1 Request for Fence By-law Exemption Martine Michelle, Gregory Mulvey, 61 Ladysbridge Drive Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

2 Request for Fence By-law Exemption Jorge Chavarria, Elia Rojas, 67 Kentish Drive Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

3 Traffic Concerns at Regent Heights Junior Public School on Nancy Avenue Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

4 Proposed Left-turn Prohibitions at Private Driveway on Midland Avenue Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

5 Traffic Concerns on Amiens Road Beath Street and Fairwood Crescent Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

6 Traffic and Parking Concerns on Deep Dene Drive and Bramber Road Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

7 Stopping Prohibition on Passmore Avenue Between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

8 No Stopping Anytime Prohibition on Fundy Bay Boulevard at David Lewis Public School Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

9 Proposed Pedestrian Crossover Installations Wards 13, 15 and 18 - Scarborough Bluffs, Scarborough City Centre and Scarborough Malvern

10 Request for Direction Appeal of Minor Variance Application SC-A19990168 Dimitar Belchevski, 1 Ranstone Gardens Ionview Community Ward 15 - Scarborough City Centre

11 Condominium Application SC-C19990004 Pensionfund Realty Ltd., 151 Nashdene Road Tapscott Employment District Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

12 Monarch Construction Limited 5039 Finch Avenue East Agincourt North Community Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

13 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SC-Z1998030 Part Lot Control By-law Exemption Application SC-L19990002 Connie Realty Ltd., 33-39 Andover Crescent West Hill Community Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

14 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SC-Z1997055 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SC-T1998602 Hopewell Contracting Ltd. 4585 Kingston Road West Hill Community Ward 16 - Scarborough Highland Creek

15 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SC-Z1999015 546958 Ontario Limited (King-City Corp.) 4711 Steeles Avenue East, Milliken Employment District Ward 17 - Scarborough Agincourt

16 47 Crockford Boulevard - Ontario Municipal Board Hearing Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

17 OMB Decision - Funds for Planning Consultant Monarch Construction Limited 5039 Finch Avenue East and 2627 McCowan Road Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

18 Request for Direction Site Plan Control Application SS1998008 Consent Application SB98006 Minor Variance Applications SA1998019 and SA1998271 Canadian Tire Real Estate Limited Nugget Construction Company Limited Aimhigh Development Group Limited 4570 and 4630 Sheppard Avenue East Marshalling Yard Employment District Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern

19 Other Items Considered by the Community Council

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends:

(1) that the recommendation contained in the following report be struck out; and

(2) that City Council approve a fence along the south side property line at a height not to exceed 2 metres.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (September 21, 1999) from the East District Manager, Municipal Licensing and Standards:

Purpose:

The applicants are seeking an exemption to By-law 24945, as amended, to permit a 9.1 metre section of fence to remain at a height of 2.4 metres whereas the by-law permits a maximum height of 2 metres.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit a 9.1 metre section of fence along the south property line to remain as constructed at a height of 2.4 metres.

Background/History:

Acting upon a complaint received, an inspection of the property known municipally as 61 Ladysbridge Drive was undertaken in late July. Inspection revealed a 2.4 metre high fence consisting of lattice panels constructed along the south property line for a distance of 9.1 metres.

As a result of the inspection, a Notice of Violation was issued to the registered owners. Subsequent to the issuance of this notice, a request for exemption from the by-law was received.

The applicants indicated that the neighbour's building to the south is located within .6 metre of the side lot line. In addition, the southerly abutting property has a second storey deck which projects into the rear yard. According to the applicants, this situation has resulted in a loss of privacy when their rear yard is in use. A secondary purpose for the privacy fence is the screening of an abutting shed. The applicants argue that a third of the constructed fence abuts the neighbour's shed and results in no impact upon the neighbours.

