(c) construction of a "tabled" intersection (raised 100 mm in height with suitably graded ramps approaching and departing the intersection on all road-legs) at Humbercrest Boulevard and St. John's Road, including the introduction of an all-way stop control.

It should be noted that the proposed combination speed humps and road narrowings will result in a loss of on-street parking spaces. It will be necessary to prohibit parking on either side and through each of the locations where these traffic calming measures will be constructed, to accommodate two-way vehicular traffic flow on Humbercrest Boulevard. As well, speed hump installation may result in a slower response time for emergency vehicles.

Due to the need to co-ordinate the implementation of traffic calming measures on Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West and St. John's Road with the planned reconstruction this year, there is some urgency to initiate the approval process. (As Community Council knows, once this portion of the plan is approved by Council, a four week statutory advertising period must be completed, and deputation hearing held by Community Council before Council can enact the requisite by-laws to enable the roadway alterations). Ideally, a greater level of prior public scrutiny of the plan through the traffic committee and the Councillors would have been helpful. It is important to note, however, that although there have been preliminary discussions between members of the traffic committee and my staff, public consultation including public meetings can continue concurrently, and there are several opportunities through subsequent supplementary reports to York Community Council or Council for refinements to this portion of the plan, if necessary.

The introduction of these proposed traffic calming measures on Humbercrest Boulevard from Dundas Street West and St. John's Road constitute alterations to the public highway pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act.

This project is pre-approved in accordance with Schedule A of the Class Environmental Assessment for Municipal Road Projects.

Conclusions:

The introduction of traffic calming on that portion of Humbercrest Boulevard between Dundas Street West and St. John's Road will reduce overall operating speeds and in turn improve overall public safety for both the students at St. James Catholic School, located at 230 Humbercrest Boulevard and the local residents along the street. The work can be implemented cost-effectively in conjunction with the planned reconstruction scheduled for this year.

Contact Person:

Jacqueline White

Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1

Tel: 397-5021; Fax: 392-8504

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report dated August 24, 1999 from the Director, Community Planning, West District, and for the reason that the proposal is an appropriate use of lands, that the application by T. Cornacchia for a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a three and one-half storey multiple dwelling building with four units at 164 Vaughan Road, be approved.

The York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having held a statutory public meeting on September 14, 1999, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and regulations thereunder.

The York Community Council submits the following report (August 24, 1999) from the Director, Community Planning, West District:

Purpose:

To consider a proposal to amend Zoning By-Law No. 1-83 to permit a three and one-half storey multiple dwelling building with four units.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

City funding is not required. There are no impacts on capital or operating budgets.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1) the application by T. Cornacchia be approved and the Zoning By-law No. 1-83 for the former City of York be amended generally in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law attached as Schedule 1 to this report and worded to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, subject to a Public Meeting to obtain the views of interested parties and the conditions to approval contained in this report.

Background:

On January 19, 1998, a rezoning application was submitted to permit the development of a multiple dwelling house containing four units at 164 Vaughan Road. No community information meeting has been held in relation to this application. No neighbourhood comments have been received.

Site Description and Surrounding Uses:

The 0.0336 ha (0.083 acre) vacant lot which has a frontage of 7.62 metres (25 feet) and a depth of 44.1 metres (144.75 feet) is located on the west side of Vaughan Road, south of Maplewood Avenue (see Appendix 1: Location Map)

The surrounding uses are as follows:

North: a detached house and two, two-storey mixed commercial and residential buildings

West: duplex dwelling houses beyond a rear lane

South: a two-storey detached house and seven-storey apartment building beyond

East: a development site with approval for a 13-storey continuum care residential building

Proposal:

The proposed three-storey plus basement multiple dwelling house will contain four rental, two bedroom dwelling units, (one per floor) each having an area of 133.3 m² (1,434 ft²).

The front 6.0 metre (20 feet) portion of the building provides a covered entry and internal stairway, for access to each common dwelling unit. Within this area, a garbage and storage room is provided on each floor for the adjoining unit. Setbacks for the proposed development are as follows:

Front Yard 3.5 m 11.5 ft

South Side Yard 1.2 m 4.0 ft

North Side Yard 0.6 m 2.0 ft

Rear Yard 11.5 m 37.7 ft

The front yard area will be landscaped with a stone wall and wrought iron fence entry feature. Additional landscaped open space will be provided in the rear yard adjoining the building.

The existing 3.05 metre (10 feet) wide public lane extending between Louise Avenue and Maplewood Avenue at the rear of the site will provide access to three rear yard parking spaces located abutting the lane. A walkway along the south side yard provides access between the front building entrance and the rear yard parking and open space areas. A summary of site statistics is provided below.

Official Plan: High Density Residential

Zoning:

Existing: RM2 - Residential Multiple Zone

Proposed: RM2 with site specific zoning to permit a four unit Multiple Dwelling House.

Site Area: 0.0336 ha (0.083 acres)

Units: 4

Density: 119 uph 48 upa

Gross Floor Area: 598.5 m² 6 445 ft²

Floor Space Index: 1.78

Coverage:

Building 168 m² 1814.4 ft² (50.0%)

Landscaped Area: 122.5 m² 1318.6 ft² (36.4%)

Parking Area: 45.7 m² 492.1 ft² (13.6%)

Height: 10.1 m 33 feet (three-storeys)

Parking Required: 4 spaces Parking Provided (3 spaces)

Appendix 2, 3, and 4 are the site plan, floor plans and elevations of the proposal, respectively.

Comment:

Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law:

The site is designated High Density Residential in the Official Plan. This designation allows multiple unit forms of housing with a maximum density of 3.0. Therefore, the proposal conforms to the Official Plan.

The site is zoned RM2 Residential Multiple Zone. The zoning permits the following specifically defined multiple unit residential uses; townhouses, double duplexes, double triplexes and apartment buildings. A multiple dwelling building with four units as proposed, however, is not permitted. Although a use definition reflecting multiple unit buildings containing more than three units exists in the Zoning By-law, the inclusion of a Multiple Dwelling House use and associated zoning standards, as a permitted use in RM1 and RM2 zones was inadvertently omitted when the new residential zoning districts and standards were established By-law No. 3623-97. Planning staff are reviewing other technical problems arising from recent by-law amendment relating to residential uses and zones and will address the omission noted above when a report on technical amendments is brought forward.

Agency/Department Circulation

The Toronto District Catholic School Board noted that Holy Rosary Catholic School could not accommodate any more students but Marshall McLuhan Catholic Secondary School could accommodate additional students. Comments have not been received from the Toronto District Public School Board

Works and Emergency Services has recommended that the four parking spaces originally proposal be reduced to three, as there is insufficient room for four and that any work carried out within the abutting road allowance must be approved by Works and Emergency Services.

The Buildings Section indicated that the proposal does not comply with the zoning by-law.

Toronto Hydro has indicated that the development may require an upgrade and Hydro should be contacted.

Municipal Standards has indicated it has no active files in relation to this site.

Parks Division and the Fire Division have provided no response.

Land Use and Site Design Considerations:

(a) Suitability of the Site for the Proposed Development.

The site is located on Vaughan Road which is classified as a minor arterial road in the Official Plan and is a public transit route. The Works and Emergency Services Department has not identified any concerns with respect to the capacity of the local roadway system to support the development. The site also has convenient access to local shopping along St. Clair Avenue West and to local community facilities within the area.

Planning staff have also assessed impact of this development on the abutting existing, but under developed, dwelling house uses on either side of the proposed multiple dwelling house use. As an infill project, the proposed development would be compatible and is similar to other existing low to medium rise, high coverage multiple unit and apartment house developments in proximity along the Vaughan Road corridor. In terms of height, the proposed development is within the height limit permitted in the RM2 zone for other multiple unit dwellings and is comparable in height to the abutting residential uses and other multiple unit dwellings within the area. In terms of rear yard depth the proposed development has a rear yard depth of 11.5 metres which complies with the minimum rear yard setback for similar multiple unit developments in the RM2 zone. In addition, the windows are proposed on the south side of the development and those which are opposite the southern property are windows for bathroom and bedroom areas. As such, overview to the rear yard of the property to the south will be minimized.

As part of the assessment, the applicant was asked about the possibility of assembling one or more of the adjoining uses to develop a larger project, but indicated that this was not possible. Staff has determined that since these abutting properties are identical in frontage and lot area to the application site, similar multiple dwelling house developments could be accommodated on these lots. There are no undue adverse effect impact on the adjoining uses and the prospect for the future assembly and for redevelopment of the adjoining parcels would not jeopardized.

The four unit small infill multiple residential project is appropriate in this instance, as the owner of the subject site cannot acquire additional lands for a larger development. If the small project is not allowed, the site could not be used for any type of existing defined permitted residential uses in an RM2 zone and would therefore, remain a vacant property.

(b) Parking and Access

Current Zoning By-law standards require that one on site parking space be provided for each unit, for a total of four parking spaces. The applicant originally proposed four rear yard parking space angled along the south side lot line and accessed by a 2.7 metres (feet) wide driveway. The Works and Emergency Services Department reviewed the proposal and commented that the proposed angled parking spaces would be sufficient to accommodate small cars only but that the driveway width would not provide sufficient maneuvering space. The Department concluded that the parking arrangement should be revised to provide three full size spaces perpendicular to the lane. Notwithstanding that the three spaces would not satisfy the zoning requirements, Works and Emergency Services has recommended a revised configuration providing three spaces, given the proximity of this site to public transit and the potential lower car ownership patterns of future tenants.

Planning staff are in agreement and a provision requiring three parking spaces has been included in the proposed zoning by-law for the property (See Schedule 1 - Draft Zoning By-law).

Further Planning Approvals and Agreements:

A Site Plan Control Application will be required and the applicant has been advised. Parking, access and landscaping details will be addressed through the Site Plan Approval process.

Conclusion:

This Department has evaluated the application within the context of the policies of the Official Plan and is of the opinion that the proposed use conforms with the Official Plan and is an appropriate and desirable infill development for the site. It is recommended that the application and the site specific Zoning By-law attached as Schedule 1 to this report be approved subject to a Public Meeting to obtain the views of interested parties and the following conditions to approval.

Conditions to Approval

1. The enactment of a Zoning By-law to permit the multiple dwelling house which is generally in accordance with the draft Zoning by-law attached as schedule 1 to this report.

2. Further detailed consideration of the proposal in conjunction with the Site Plan Control review and approval shall require the resolution of the following, among other matters:

(i) the payment of 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication and any other applicable development charges.

(ii) the submission of a landscaping plan detailing curbing, walkways, grading, and plant materials to the satisfaction of the Urban Planning and Development Services Department and the posting of the appropriate financial guarantee to ensure compliance with the approved plans

Contact Name:

Wendy Johncox, Senior Planner

Community Planning, West District

Tel: (416) 394-2868

Fax: (416) 394-2782

Authority: York Community Council Report No.____, Clause No._____ As adopted by Council on______________

Enacted by Council:

Bill No.

WHEREAS authority is given to Council by Section 34 of 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:

SECTION 16 - AMENDED

3. That Section 16 of Zoning By-law Number 1-83, as amended, of the former City of York, be and the same is hereby further amended by adding a new Subsection (392) as follows:

"(392) LANDS - 164 VAUGHAN ROAD

Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection 3.2.D.1,and Section 10.1 of this By-law, the lands municipally known as 164 Vaughan which lands are more particularly described in Schedule "A" hereto, may be used for the purpose of erecting and using a multiple dwelling house and accessory buildings, structures and uses subject to the following provisions:

(a) a maximum of 4 units shall be permitted;

(b) the maximum height of the building shall be 11 metres;

(c) the minimum side yard widths shall be 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 metres on the other side;

(d) the front yard setback shall be a minimum of 1 metre and a maximum of 3.5 metres;

(e) the minimum rear yard depth shall be 11 metres;

(f) a minimum of 3 parking spaces shall be provided and maintained on the lot;

(g) the maximum floor space index shall be 1.8;

(h) all other provisions of this By-law shall continue to apply except in the case where those provisions are in conflict with the provisions of the Subsection, in which case the provisions of this Subsection shall prevail."

4. Subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P13 this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date of its passing.

ENACTED and PASSED this day of , 1999.

__________________ ___________________

Mayor City Clerk

All and singular that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being in the City of Toronto(formerly City of York, in the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto) being composed of the south 7.62 metres in all of Lot 21, Plan 1322 registered in the Registry Office for the Registry Division of Toronto (No.64).

No one appeared before the York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that based on the findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report dated August 25, 1999 from the Director, Community Planning, West District, and for the reason that the proposal is an appropriate use of lands, that the application by Forest Green Homes for an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit the development of 12 pairs of semi-detached houses and a residence for a religious order which includes a workshop and retail area, be approved.

The York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having held a statutory public meeting on September 14, 1999, in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, and that appropriate notice of this meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act and regulations thereunder.

The York Community Council submits the following report (August 25, 1999) from the Director, Community Planning, West District:

Purpose:

To consider a proposal to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law No. 1-83 for the former City of York to permit the development of 12 pairs of semi-detached houses and a residence for a religious order (residence for the Sister Disciples of the Divine Master) which includes a workshop and retail area.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

City funding is not required. There are no impacts on capital or operating budgets.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1) The application by Forest Green Homes to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for the former City of York to permit a semi-detached dwellings and a live/work residence for a religious order with accessory uses be approved subject to holding a Public Meeting to obtain the views of interested parties and the conditions to approval outlined in this report;

(2) the Official Plan for the former City of York be amended in accordance with the draft Official Plan Amendment attached as Schedule 1 to this report;

(3) the Zoning By-law 1-83 for the former City of York be amended generally in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law attached as Schedule 2 to this report; and worded to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor; and

(4) In the event of approval, authority be given to appropriate staff to prepare any necessary by-laws and/or enter into any necessary agreements to facilitate the conveyance, construction and dedication of the proposed public lane, including reserves, to applicable City standards.

Background:

Site and Surrounding Area

The 8,043.4 m² (2 acre) site is located between Pine Street and Gibson Avenue, south of Lawrence Avenue West (see Appendix 1 - Location Map) and also has frontage on Wright Avenue to the south. Single detached houses are located to the east of the site and new single and semi-detached houses are being built in a subdivision to the south. A used car dealership abuts on the balance of the block to the north and industrial warehouse uses are located on the west side of Pine Street. Opposite the used car dealership, on the north side of Lawrence Avenue West, also is a residential neighbourhood. The property is separated from adjacent uses on three sides (west, south, and east) by local roads.

The subject site is vacant but was formerly part of the adjacent car dealership landholding and was used for outdoor vehicle storage. On May 5, 1998 the Committee of Adjustment granted consent to sever this site from the car dealership lands. The site was subsequently sold to the current owner who is constructing the residential subdivision development to the south.

Official Plan and Zoning

The site is designated Employment in the Official Plan and is located within the Lawrence Employment Area as identified in the Weston Secondary plan. Special Secondary Plan policies apply to permit a broad range of industrial uses and to guide development within the area. The site is zoned PE-Prestige Employment under Zoning By-law 1-83 which permits a broad range of employment uses. Both the Secondary Plan policies and PE zoning do not permit residential uses or institutional uses and therefore, amendments are required.

The applicant's solicitor, Aird and Berlis has appealed the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board on the basis that City Council has failed or neglected to make a decision with respect to the applications. To date, a hearing on the appeals has not been scheduled.

Comment:

Proposal

The applicant is proposing four pairs of semi-detached houses fronting onto Gibson Avenue and eight pairs of semi-detached houses fronting onto Wright Avenue and a live/work religious residence fronting onto Pine Street. An inverted "T" shape public lane is proposed at the rear of these uses.

The dwellings on Wright Avenue all have frontages of 5.51 metres (18 feet) and lot depths of approximately 33.50 metres (110 feet) except for the corner lots which have a frontage which is approximately up to 2 metres (6.5 feet) wider. The dwellings on Gibson Avenue, have similar frontages but lot depths are increased to 36 metres (118 feet). The northern lot abutting the car dealership rate has a wider frontage of 7.91 metres (26 feet) to provide for a 3.0 metre (10 feet) wide north side yard.

All of the dwellings would be freehold. Mutual easements totalling 1.2 metres (4 feet) wide are proposed between each pair of semi-detached dwellings for maintenance and access purposes. The applicant has been advised that the easements as well as the rear public lane and associated reserves must be conveyed as part of a part lot control and/or consent process.

Each of the dwelling units would be approximately 166.6 m² (1,793 ft²) in size, two-storeys, plus basement approximately 8 metres (26.6 feet) in height and would contain two levels of living space plus a basement level.

Residential front yards and rear yards (including garage) would be approximately 3.0 metres (10 feet) and 13 metres (42.6 feet) deep on Wright Avenue and 4.5 metres (15 feet) and 14 metres (46 feet) deep on Gibson Avenue, respectively. Landscaping would be provided in the front and rear yards and within the public boulevards along Gibson and Wright Avenues.

Two rear yard parking spaces for each semi-detached dwelling will be provided in a single detached garage and on an abutting surface parking pad, each setback 1.0 metre (3.0 feet) from the proposed public lane.

The Sisters' residence will be oriented to Pine Street and located on a 46 metre (157.3 feet) wide, 0.21 hectare (0.52 acre) lot. The residence will be three-storeys plus basement, a maximum of 15 metres (49.2 feet) in height, and will have a gross floor area of 2 385 m² (25,672 ft²). The residence will contain multiple bedrooms and a common living and dining area, as well as a workshop where religious vestment are manufactured and a retail area where the clothing is displayed for sale together with other religious goods and articles. The workshop and retail area totals 950 m² (10,226 ft²).