Comments:

It is noted that both the applicant and the abutting neighbour have second storey decks constructed at the rear of their buildings. From a privacy point of view, the neighbours will be able to look into the applicant's yard from the deck. In this respect, the value of the fence for privacy purposes is limited to ground level. It would seem, therefore, that the fence height was established in order to screen the abutting neighbour's shed from view.

A site inspection revealed that the subject fence does not abut any windows on the building to the south, thus negating any apparent visual or light blocking impact.

When considering requests for exemption, staff are primarily concerned with the issue of safety, particularly with respect to sight lines and the interaction between pedestrians and motor vehicles. In the case of the subject fence, such concerns are not an issue.

Justification:

Section 14 of By-law 24945, as amended, states in part that any person may apply for an exemption from any provision of the by-law.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, East District Manager

Telephone: (416) 396-7731; Fax: (416) 396-4266; email: byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

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

- Mr. Joseph Cameron, neighbour; and

- Mr. Greg Mulvey, the applicant.

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 20, 1999) from the East District Manager, Municipal Licensing and Standards:

Purpose:

The applicants are seeking an exemption from By-law 24945 as amended to permit an existing solid board fence to remain as located in the street yard at a height of 1.75 metres whereas the by-law permits a maximum height of 1.2 metres.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Nil.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council approve the application to permit the existing fence to remain as constructed at a height of 1.75 metres, provided that a 1.2 metre sight triangle is established abutting the applicant's driveway.

Background/History:

Acting upon a complaint received, an inspection of the premises municipally known as 67 Kentish Drive was undertaken in May. The inspection revealed a solid board fence 1.75 metres in height constructed in the street yard of the property.

As a result of the inspection, a notice of contravention under By-law 24945, as amended, was issued to the registered owners. Subsequent to the issuance of the notice, a request for exemption from the height requirements of the by-law was received.

The applicants indicated that the fence in question was installed this year and replaced a fence of the same height which had been in existence for approximately thirty years. The applicants note that the property is a corner lot and the area fenced in is intended to provide an area of safety and privacy for their four children while they play.

Comments:

Staff have reviewed the request and have noted that the fence abuts a City sidewalk and runs parallel to the applicant's driveway. It is noted that the fence is solid board construction and, given its location, a sight visibility problem exists with vehicles backing out of the applicant's driveway. Sight visibility would be assisted if the fence was reconstructed to create a 1.2 metre sight triangle abutting the driveway and public sidewalk. The creation of such a sight triangle has been discussed with the applicants and they have indicated a willingness to alter the fence accordingly.

Justification:

Section 14 of By-law 24945, as amended, states in part that any person may apply for an exemption from any provision of the By-law.

Contact Name:

Bryan Byng, East District Manager

Telephone: (416) 396-7731; Fax: (416) 396-4266; email: byng#u#b@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 27, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4, subject to adding a Recommendation No. (5), as follows:

"(5) the Director of Transportation Services, District 4, be requested to report back to Community Council in six months on the results of these traffic control initiatives.":

Purpose:

To address the need to amend the parking/stopping regulations on Nancy Avenue and Vernadale Crescent at Regent Heights Junior Public School.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1,200.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the parking/stopping regulation signs are available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget, Cost Centre No.TP0226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the stopping regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2) the parking/stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted;

(3) the school bus loading zone identified in Appendix 3 of this report be adopted; and

(4) the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the request of staff from the Toronto District School Board, Transportation Services staff investigated school related traffic/parking conditions at Regent Heights Junior Public School, as well as the need for a school bus loading zone on Nancy Avenue. Subsequent to this request, we received a copy of a 36-signature petition, forwarded by Councillor Altobello, objecting to a school bus loading zone on Nancy Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Regent Heights Junior Public School is located on the corner of Pharmacy Avenue and Nancy Avenue. On the north side of Nancy Avenue, in front of the school, no signed parking regulations exist. On the opposite side of the road, stopping is restricted between the times of 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday to Friday, and parking is prohibited at all other times. On Pharmacy Avenue, parking is restricted on both sides of the road between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday. A pedestrian crossover exists on Pharmacy Avenue at Nancy Avenue.