Vehicular access to the Sisters' residence and workshop/retail space will be from Pine Street on the north side of the lot. Parking for 13 cars including one handicapped space and one loading space will be provided at the rear of the building in an open lot. Two additional parking spaces will be provided in a detached double car garage. Access to the parking and loading area will only be provided from Pine Street.

The proposed east-west lane between Pine Street and Gibson Avenue initially will be closed at Pine Street to eliminate conflict between any truck traffic generated by the employment uses on the west side of Pine Street and residential traffic that may be entering or exiting the lane. Should the nature of the employment uses change in the future and the truck traffic decrease, the City may consider opening the lane access to Pine Street (see Appendix 2 - Site Plan and Appendix 3 - Elevations). Site statistics are provided below.

Site Statistics Table

A Public Information Meeting was held on February 3, 1999, at C.R. Marchant Public School with approximately 15 residents and local business representatives in attendance. The issues identified at the meeting Community Meeting and Neighbourhood Comments received included: increased traffic on local streets resulting from the development, extending the sidewalks on Gibson Avenue and Pine Street up to Lawrence Avenue West, the effect of existing industrial activity on the proposed residential development and potential complaints, the need to retain industrial and employment uses in the area, and this site and other vacant industrial lots are not producing much tax revenue.

A letter dated February 18, 1999, was received from the Black Creek Business Area Association expressing concerns that the proposed development will further promote the destabilization of adjoining employment properties and add to the deterioration of a long established harmony between industrial and residential use in the area. The Association strongly recommends that the application be deferred pending an external study on the viability of this area, within which this application is located, as an employment area.

Evaluation of the Change from Employment to Residential and Institutional

The site is located within the Lawrence Employment Area designated by the Weston Secondary Plan. The Weston Secondary Official Plan policies contemplate a broad range of employment uses, with the exception of noxious industrial uses and those involving a large number of trucks and semi-trailers that would be incompatible with the area. The development strategy as stated in the policies includes considering feasible development options through discussions with landowners, site users and purchasers, and subdividing larger blocks into smaller parcels.

While residential uses and institutional, live/work uses such as a house for a religious order are not permitted in employment areas, Secondary Plan Policy 6.2 provides for the consideration of applications for residential uses on lots adjacent to existing industrial uses subject to regard for (residential) buildings with adequate separation distances between the uses and appropriate landscaping so as to avoid conflict with any industrial use.

Detailed considerations to assess the introduction of residential uses in areas designated for Employment are contained in Subsection 12.8 of the general Official Plan for the former City of York. The guidelines state that land use change from employment to residential shall be based on the following considerations:

(i) location's potential for employment activities;

(ii) impact of residential, live-work development on existing employment and residential activities in the surrounding area;

(iii) environmental suitability for residential development; and,

(iv) availability of social and community services and residential amenities;

(i & ii) Assessment of the Lawrence Avenue West Employment Lands.

To evaluate the location's potential for employment activities and the impact of the proposal on existing employment in the area and in response to concerns expressed by the City's Economic Development Division and the Black Creek Business Area Association, staff requested the applicant to provide an assessment of the proposal to address these concerns. In June 1999, the applicant submitted a planning assessment prepared by The Planning Partnership. A subsequent letter was also submitted by the Planning Partnership to clarify the information and conclusions conveyed in the study.

The conclusions arrived at in the study and subsequent letter are as follows:

(i) The Lawrence Employment Area functions as a fragmented pocket of Industrial land with no identity as an employment area and with no physical or operational connection to the Black Creek Employment Area. It is not a comprehensive employment area. Moreover, the Lawrence Area Employment Area does not play a critical role in the City's future employment land use base.

(ii) The proposed residential and live/work development would not provoke changes in the existing operations or future plans for the balance of the employment uses in the area. With the exception of the application site, the properties in the area are viable for future employment uses. The proposal will not act to destabilize these remaining employment uses.

(iii) The absence of a building on the land reduces its potential to attract employment users and the lands would likely remain vacant, if the industrial designation and zoning remained in place.

(iv) The use mixture (live/work and semi-detached) and the design features of the proposed development will provide a better interface between the residential and industrial uses than the vacant parcel that exists today.

(v) The site should be converted to enable to proposed development.

The study and conclusions have been reviewed by the Urban Planning and Development Services Department, Policy and Research Section which is undertaking background work for the development of employment policies for the new City of Toronto Official Plan and by Community Planning staff. Policy and Community Planning staff agree with the study's conclusions.

(iii) Environmental Matters

The site was formerly used for a car-dealership use and soil contamination may be an issue. A Geo Environmental Investigation report prepared by Candec Consultants Limited on November 11, 1997 and submitted in support of the application concludes that the soil at the site does not contain levels of chemical contamination that are considered detrimental to its continued utilization as a residential property.

The applicant has been advised that a Record of Site Condition, which includes an affidavit from the qualified consultant and Ministry of Environment and Energy acknowledgement of receipt of the record, must be received by the City, prior to a building permit(s) being used for the residential use of the site. The Record of Site Condition as it pertains to the public lane portion of the site to be conveyed to the City, shall be subject to a peer review to confirm that the public lane lands meet the current Ministry of Environment and Energy's "Guidelines for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario". This process is in accordance with the Interim Policy and Regulation Approach for Development Applications on Contaminated Sites, which was adopted by the former City of York Council on December 11, 1996.

As a condition of Site Plan Control approval and prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the proposed development, a Record of Site Condition (which has passed an Ministry of Environment audit, if applicable) shall be submitted to the City indicating that the condition of the land, as set out in the Record, is consistent with, and suitable for, the use for which the building permit has been requested.

An Environmental Noise Analysis was prepared by Valcoustics Canada Limited on September 29, 1998, in response to CN Rail's concern, Noise sources were identified as road traffic from Lawrence Avenue West, CN Rail, the service bays at Dean Myers, Motors, and idling trucks at the warehouse facilities to the west.

The traffic noise can be mitigated by ventilation such as central air conditioning. This is only required for the live/work residential use. The CN Rail noise will be mitigated by the berm being built by the development to the south and intervening buildings on properties to the west. The consultant recommends a warning clause, as per the railway's requirement, as the site is within 300 metres of the rail right-of-way.

The stationary sources were measured to determine impact on the outdoor and indoor sound exposure for the residential uses. As a result of the noise from Dean Myers Auto Shop, the applicant has increased the side yard separation to the dwelling on the northerly most lot on Gibson Avenue, Lot 12, eliminated windows on the north façade of this dwelling, and will provide a 1.8 high noise attenuation fence on the north lot line in the rear yard to mitigate noise to Ministry of Environment standards.

The adjacent industry was also concerned about the new residents complaining about their truck traffic and noise from loading and unloading materials. To alleviate this concern, planning staff is recommending that a Warning Clause be inserted in all agreements of Purchase and Sale to advise prospective occupants of the presence of industry in the vicinity and that industrial operations will include truck traffic and loading and unloading of goods. Provision of these clauses and warning clauses as recommended in the noise study along with the acoustical fence and side wall treatment shall be secured through the Site Plan Approval process.

(iv) Availability of Social and Community Services and Residential Amenities.

The site is located with walking distance of the commercial strip along Jane Street north and south of Lawrence Avenue West, where a variety of retail facilities are available. Public transit is available on both Jane Street and Lawrence Avenue West.

The site is located in proximity to Trimbee Park which is located a few blocks to the south on Plainfield Road and which is being expanded as part of the residential infill subdivision under constructed to the south of the application site.

Public and Catholic schools are located in proximity to the site. While concerns have been expressed with school capacities as noted below, students can be accommodated.

Site Design

The site is adjacent to residential uses on its east and south perimeters. The addition of residential uses to the block will complement these existing uses as the vacant site currently creates does not provide a clearly defined interface and separation of differing land uses.

The institutional live/work Sisters' residence is situated to provide an interface and buffer for the semi-detached development from employment uses and related activity which are most prevalent on the west side of Pine Street. In addition, although one dwelling lot also is located abutting the south end of Pine Street, the dwelling is oriented south to Wright Avenue with its side wall addressing Pine Street. It is further protected by a 1.8 metre high acoustical fence extending along Pine Street to mitigate noise impact (6 feet) and screen the rear yard amenity area.

The possibility of conflict between the truck traffic and residential traffic was considered. To minimize the conflict, a barrier is proposed across the public lane at the Pine Street access. This will eliminate residential traffic exiting from the lane onto Pine Street. The latter street will still be used by some residential traffic as it connects to Lawrence Avenue West at a signaled intersection. If the ownership of the industry on the west side of Pine Street changes, and the truck traffic is reduced, the laneway can be opened for residential traffic to gain access to Pine Street.

At the request of Planning staff, to improve visibility and safety in the rear lane, the applicant has revised the proposal to replace the two car garages abutting the public lane on each lot to provide on garage and a surface parking space. In addition, the applicant has increased the side yard setback of the northern most dwelling from 1.2 metres (4 feet) to 3 metres (10 feet). The increase improves the separation from the car dealership to provide an added opportunity to further buffer the abutting use with landscaping. Details will be finalized at the Site Plan Approval stage.

A sidewalk is proposed adjacent to the site, along Wright Avenue, and the owner has agreed to have a sidewalk extend along Gibson Avenue adjacent to this site to Lawrence Avenue West. This will provide for safe pedestrian access public to transit and sidewalks on Lawrence Avenue West from the proposed development and the new subdivision on the south side of Wright Avenue. Works and Emergency Services has also requested a sidewalk along Pine Street which the applicant views as not necessary. The location and provision of sidewalks will be secured at the Site Plan Approval stage.

Agency Comments:

Fire Prevention Services and By-law Enforcement have no comment.

Works and Emergency Services require sidewalks on Gibson and Wright Avenues and Pine Street, a storm management report and a 9.15 metre right-of-way for the public lane. The additional 24 semi-detached dwellings units and the Sisters' residence/workplace will not generate enough traffic to require a traffic study. The department has not expressed concerns regarding the capacity of the existing roads to handle the traffic generated by the proposal.

Although, the Economic Development Division of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department originally commented that it had no objection, they have subsequently revised their comments to indicate concern that the proposal will destabilize an existing industrial block.

The Economic Development Division has also received and reviewed a copy of the applicant's study. The Division's comments in a memorandum dated August 10, 1999 indicates that they continue not to support the application in that they feel approval of this application will result in further rezoning and destabilization of the area. They maintain that existing industrial and commercial lands should be protected and preserved for employment uses until such time as a formal industrial/commercial policy is adopted for the City.

The Toronto District Public School Board has verbally advised that C.R. Marchant Public School and Weston Collegiate are in proximity to the proposed development.

The Toronto District Catholic School Board has advised that although the Board does not object to the above-noted application, it wishes to express concern regarding the overcrowding and lack of permanent facilities at St. Bernard Catholic School (JK-8), Chaminade, Don Bosco and Madonna Catholic Secondary Schools. Notwithstanding these concerns, Planning staff were verbally advised that students from the development will not be precluded from being accommodated within the school system.

Further Planning Approvals and Agreements

As the lands are subject to Site Plan Control, the applicant would also be required to submit detailed site plans for review and approval and enter into an agreement.

The applicant is requesting freehold tenure with the sale of individual lots to be facilitated through the consent process and/or the lifting of part-lot control. No application to either the Committee of Adjustment or the lifting of part-lot control has yet been received. Either process can be utilized to secure the public lane that would be dedicated, following conveyance to the City. In order to allow for the dedication, staff should be authorized to bring forward the necessary lane dedication by-law, at the appropriate time. The construction of the public lane including approved works and services, could be secured through an agreement as part of the Site Plan Approval of Consent processes, and authorization should be given to staff to enter into any necessary consent agreement(s).

Conclusion:

The redevelopment of the site for 12 pairs of semi-detached and a live/work Sisters' residence constitutes good planning and the appropriate development of the lands. The proposal is a logical extension and compatible with the surrounding residential uses, as it eliminates a vacant site that is not economically viable for an employment use development. Mitigation measures and design features have been incorporated in the proposal to minimize the impact of adjoining non-residential uses. The live/work Sisters' residence provides an acceptable buffer and transition between the residential uses and the existing employment uses.

Staff recommend that Council approve the application and adopt the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law to permit the development, subject to a Public Meeting to obtain the views of interested parties and the following conditions to approval.

Conditions to Approval

(1) The adoption of an Official Plan Amend to redesignate the site from Employment to Low Density Residential and Institutional in the Weston Secondary Plan in accordance with draft Official Plan Amendment No. 156 attached as Schedule 1.

(2) The enactment of an Zoning By-Law satisfactory to the City Solicitor and generally in accordance with the draft Zoning By-Law attached as Schedule 2. The draft Zoning By-Law provides for the rezoning of the site from PE-Prestige Employment to R2-Residential Zone and R3 - Residential Zone and on a site specific basis to permit the semi-detached dwelling and the religious order dwelling house with an accessory commercial use together with provisions for lot frontage, unit width, lot area, floor space index, building height, setbacks, parking, and maximum number of units.

(3) Further detailed consideration of the proposal in conjunction with Site Plan Control applications to include, among other matters:

(i) Signing of a Site Control Agreement, which shall include the provision of warning clauses in all Purchase and Sale and/or Lease Agreements, advising of industrial land and railway uses in the area, and payment of necessary fees associated with the preparation, execution and registration of same, to the satisfaction of City staff and City Solicitor.

(ii) Submission of a landscaping plan detailing fencing, curbing, grading, retaining walls, street trees, planting, noise attenuation features, to the satisfaction of City staff, and posting of an appropriate financial guarantee to ensure compliance with the approved plans.

(iii) Provision of on-site services including a storm-water management facility and the submission of a grading plan: public sidewalks; the signing of agreements; and, the posting of financial guarantees, if required by the Works Department.

(iv) The conveyance and/or provision for the conveyance of the public lane and any necessary reserves to the satisfaction of City staff and the City Solicitor.

(v) The developer to pay the prevailing development charges in effect at the time of issuance of building permits and five percent cash in lieu of parkland dedication.

(vi) Submission of a Record of Site Condition prior to the issuance of a building permit.

Contact Name:

Wendy Johncox, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner

Community Planning, West District

Tel: (416) 394-2868; Fax: (416) 394-2782

2.1 INTRODUCTION

All of this part of the Amendment, consisting of the following map and text constitutes Amendment Number 156 of the Official Plan for the former City of York Planning Area. The Plan is hereby amended as follows:

2.2 MAP CHANGES

Schedule D-3 (District Plan 3) is amended by changing the designation of the lands known as the rear of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West shown on Schedule A to this amendment from Employment to Low Density Residential and Institutional in accordance with Schedule "A" attached to this Amendment.

2.3 TEXT CHANGES

The following Site Specific Policy is hereby added as Section 21.3(n):

21.3(n) Notwithstanding Section 21.10. C. 6.3, the lands known as the rear of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West may be used for Low Density Residential uses abutting on Gibson Avenue and Wright Avenue and for an Institutional use with ancillary commercial uses abutting on Pine Street.

2.4 IMPLEMENTATION

The policy established by this Amendment will be implemented through an amendment to Zoning By-law No. 1-83.

Authority: York Community Council Report No.__, Clause No.__

As adopted by Council on ______________

Enacted by Council:

Bill No.

WHEREAS authority is given to Council by Section 34 of 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:

SECTION 6 - AMENDED

1. That Section 6 of Zoning By-law Number 1-83, as amended, of the former City of York, be and the same is hereby further amended by adding the following Subsection (63):

"(63) MAP 1

By changing the area shown on District Map 1, municipally known as the lands at the rear of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West which lands are more particularly described in Schedule "A" hereto from a PE District to an R2 District and from a PE District to an R3 District as shown on Schedule "B" hereto and by amending District Map 1 accordingly."

SECTION 16 - AMENDED

2. That Section 16 of Zoning By-law Number 1-83, as amended, of the former City of York, be and the same is hereby further amended by adding a new Subsection (393) as follows:

"(393) LANDS - REAR OF 1945 LAWRENCE AVENUE WEST

Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection 8.3(a) and Subsections 9.2 and 9.3(a) of this By-law, the lands described in Schedule "A" may be used for the purpose of semi-detached houses and one house of a religious order and accessory uses thereto, subject to the following provisions:

(a) for the semi-detached houses:

(i) a maximum floor space index of 0.94;

(ii) a minimum side yard width of 0.6 metres save and except for the northerly most semi-detached lot which shall have a minimum north side yard width of 3.0 metres;

(iii) a minimum rear yard depth of 6.0 metres;

(iv) a minimum lot frontage of 5.5 metres;

(v) a maximum height of building of 11.0 metres with not more than 3 storeys;

(vi) a minimum front yard setback of 3 metres

(vii) semi-detached houses shall be located on lots which front onto Wright Avenue and Gibson Avenue;

(viii) vehicular access to the parking facilities shall be from the public lane at the rear of the lots;

(b) for the house of a religious order:

(i) a maximum floor space index of 1.15;

(ii) notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection 3.2.1 C.1 and Subsection 3.2.1 D.1 a minimum of 12 parking spaces, including 1 handicapped parking space;

(iii) a maximum height of building of 15 metres with not more than 3 storeys;

(iv) a minimum side yard width of 6 metres;

(v) a minimum rear yard depth of 20 metres

(vi) a minimum front yard setback of 4 metres

(vii) the use hall be located on a lot which fronts onto Pine Street and which has a minimum lot frontage of 45 metres;

(viii) vehicular access shall be limited to one access point on Pine Street;

(ix) a maximum ancillary commercial and workshop gross floor area of 950 m²;

(c) a portion of the lands at the rear of the semi-detached lots and the house of the religious order shall be conveyed to the City and dedicated by City By-law for a minimum 9.15 metre wide public lane. A 0.3 metre wide portion of land across the terminus of the public lane at Pine Street and the north limit of the lands shall be conveyed to the City for reserve purposes.