Pedestrian Crossing Observations:

Transportation Services staff recorded the volume and location of pedestrian crossings on Nancy Avenue. These observations revealed a total of 367 pedestrians crossed Nancy Avenue during the 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. study periods. The majority of these crossings took place west of Bertha Avenue. While no conflicts between pedestrians and motorists were noted during our study, we have requested that the school consider co-ordinating with the Toronto Police Service, Community Policing Support Unit, the establishment of a school safety patrol program at the school.

Vehicle Observations:

Along with the pedestrian study, vehicular traffic observations were taken simultaneously. A total of 63 vehicles (35 in the morning, 28 in the afternoon) parked along Nancy Avenue in front of the school. Most of these parked along the north/school side of Nancy Avenue. During the morning, two large school buses and in the afternoon two large and one small school bus stopped on the north side of Nancy Avenue. The school parking lot was well used by 71 motorists (50 in the morning and 20 in the afternoon) including eight small school buses. Full size school buses are too large to be accommodated in the school's turning loop.

Collision History:

In addition to the studies outlined above, we conducted a three-year collision review for the years in which we have the most current data (from January 1, 1995 to December 31, 1997). Ten collisions have been reported during this time period on Pharmacy Avenue in the area of Regent Heights Junior Public School. These collisions were evenly divided between five southbound and five northbound by the intersection of Pharmacy Avenue and Nancy Avenue. None of the other streets surrounding the perimeter of Regent Heights Junior Public School (Nancy Avenue, Presley Avenue or Vernadale Crescent) had any reported collisions during this time.

Four of these Pharmacy Avenue collisions occurred in 1995, two occurred in 1996 and four in 1997. No pedestrians were injured in any of these incidents. In two cases were the drivers reported to be exceeding the speed limit (with the maximum speed of motorists noted as 60 km/h).

Modifications to Parking Regulations:

Based on the results of our investigations, we are recommending changes at Regent Heights Junior Public School to enhance the existing school side parking/opposite side no stopping and provide a school bus loading zone on Nancy Avenue. The specifics are as follows:

(1) Installing "30 Minute Parking, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" signs along the school/north side of Nancy Avenue. These permissive parking restrictions would allow children direct access to the school grounds from waiting vehicles. With vehicles encouraged to temporarily park next to the school, passengers could avoid passing in front of through-traffic. This restriction will also limit long duration parking.

(2) Installing a 34 metre school bus loading zone on Nancy Avenue. This school bus loading zone will be centred by the south door/walkway and will be large enough for two large buses. School bus loading zones are for the exclusive use of school buses. This exclusive zone means school buses may avoid using their alternating flashing lights to stop all approaching traffic. Any other vehicle, at any time, may receive a stopping violation for using this zone.

(3) Installing a corner parking prohibition on Nancy Avenue between the proposed school bus loading zone and Pharmacy Avenue. This prohibition, if properly obeyed, will help to maintain clear sightlines of the stop sign at Pharmacy Avenue and enhance pedestrian safety at this intersection.

(4) Altering the "No Stopping, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Monday - Friday" regulations along the south/opposite school side of Nancy Avenue to the new times of "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Monday - Friday". Although the dimensions of the stopping prohibitions will remain the same, the new hours are recommended so they are consistent with standardized school area restrictions throughout the Scarborough District.

(5) Installing "No Stopping, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Monday - Friday" regulations along the inside corner of Vernadale Crescent. This small area regulation (37 metres) is intended to maintain clear sightlines along this portion of Vernadale Crescent which has been identified as a location with parked vehicle obstructions on both sides of the road at admission/dismissal time. Staff have observed this parking while visiting the area following our investigations.

These altered and new regulations are recommended because they do not allow even temporary stopping during weekdays, and they maintain the effective road width for two-way traffic movement. The recommended signs should prevent the school generated traffic from obstructing private driveways opposite the school.

School Bus Loading Zone Objection:

In the aforementioned petition, the following was requested:

(1) the use of smaller buses at Regent Heights Junior Public School;

(2) the use of appropriate/existing bus loops; and

(3) denying any requests for a bus-loading zone on Nancy Avenue.

To the first of these petition requests, that smaller school bus be used at Regent Heights Junior Public School, Transportation Services notes that, in recent months, there seems to have been an increased need for large buses at this school. During our initial study conducted on November 23, 1998, 11 bus trips were made to this school, only 4 of which were made by large buses. This information shows that most busing (8 of the 11 trips) is being handled by the small buses in the turning loop. In addition, during our field studies on November 23, 1998, ridership on the large buses appeared lower than during a site visit on Friday, April 16, 1999. During this more recent afternoon check, the two buses that parked on Nancy Avenue at the south end of the school appeared to be near capacity. It appears that the use of two large buses verses numerous smaller buses is more efficient.

To the second request of the petition, that school buses use the existing bus loops, a turning radius analysis has revealed that a large school bus is too big to effectively fit into the parking lot/turning loops. Therefore, under the existing conditions, large buses serving this school must park on the roadway.

In response to the last point on the petition, that a school bus loading zone on Nancy Avenue be denied, it seems that the objections of those parents who signed the petition are not related to safety, but more to competition for prime curb side access to the school. While there is a substantial amount of school side parking at Regent Heights Junior Public School, (currently enough space for 19 private vehicles along the north side of Nancy Avenue alone), many motorists want to park as close as possible to the south door of the school. This same location is being used by the two large school buses, which appears to be the most appropriate location for them.

Large buses in this location do not pose a safety hazard, and provide the shortest walking distance for the students being bused. Private motorists can still access curb side parking by simply shifting further east of the south door or using the turning loop. As Regent Heights Junior Public School is a French Immersion School, school busing will continue to have an ongoing impact.

Conclusion:

The modifications to the parking regulations on Nancy Avenue and Vernadale Crescent, as recommended within this report, will improve the safety of pedestrians and the management of traffic near Regent Heights Junior Public School.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor

Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844

Fax: 396-5681

E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Nancy South Pharmacy Presley 8:30 a.m. to

Avenue Avenue Avenue 4:30 p.m.

Monday to Friday

Appendix 2

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Nancy South Pharmacy Presley 8:00 a.m. to

Avenue Avenue Avenue 4:00 p.m.

Monday to Friday

Vernadale North and 60 metres west of 37 metres further 8:00 a.m. to

Crescent East Presley Avenue northwest 4:00 p.m.

Monday to Friday

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Restriction to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Maximum

Period

Highway Side From To Times or Days Permitted

Nancy North Pharmacy Presley 8:00 a.m. to 30 minutes

Avenue Avenue Avenue 4:00 p.m.

Monday to

Friday

Appendix 3

"School Bus Loading Zone"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3

Name of School

Highway Side or Institution

555 Pharmacy North Regent Heights

Avenue Junior Public School

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 21, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To report on the terms of permit issuance as it relates to access restrictions to and from a townhouse complex development on the west side of Midland Avenue, south of Ellesmere Road.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The owners, Kradler Investments Incorporated, are responsible for the cost of signing the left-turn entry and left-turn exit prohibitions under the terms of issuance of their development permit.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the eastbound left-turn movement from the driveway on the west side of Midland Avenue, approximately 80 metres south of Ellesmere Road, be prohibited at all times, as identified in Appendix 1 of this report;

(2) the northbound left-turn movement into the driveway on the west side of Midland Avenue, approximately 80 metres south of Ellesmere Road, be prohibited at all times, as identified in Appendix 1 of this report;

(3) all costs associated with signing the eastbound and northbound left-turn prohibitions at the driveway be borne by the owner of the property serviced by the driveway, namely Kradler Investments Incorporated; and