(d) All other provisions of this By-law shall continue to apply except in the case where those provisions conflict with the provisions of this subsection, in which case the provisions of this Subsection shall prevail."

3. Subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P13 this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date of its passing.

ENACTED and PASSED this day of , 1999.

__________________________ _______________________

Mayor City Clerk

Part of Block A, Registered Plan M-304, City of Toronto (formerly City of York in the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto) being composed of Part 2 on Reference Plan of Survey No. 66R-17985 deposited in the Land Titles Division of Toronto (No. 66).

The York Community Council also submits the following communication (September 2, 1999) from the Planning Assistant, CN Rail:

We have reviewed your letter dated August 24, 1999 regarding the above noted application and have the following comments:

1. The Owner is required to insert the following warning clause in all development agreements, offers to purchase, agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease and include in a Noise Impact Statement:

"Warning: Canadian National Railway Company or its assigns or successors in interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres from the land the subject hereof. There may be alterations to or expansions of the rail facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that the railway or its assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CNR will not be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid right-of-way."

2. The Owner is required to engage a consultant to undertake an analysis of noise and vibration and provide abatement measures necessary to achieve the maximum level limits set by the Ministry of Environment and Canadian National.

We request receiving notice of the Amendment being approved.

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (416) 217-6961.

The York Community Council also submits the following communication (September 14, 1999) from Ms. Ella Jackson, Chair, Black Creek Business Area Association:

The Black Creek Business Area Association is once again before you voicing our concern about further rezoning of Employment Property to Residential Use. We are here to highlight the implications of allowing the rezoning of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West and what its effects will be on the community of York and the City of Toronto as a whole.

Socio-Economic:

It is incomprehensible why, at a time the City is having trouble meeting its fiscal responsibilities, the planning department is allowing the industrial tax base to shrink even by fractional amounts. Traditionally, employment property has been responsible for 60% of the revenue generated through property taxes. This 60% is being distributed over fewer and fewer businesses which translates into a larger tax burden on each individual business. These taxes collected through employment property taxes are used to support new social and recreational facilities and services. Over the last six months the York Community Council has heard requests and arguments that this Community is far behind most other parts of the City in providing these items. How is this area expected to become an equal beneficiary of services if you continue to eliminate the major source of revenue needed to achieve this goal? Revenue generated through residential property tax is significantly lower than that from employment use. Relying only on residential property tax to provide these services is unrealistic. Residential property taxes will eventually have to increase dramatically to compensate for future loss of business property taxes. The other side of the coin is, residential use is a higher drain on municipal resources. It is clearly the Employment uses portion of the property tax pool that is making a major contribution towards the services and facilities groups such as Arts York, Art Starts, the York Community Alliance and the York-Weston Players' are requesting from the City. It is the Employment Tax base that will eventually pay for and maintain these facilities.

Process:

The Association is very concerned about a process which requires a residential developer to pay for and administer an Employment Area Impact Study for the purpose of proving their development will have no impact on existing or future employment. This is similar to having a defendant act as his own expert witness during a trial. As predicted, the study says just that. If the Black Creek Business Area Association had the funds, an equally authoritative study could have been produced to provide findings 100% contrary to those of the Planning Partnership's study. Local businesses located on the adjoining properties were asked to contribute funds towards the study. This was not a realistic approach. The business located across Pine Street is moving so it is no real concern of theirs to participate in the study. The businesses in the Lawrence Business Park were asked to contribute to the study. They have been repeatedly hit with increases in property taxes from the new CVA, increased water and electrical rates from the City's amalgamation and they are spending thousands of dollars on property improvements towards participating in the area clean-up and living fence project aimed at making this area safer and better for those living and working in the Lawrence Avenue and Weston Road area. When have these businesses contributed enough towards the well being of this area? When does the City step in and say we value your contributions to the area and we recognize your importance in the community?

Current Impact

The Black Creek Business Area Association was never contacted by the consultants for information about the area and its businesses or to enquire about current area market trends. If they had, they would have discovered that:

1. Employment property is in short supply locally.

2. Investors interested in developing the five vacant acres in front of the Lawrence Business Park had submitted firm offers to the vendor.

3. An investor interested in 4 Pine Street and 20 Pine Street lost interest after learning about the rezoning application for this property.

4. Over 800 new jobs over the last two years have been generated in the Black Creek Business Area. We have hard economic facts about the impact this application is having on the area before development has even started.

The Association has shown the district planning staff, including the District Director, Karen Bricker, pictures of the undesirable interaction of tractor trailer truck traffic on residential streets. These are copies of the photos for the record. Notice the truck stuck in the intersection of Wright Avenue and Pine Street.

1945 Lawrence Avenue West is best served as a buffer or transition property blending existing employment use with existing residential use. We have offered to work with the developer and the owners of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West to find a suitable employment use for the whole site yet our offers have been declined.

Conclusion

The City is finding it harder each month to attract new businesses into the City and to convince existing ones to stay. Her is an opportunity to maintain our much needed employment property inventory. It is time to protect the remaining inventory of light industrial and large retail 5 acre blocks of land and acknowledge its importance to the socio-economic well being of our city.

Toronto's Economic Development has done so. The Parks and Recreation Department has done so. It is time for the Planning Department to stand up and draw the line and say employment use is important to the well being of this area and we can no longer afford to lose any more employment supporting property to residential rezoning.

(The abovementioned photographs are on file in the Clerk's Division, York Civic Centre.)

The York Community Council also submits the following communication (undated) from Ms. Ella Jackson, Chair, Black Creek Business Area Association to the Manager, Community Planning, West District:

The Black Creek Business Area Association once again would like to voice our concern regarding the rezoning application for the rear two-acre section of 1945 Lawrence Avenue West. Please find attached copies of past correspondence regarding this issue.

As stated in the first letter dated January 1998, the application and subsequent approval of a severance of this property designated no use to this site. The Association stated their concerns that further loss of buffer employment properties would have a negative effect not only on the existing surrounding businesses, but also on enticing future business to this area. Acting as good neighbours, the Association has also voiced concerns relating to the effect that existing and future business will have on residential use if a buffer zone is eliminated. The attached memo dated July 20, 1999 describes just this point.

The Black Creek Business Area Association also questions the validity of an Employment Area Viability Study paid for and conducted by a residential developer interested in developing a property within the study area. Given the resources, our Association could have produced an equally authoritative report recommending the opposite outcome to that of the developer's study. The proper solution would have been to require the developer to pay the City to hire an independent consultant and for the City to provide a set of Terms of Reference created by the community (including the developer). This would have produced a less biased report which would have been more acceptable to the whole community. Our recommendation is that a more equitable process be established that takes the communities interests into account first.

As stated previously, the proposed rezoning application goes against the mandate of the Black Creek Business Area Association. Our status limits us to only voicing a concern about this application. It is important to remember that the Black Creek Business Area Association was created, through a resolution of Council, for the purpose of protecting employment land from just this situation.

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

- Representative from Forest Green Homes; and

- Ms. Ella Jackson, Black Creek Business Area Association, and submitted a brief in regard thereto.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that with regard to the Cedarvale Traffic Calming Survey Results, that:

(1) Items 1 to 5 in Table 1, Supporting Traffic Calming, be approved;

(2) the respective By-laws regarding Items 1 to 9 in Table 2, Opposed to Traffic Calming, be repealed;

(3) Item 10 in Table 2, Opposed to Traffic Calming, be approved;

(4) Items 1 and 2 in Table 3, Marginal Support for Traffic Calming, be approved;

(5) the City Solicitor be authorized to prepare road alteration by-laws for the individual street sections, where appropriate, and that public notice be given respecting those locations;

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (September 10, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To provide results of the survey conducted of Cedarvale Community residents on various street blocks to determine majority support and preference to complete construction of the Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with the construction of the preferred traffic calming measures for each of the individual street sections supported by the majority of the municipally addressed property owners, estimated at $110,000.00, are contained in the Works and Emergency Services Department 1999 Capital Budget;

The funds associated with the construction of the preferred traffic calming measures on those individual street sections, where the responses were received from less than 50 percent of those polled, but the support from those who did respond is high, estimated at $60,000.00, are contained in the Works and Emergency Services Department 1999 Capital Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1. road alteration by-laws be prepared and public notice be given, for those individual street sections listed in Table 1 of the Appendix where the majority of municipally addressed property owners responded showing support for the preferred traffic calming measure; and

2. the York Community Council decide whether to proceed with the installation of the traffic calming plan on those individual street sections, listed in Table 3 of the Appendix where the number of responses received was not a majority, but the support for traffic calming is high, and if the decision is positive, road alteration by-laws be prepared and public notice given respecting these locations.