(4) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a condition of permit issuance, the townhouse complex developers have agreed to the imposition of an eastbound and northbound left-turn prohibition at all times at one of their driveways on Midland Avenue, at their cost, which is estimated to be $1,400.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Kradler Investments Incorporated applied for a permit for a 134 unit townhouse complex development on the southwest quadrant of Ellesmere Road and Midland Avenue. The property will be serviced by two driveways on Midland Avenue and none on Ellesmere Road. The northerly driveway will be approximately 80 metres south of Ellesmere Road and should operate as a "right in/right out" driveway. The southerly driveway will be approximately 60 metres south of the first driveway, and will be aligned with Canadine Road on the east side of Midland Avenue. All vehicular movements will be permitted at this second driveway.

Because of the close proximity of the northerly driveway to Ellesmere Road, left-turn movements into and out of the driveway would potentially be unsafe and could result in a high collision frequency. Therefore, as a condition of approving the development application and access to this site on Midland Avenue, the developers agreed to the imposition of eastbound and northbound left-turn prohibitions, in effect at all times, for traffic exiting and entering the northerly driveway. Motorists wishing to exit the site and proceed north, or enter the site from the south, will be able to use the full-movements driveway on Midland Avenue approximately 60 metres further south.

Conclusions:

As a condition of permit approval, and in order to protect public safety, the developers of a townhouse complex development on the southwest quadrant of Ellesmere Road and Midland Avenue have agreed to the installation of eastbound and northbound left-turn prohibitions, in effect at all times, at the driveway on the west side of Midland Avenue approximately 80 metres south of Ellesmere Road.

Contact: Peter K. Hillier, Manager, Traffic Operations, District 4;Tel: 396-7148; Fax: 396-5681

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Intersection or Turns Times

Portion of Highway Direction Prohibited or Days

Midland Avenue Eastbound and Left Anytime

at the driveway

80 metres south of

Ellesmere Road

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 22, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To report on the results of studies conducted on Amiens Road, Beath Street and Fairwood Crescent.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the speed limit signs is available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget, Cost Centre No.TP0226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the 40 kilometre per hour speed limits identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a request from Councillor Moeser, on behalf of a resident of Fairwood Crescent, Transportation Services investigated a concern regarding speeding on Amiens Road, Beath Street and Fairwood Crescent.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Amiens Road, Beath Street and Fairwood Crescent are local roads located to the northeast of the intersection of Kingston Road and Morningside Avenue. The speed limits within this community are currently 50 kilometres per hour. West Hill Public School is located at the corner of Amiens Road and Tefft Road. Appropriate School Area warning signs are posted in advance of this school.

Speed Studies:

Speed studies were conducted on Amiens Road, Beath Street and Fairwood Crescent on Tuesday, July 13, 1999. The results are as follows:

These study results reveal that all three streets appear to be characteristic of many other local roads, where a few motorists elect to travel at excessive speeds. Although incidents of excessive speeding are occurring on these roads, the vast majority of motorists are travelling below the 50 km/h speed limit.

Application of these study results to our 40 km/h Speed Limit Warrant also revealed that minimum requirements are close to being achieved on all of these roads. On Amiens Road the 24-hour traffic volume does not exceed the required 1,000 vehicles and the distance between controls is 320 metres, less than the required 457.5 metres. On Beath Street and Fairwood Crescent, while the vehicle volume exceeds 1,000 vehicles, the distance between controls is 230 metres and 380 metres respectively.

The 24-hour vehicle volumes recorded also reveals that all three roads are functioning within the vehicle volume range of a local residential road, i.e., less than 2,500 vehicles per day.

While the warrants are close to being achieved on the three streets studied, staff also feel it is important to remind motorists to reduce their speed in the vicinity of West Hill Public School, namely on Amiens Road and also on Tefft Road, which was not studied. The speed reductions being recommended provide a uniform operation on the through streets in this residential area. Staff do not recommend reducing the speed limit on Amiens Road or Fairwood Crescent, north of Beath Street, or on Beath Street east of Fairwood Crescent, because these roads do not exit from the community, and are used exclusively by local traffic.