Background:

York Community Council, at its meeting of January 20, 1999, approved the following recommendation:

"That prior to the installation of the remaining pinch points and speed humps approved in the Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan, that the residents be polled on a block by block basis, requesting that they indicate their preference for either speed humps or pinch points on their respective blocks." (Clause No. 4(d) of Report No. 1 of theYork Community Council).

Comments:

The Cedarvale Traffic Management Plan was developed by a citizen task force, through an extensive public consultation process. The Traffic Plan consisted of numerous traffic calming measures aimed at reducing through traffic, reducing vehicular travel speeds, and improving pedestrian and cycling environments, to form a cohesive setting.

As a result the former City of York Council on June 25, 1997, approved the recommendations contained within the Cedarvale Community Traffic Plan within their jurisdictional control. Council further recommended the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto also approve those recommendations within their jurisdictional control, which was subsequently approved.

In late 1997, construction commenced on Phase I, which involved constructing twenty-one of the total forty traffic calming measures approved. For Council's information, it was the decision of both the citizen traffic committee and the local Councillor to choose and request those twenty-one locations, within the allocated Capital Budget.

Phase II involves completing the remaining nineteen individual traffic calming measures, subject to results of a survey undertaken on an individual street block basis revealing majority support.

The attached Appendix details the results of the residents survey for each individual street section and the preferred traffic calming measure, according to resident owners, non-resident owners and tenants. The survey results have been divided into three categories. It was concluded that traffic calming is supported if more than 50 percent of property owners responded and more than 50 percent of those responses were favourable (Table 1). It was concluded that residents were opposed to traffic calming if 50 percent. of the responses were not favourable whether a majority of property owners responded or not (Table 2). However, there were two street sections where less than 50 percent. of property owners responded, but of those responses, there was a significant majority that were favourable (Table 3). These were considered to be "marginally supported" and it is requested that York Community Council provide direction on whether the traffic calming measures should be installed at these locations.

Conclusions:

The survey results have been categorized as follows:

Supporting Traffic Calming

6. Camberwell Road between Eglinton Avenue West and Dewbourne Avenue;

2. Dewbourne Avenue between Westover Hill Road and Menin Road;

3. Dewbourne Avenue and Peveril Hill North;

4. Strathearn Road between Ava Road and Westover Hill Road;

5. Strathearn Road between Chiltern Hill Road and Bathurst Street.

Opposed to Traffic Calming

1. Avenal Drive between Peveril Hill South and Bathurst Street;

2. Dewbourne Avenue between Flanders Road and Westover Hill Road;

3. Dewbourne Avenue between Camberwell Road and Rostrevor Road;

4. Flanders Road between Eglinton Avenue West and Dewbourne Avenue;

5. Glen Cedar Road between Markdale Avenue and Strathearn Road;

6. Rostrevor Road between Eglinton Avenue West and Dewbourne Avenue;

7. Strathearn Road between Westover Hill Road and Warwick Avenue;

8. Strathearn Road between Markdale Avenue and Glen Cedar Road;

9. Strathearn Road and Glen Cedar Road;

10. Westover Hill Road between Eglinton Avenue West and Dewbourne Avenue.

Marginal Support for Traffic Calming

1. Chiltren Hill Road between Eglinton Avenue West and Dewbourne Avenue;

2. Glen Cedar Road between Eglinton Avenue West and Dewbourne Avenue.

Based on the survey results, the preferred traffic calming measures should be installed on those individual streets where there was support for traffic calming. Also, York Community Council is requested to decide whether the traffic calming measures should be installed on those individual streets where the number of responses received was clearly not a majority, but these responses did indicate support for traffic calming.

Contact Person:

Jacqueline White

Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1

397-5021

392-8504 (fax)

Survey Results

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1) the 25 applications for additional off-premise sign locations submitted by Pattison Signs as noted in the report dated August 17, 1999 from the Manager, Community Planning, West District, be approved;

(2) the applications by Pattison Signs for another 2 off-premise signs at the following locations, be approved:

- 351 Silverthorn Avenue Canadian Legion at Silverthorn and Rogers Road

- 501 Rogers Road Coffee Time;

(3) the former City of York Sign By-law No. 3369-79 be amended to increase the current maximum number of off-premise sign locations from 150 to 177 to permit the abovementioned 27 additional locations;

(4) the notice be given for a public meeting to consider the proposed amendment to the Sign By-law; and

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

The York Community Council submits the following report (August 17, 1999) from the Manager, Community Planning, West District:

Purpose:

To consider amending the maximum number of off-premise sign location set out in former City of York Sign By-law No. 3369-79, as amended to permit a number of Sign Permit applications filed by the Pattison Sign Group.

Financial Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There is no impact on capital or operating budgets.

Recommendations:

It is recommend that:

(1) a decision be made on whether or not to amend the Sign By-law to increase the current maximum number of off-premise sign locations from 150 to 175 to permit 25 additional locations requested by Pattison Signs as noted in this report and in the event of approval authority be given to staff to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Background:

Former City of York Sign Review Committee

Prior to amalgamation, in the City of York, the maintenance of Sign By-law 3369-79, as amended and the processing of sign by-law variance applications was shared among the Building, Planning and Economic Development and Legal departments. All sign permit applications requiring variance from the Sign By-law were processed through the Sign By-law Committee. The three member Sign By-law Committee was appointed by the former City of York Council and consisted of the Director of Policy and Administration, Planning and Economic Development Department, the Assistant City Solicitor, Legal Department and the Chief Building Official, Building Department. Recommendations of the Committee relating to Sign By-law matters and variance application were reported through Administrative Services Committee to City of York Council for decision.

Following amalgamation, the City Solicitor and the Chief Building Official for the former City of York, were redeployed and the Sign By-law Committee ceased to function. The process for dealing with sign by-law variance applications in the absence of a Sign Review Committee is the subject of discussions between the Community Planning Division and the Building Division and will be reported on at a later date. On a city-wide perspective a report to North York Community Council has among other matters identified the need for deciding on the harmonization, administration and service delivery relating to Sign By-law Matters. Knowing what decisions are made in relation to the timeframe for the harmonization of the Sign By-laws of the former municipalities, may assist in helping to resolve how the processing of sign by-law variance applications should be undertaken in the short and long term.

Outstanding Sign By-law Variance Applications

A small number of other applications for minor variances to the sign by-law filed by individual owners are outstanding. These will be reviewed and reported on following discussions and resolution of responsibilities for the processing of sign by-law variance as noted above. The majority of the outstanding applications are in regard to the location of additional off premise sign locations with a combination of single and double faced signs resulting in a total of 40 additional signs. The sign by-law limits the number of off-premise sign locations to a maximum of 150. Pattison Signs has filled applications to permit 25 additional off-premise sign locations and has requested that these applications be forwarded to Community Council for decision.

The applications for additional off-premise sign locations are as follows:

Property/owner Location No.of Signs

CP Railway right-of-way N/W corner of Dundas St. W. at Scarlett Rd 1 (GS,1)

CP Railway right-of-way West side Runnymede Rd. at Raybould Ave 2 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way N/W corner of Dundas St W. at Jane St 1 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way N/E corner of Weston Rd at Rogers Rd 4 (GS,5)

CP Railway right-of-way N. side Eglinton Ave W., west of Black Creek Dr 1 (GS,1)

CP Railway right-of-way E. side Jane Street at overpass north of Weston Rd. 1 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way W. side Jane Street at overpass north of Weston Rd. 1 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way South side of Oak St., east of Weston Rd 1 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way North side of Oak St., east of Weston Rd 1 (GS,2)

CN Railway right-of-way South side of Castlefeild Ave.,. east of Kincourt St. 1 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way South side of St. Clair Ave. W, east of Jane St 4 (GS,8)

CP Railway right-of-way South side of St. Clair Ave. W, east of Scarlett Rd 2 (GS,2)

CP Railway right-of-way S. side of St. Clair Ave. W., west side of Jane St. 1 (GS,1)

2658 St. Clair Ave W./O. Mann N/W cor. of St. Clair Ave. W. at Batavia Ave. 1 (RS,2)

1650 Weston Rd./G.Y. Kim West side Weston Rd., north of Denison Rd. W. 1 (RS,2)

55 Denison Rd. E./L. Fruitman S/W corner of Jane St. at Denison Rd. E. 2 (GS,4)

Total 25 (40)

(GS) denotes ground sign (RS) denotes roof sign (2) denotes number of sign faces

Comment:

In view of the large number off-premise sign applications, Community Council may wish to consider amending the Sign By-law to raise the limit on locations in order that these application be approved. The former City of York Council in the past has resisted increasing the cap on off-premise signs. Increasing the cap to permit these additional locations will provide one of the major sign companies with more sign locations within the former City of York to compete with other major sign companies with long established existing off-premise sign locations. Favourable consideration of such a request may prompt other similar applications from competitor sign companies. There is no planning basis for increasing the cap at this time particularly in light of the pending review and expected harmonization of the existing sign by-laws for application on a city-wide basis.

Conclusions:

Community Council should decide on whether or not to amend the Sign By-law to increase the current maximum number of off-premise sign locations from 150 to 175 to permit 25 additional locations (total 40 sign faces) requested by Pattison Signs as noted in this report and in the event of approval authority be given to staff to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Contact Name:

L. Moretto, Manager

Community Planning, West District

Tel: 394-2610; Fax: 394-2782

- Mr. Ron Barr, Pattison Signs, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, received this Clause, as information.)

(a) New Practices for the Review of Development Applications.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) recommended to the Planning and Transportation Committee, that:

(a) with respect to the process for community consultation, that the community meetings be chaired alternately by the Ward Councillors if the process is implemented during this current term of Council;

(b) the Ward Councillor be responsible for chairing the community meetings, during the next term of Council;

(c) regarding the Proposed Site Plan Approval Process, that the Ward Councillors notify planning staff of their absences or unavailability, to allow the Councillors to submit comments on their return and to "bump-up" the issue to the Community Council, if necessary.

(2) requested the Ward Councillors to submit their individual comments to the Planning and Transportation Committee for consideration at its October 4, 1999 meeting; and

(3) held a public meeting regarding this matter.

The York Community Council had before it the following communications:

(i) (July 30, 1999) from the City Clerk, Planning and Transportation Committee forwarding the report (June 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services regarding New Practices for the Review of Development Applications, which the Planning and Transportation Committee referred to the Community Councils for review and comment back to the Committee for consideration on October 4, 1999 and requested that each Community Council schedule public deputations on this report;

(ii) (August 25, 1999) Administrator, Planning and Transportation Committee, forwarding a memorandum (July 30, 1999) from Councillor John Filion, Ward 10, on suggested amendments to the planning process; and

(iii) (September 1, 1999) from the Director of Government Relations, Greater Toronto Home Builders' Association, expressing the Association's support in principle for the commitments in the report (June 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, to implement best practices across the new City; advising that there are specific concerns and further suggestions for improvement and believe that the report "as a complete package" should be approved by the Community Council, the Committee and finally City Council, with further suggested improvements flowing from the Urban Development Roundtable; and submitting comments for consideration on Draft Plan and Site Plan Approvals, Subdivision Approval, Site Plan Control and Streamlining the Approvals Process; and recommending that the Community Council approve these needed improvements to the process.

- Ms. Marjorie Sutton, Mt. Dennis Community Association, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

(b) Proposed Road Classification System.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) recommended to the Works Committee that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to review the classification of Winona Drive between Eglinton Avenue West and Vaughan Road, for redesignation as a Local Road;

(2) requested that Works and Planning staff also take into consideration the comments expressed by the deputant; and

(3) received the following report:

(i) (July 14, 1999) from the City Clerk advising that the Works Committee on July 14, 1999 concurred with the recommendation in the report (June 29, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services wherein information was submitted on the:

1. consolidation of the various road classification systems inherited from the amalgamating municipalities into a single, consistent system;

2. classification of roads in Toronto according to the new road classification system;

3. clarification on the respective roles and responsibilities of Community Councils and various Standing Committees with respect to traffic operations policies in the context of the new classification system; and

4. phasing in of the delegation of responsibilities of Community Councils and Standing Committees with respect to these matters;

and recommending that this report be referred to all Community Councils for consideration and that their comments be submitted to the Works Committee for consideration at its November 3, 1999 meeting.

(ii) (September 14, 1999) from Ms. Madeline McDowell, member, Pedestrian Committee, advising that the new proposed road classification system is an extremely important document; that it defines the relationship between traffic operations and planning matters, traffic operations and the urban living environment and traffic operations and the natural environment; that the report is written from the perspective of motor vehicular operations rather than the broader prospect of all traffic including pedestrians yet pedestrians should be a significant factor in the word "traffic"; that 52% of traffic fatalities in the last 20 years have been pedestrians; that the area of the report dealing with PTO's perpetuates the absence of pedestrian safety as a priority in traffic operation; that Toronto's new Official Plan, still in the making, has stated goals of making the City more livable, walkable, environmentally responsible, diverse, integrated and equitable; that the proposed focus on traffic operations does not support this holistic approach; that roads are a component of streets; and that the classification policy is a planning issue and should be considered in that context; that the issue of exhaust fumes and the non-vehicular traffic components are not evident; the report is geared to further intensification of automobile use and it facilitation and it needs to be examined in a complete planning perspective with a closer look at automobile alternatives and networks for them, and at neighbourhoods, which the report does acknowledge, but perceives again largely from an operations perspective; that street planning must be the key and should correspond to the urban environment, land use and architecture; that while there is a great deal that is good in this report, it is weak in the policy area which planning would strengthen; that Works cannot be isolated from Planning; the City is not a grid on spiderweb but a living and working environment for three million people.

(c) Introduction of Overnight Permit Parking on the South Side of Weatherell Street between Jane Street and Rivercrest Road Ward 28, York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having requested the City Clerk to undertake a formal poll of the residents of Weatherell Street between 36.6 metres west of Jane Street and Rivercrest Road, to determine support for the implementation of overnight permit parking, as noted in recommendation (1) of the following report:

(August 26, 1999) from the Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services, District 1, responding to a request from Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczyinski, on behalf of an area resident, for a report on the introduction of overnight permit parking on the south side of Weatherell Street, between 36.6 metres west of Jane Street and Rivercrest Road, on a street name basis, to operate during the hours of 12:01 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., 7 days a week; and advising that Weatherell Street, between 36.6 metres west of Jane Street and Rivercrest Road, operates two-way traffic with a pavement width, which, varies between 7.3 metres and 8.5 metres that is presently regulated by the unsigned three-hour parking restriction on the south side of the street; that a field survey has determined that there are eight (8) potential on-street permit parking spaces available on the south side of Weatherell Street, between 36.6 metres west of Jane Street and Rivercrest Road; and recommending that:

(1) the City Clerk be directed to conduct a formal poll of the residents of Weatherell Street, between 36.6 metres west of Jane Street and Rivercrest Road, to determine support for the implementation of overnight permit parking;

(2) the City Clerk report the results of the poll to the York Community Council; and

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

(d) Request for Traffic Calming on Royal Street Ward 27, York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(August 25, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, responding to a request from the York Community Council for a report on the feasibility of introducing traffic calming on Royal Street; and advising that Royal Street is a short dead-end street traversing in a north/south direction between Henrietta Street and its northerly terminus; that the street is classified as a local road within the City's road network providing two-way vehicular traffic with a legal speed limit of 50 km/h; that currently on-street parking is exclusively permitted on the east side of the street with parking unsigned three-hour regulation at all times and a permit restriction between 12:00 midnight and 6:00 a.m.; that volume and speed studies were undertaken and according to the results the street carries an average daily combined total of 344 vehicles per day (175 northbound and 169 southbound) which are minimal for a local residential area, understanding the fact that the street provides exclusive access to those residents residing there; that an analysis of the speed data taken over a recent seven-day period revealed an average speed of 16.6 km/h for northbound and 15.1 km/h for southbound with a daily operating speed (the speed at which 65% of the motorists travelled at or below) of 29.4 km/h for northbound and 27.0 km/h for southbound, respectively; that these study results quantitatively show speed is not a problem on Royal Street and again reflect the local nature of the street; and concluding that based on the study results and the local characteristics of the street, speed is not an issue on Royal Street, but in fact motorists are travelling well below the legal speed limit of 50 km/h; that the introduction of traffic calming would provide no benefit and is not recommended; and recommending that this report be received.

(e) New Development Applications for York District.

The York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(August 18, 1999) Director, Community Planning, West District, providing information on new development applications received within Wards 27 and 28 of the West Community Planning District (former City of York), and that advising that since the beginning of 1999 the number of applications received is as follows:

Official Plan Amendment 2 Plan of Condominium 0

Zoning By-law Amendment 5 Part-lot Control Exemption 0

Site Plan Approval 9

and that the following new applications have been received since our last report to Community Council:

1. ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT

File No.: R99-005 Date Received: July 28,1999 Planner: Philip Carvalhinho

Applicant: Joseph Stepien

Owner: Teresa Cieciara & Joseph Stepien

Address: 2409 Eglinton Avenue West and 4 Venn Crescent Ward 27

Proposal: To amend area-specific By-law to permit retail uses and structural additions.

Approval Process: City Council

2. APPLICATION: SITE PLAN APPROVAL

File No.: SPA99-007 Date Received: July 20, 1999 Planner: Philip Carvalhinho

Applicant: Erwin J. Kurtz

Owner: 1212884 Ont. Ltd.

Address: 870 Jane Street Ward 27

Proposal: Proposed free standing donut shop and drive-through

Approval Process: Delegated to Director of Community Planning

File No.: SPA99-008 Date Received: August 17, 1999 Planner: Philip Carvalhinho

Applicant: Glenn Piotrowski Architect

Owner: The Lambton Golf and Country Club Limited

Address: 100 Scarlett Road Ward 27

Proposal: To construct two new buildings for club house and pro shop uses

Approval Process: Delegated to Director of Community Planning

File No.: SPA99-009 Date Received: August 19, 1999 Planner: Al Rezoski

Applicant: Dennis Warrilow Architect Limited

Owner: Access Development Inc.

Address: 21 Oak Street Ward 27

Proposal: To develop a self storage facility

Approval Process: Delegated to Director of Community Planning

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

Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Dedication.

The York Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(August 6, 1999)from the City Clerk, enclosing copy of Clause No. 1 contained in Report No. 2 of The Planning and Transportation Committee, headed "Further Report on Proposed Use of Funds Generated from Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Dedication", which was adopted, as amended, by City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999.

(g) Harmonized Residential Water Service

Connection Repair Program.

The York Community Council reports having received the following report:

(June 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, reporting on the development of a strategy to upgrade the private portions of residential water service connections at no cost to homeowners, and to provide an estimate of the cost to do so; and advising that the cost to the City to upgrade the private portions of residential water service connections in conjunction with the Residential Water Service Connection Repair Program within the street allowance is estimated to be approximately $10.96M annually; providing information on the estimated number and costs for an annual program of replacing the private portion of water services at the City's cost (extending from the street line to the meter) using the Water Service Repair eligibility criteria; and recommending that the report be received.

(h) Community Skating at Phil White Arena Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) supported in principle the need for additional rink time for community skating and requested the Director, Parks and Recreation, West District, to report on this matter; and

(2) received the following communication:

(June 21, 1999) from Councillor J. Mihevc advising that his office has received numerous complaints regarding the limited availability of community skating time at the Phil White Arena; that for the past couple years the only rink time available for public skating is on Sundays from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m.; that residents are requesting that time be also made available on Saturday afternoons and/or one evening during the week; and requesting that staff investigate and report on the feasibility of this request.

(i) Display of Merchandise on the Public Sidewalks.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Acting Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards, to report on the introduction of interim measures to strengthen York's by-laws; and

(2) received the following communication:

(July 5, 1999) from Councillor J. Mihevc advising that York's by-laws regarding the display of merchandise on the public sidewalks are weak; and requesting that staff examine the need for interim measures to strengthenYork's by-laws on a City-wide basis.

(j) Direction of Traffic on Alameda Avenue between Eglinton Avenue W. and Belvidere Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the City Clerk to undertake a poll of the residents on Alameda Avenue between Eglinton Avenue West and Belvidere Avenue to determine interest in two-way traffic on this section of the street, or in maintaining the status quo which is two-way from Eglinton Avenue West to Strader Avenue and one-way south from Strader Avenue to Belvidere Avenue; and

(2) received the following communication:

(July 27, 1999) from Councillor J. Mihevc advising that residents on Alameda Avenue between Eglinton Avenue West and Belvidere Avenue have expressed interest in changing the direction of traffic on Alameda Avenue; and requesting that the residents be polled on the following options:

(1) one-way south from immediately south of Eglinton Avenue West to Vaughan Road;

(2) two-way from Eglinton Avenue West to Belvidere Avenue; and

(3) maintaining the status quo which is two-way from Eglinton Avenue West to Strader Avenue and one-way south from Strader Avenue to Belvidere Avenue.

(k) Tree in front of 198 Winnett Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Director, Parks and Recreation, West District, to report next day on the cost of removing the tree in front of 198 Winnett Avenue, including its caliper, health and age, and to bring forward the policy regarding Tree Removal and Replacement; and

(2) received the following communication:

(August 5, 1999)from Councillor J. Mihevc advising that the tree in front of 198 Winnett Avenue is an undesirable specie dripping sap on the car parked on the front yard parking space; that staff have indicated that the tree is healthy; that the owner is willing to accept a larger caliper tree on the front lawn and to pay part of the cost; and requesting that the Community Council support this proposal.

(l) Concerns regarding Activities Underneath the Glencedar Bridge - Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Director, Parks and Recreation, West District, to:

(a) take the necessary action as required, as soon as possible, to replace the existing chain link fence underneath the Glencedar bridge, with iron bars or other material in order to secure the area and prevent accessibility;

(b) contact the appropriate social service agency in the event of homeless persons using the area; and

(2) received the following communication:

(August 11, 1999) from Councillor J. Mihevc advising that the fenced area below the Glencedar Bridge is being used as a camp area for illegal activities; and requesting that iron bars or similar permanent barriers be installed as soon as possible.

(m) Naming of New Park on Alberta Avenue Ward 28, York Eglinton.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, to report on naming the park on Alberta Avenue (St. Clair Avenue West and Oakwood Avenue area) "Roseneath Park";

(2) supported the name "Roseneath Park" in principle, subject to a positive report from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism;

(3) requested Councillor Mihevc to provide staff with the results of the poll undertaken of the area residents regarding the naming of the park; and

(4) received the following communication:

(July 8, 1999) from Councillor J. Mihevc advising that a new park has recently been opened on Alberta Avenue in the St. Clair Avenue West/Oakwood Avenue area; that as a result of broad-based community consultation, the name "Roseneath Park" was chosen for the new site, with "Garrison Creek Park" being the second choice; and recommending that the name "Roseneath Park" be officially adopted in principle and that the plaque indicate in small print underneath "Part of the Old Garrison Creek River System", subject to a report from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, supporting such proposal.

(n) Request for All-Way Stop Control at Clouston Avenue and Centre Road Ward 27, York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, to report on the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at Clouston Avenue and Centre Road; and

(2) received the following communication:

(August 10, 1999) from Councillor F. Nunziata advising that there have been concerns regarding the safety of the intersection at Clouston Avenue and Centre Road; and requesting that staff investigate the feasibility of installing an all-way stop control at this intersection as a precautionary measure.

(o) Request for Additional Lighting in the Parkette between Traymore Crescent and Old Mill Drive Ward 27, York Humber.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, to include funds in next year's capital budget to cover the cost of additional lighting in the parkette between Traymore Crescent and Old Mill Drive; and

(2) received the following communication:

(July 19, 1999) from Councillor F. Nunziata submitting a motion with respect to concerns of the local residents regarding vandalism, rowdy behaviour and drinking taking place in the early hours of the morning in the parkette located between Traymore Crescent and Old Mill Drive; and requesting that funds be provided in next year's capital budget for the installation of additional lighting in this parkette.

(p) Sign in Plaza at 4020 Dundas Street West Ward 27, York Humbler.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Manager, West District Field Office, Urban Planning & Development Services, to meet with the business owners in the plaza at 4020 Dundas Street West, to try to reach a compromise arrangement regarding the advertisement sign and to provide assistance to the business owners with respect to proper signage and to report back to the Community Council next day; and

(2) received the following communication:

(August 23, 1999) Councillor F. Nunziata advising that the business owners in the plaza located at 4020 Dundas Street West have been informed that an advertisement sign they had posted was contrary to York's by-law; and submitting a motion requesting that staff report on compromise measures to enable store owners at this plaza to advertise their products and services.

- Ms. Jackie DeRoy appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter, on behalf of several retailers in the plaza.

(q) Request to Change the One-Way Southbound Direction of Traffic on Hillary Avenue from Rogers Road to Two-Way Traffic Ward 27, York Humbler.

The York Community Council reports having:

(1) requested the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, to report on the feasibility of changing the direction of traffic on Hillary Avenue from one-way southbound to two-way, on the section of the street from Eglinton Avenue West to the laneway; and

(2) received the following communication:

(August 31, 1999) from Councillor F. Nunziata submitting a letter (August 24, 1999) from Coffee Time donuts at the south-west corner of Rogers Road and Hillary Avenue requesting that the direction of traffic be changed from one-way southbound to two-way; and a report (August 24, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, providing the results of a review of this proposal and advising that the implementation of two-way traffic is not recommended.

Respectfully submitted,

ROB DAVIS

Chair

Toronto, September 14, 1999.

(Report No. 9 of The York Community Council, including an addition thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999.)