Collisions:

A review of the collision history for the three-year period, January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998 reveals no collisions have been reported that are related to speeding in this community. Our information is based on the police collision reports that are available.

Conclusions:

In summary, we are recommending the installation of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limits at the following locations:

(a) Amiens Road, between Kingston Road and Beath Street;

(b) Beath Street, between Morningside Avenue and Fairwood Crescent;

(c) Fairwood Crescent, between Kingston Road and Beath Street; and

(d) Tefft Road, between Morningside Road and Amiens Road.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Tel: 396-7844; Fax: 396-5681; E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Highway From To

Amiens Road Kingston Road Beath Street

Beath Street Morningside Avenue Fairwood Crescent

Fairwood Crescent Kingston Road Beath Street

Tefft Road Morningside Avenue Amiens Road

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 22, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To report on the results of studies conducted on Deep Dene Drive and Bramber Road.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $1000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the parking prohibition and speed limit signs is available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget, Cost Centre No. TP0226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the 40 kilometre per hour speed limit identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of a petition, forwarded by Councillor Moeser, Transportation Services is reporting the results of our investigations of speeding on Deep Dene Drive and parking on Bramber Road. Residents specifically requested all-way stops on Deep Dene Drive in an attempt to reduce motorists' speeds.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Deep Dene Drive is a local road which runs between Kingston Road and Ellesmere Road, west of Meadowvale Road. Bramber Road intersects Deep Dene Drive on the east side of the street. In total four minor streets intersect Deep Dene Drive, all of which are controlled by stop signs at Deep Dene Drive. A 50 kilometre per hour speed limit is posted on Deep Dene Drive.

All-Way Stop Control:

The justification for the installation of all-way stop controls is based on a technical warrant established by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO) and adopted as city policy by the former Scarborough Council. The analysis of this warrant is based on data compiled from peak period counts.

Traffic studies were conducted at Deep Dene Drive and Acland Crescent, and Deep Dene Drive and Camor Court on Wednesday, June 23, 1999. These studies produced the following results that illustrate that the warrant's requirements are not satisfied:

In addition to the Warrant, the following outlines the main reasons why the installation of unwarranted all-way stop controls are not recommended:

(i) Most motorists are reasonable and prudent with no intention of maliciously violating traffic regulations. However, when an unreasonable restriction is imposed (such as an unwarranted all-way stop control) it can result in flagrant violations. In such cases, pedestrians may start to cross the road with a false sense of security, and conflict with a motorist approaching the stop sign without expecting to stop. This will obviously place the pedestrian at risk.

(ii) A situation of indecision is created as to when to cross as a pedestrian or when to start as a motorist.

(iii) Unwarranted stop signs often result in an increase in speeds by motorists who try to make up lost time for what they perceive as unnecessary delays.

(iv) The City has an obligation to provide services in an environmentally conscious manner. The installation of unwarranted stop controls not only undermines the warrant but also contributes to unnecessary fuel consumption and higher levels of noise and air pollution. These pollutants most specifically impact those residents in the immediate vicinity of the intersection.

Speed Study:

A 24-hour speed study was conducted on Tuesday, June 22, 1999 on Deep Dene Drive, south of Camore Court. Our study revealed that the majority of motorists are travelling at reasonable speeds on Deep Dene Drive with 63% compliance with the 50 kilometre per hour speed limit. Study results are as follows:

Although speed limit compliance is good, application of the study results to the 40 kilometre per hour speed limit warrant reveal that a speed limit reduction is justified. This is in large part due to the fact that the recommended safe speed on the curve near Bramber Road is 40 kilometres per hour.

Parking on Bramber Road:

Although staff did not observe cars parked within the turning basin at the east end of Bramber Road during our investigations, we are supportive of prohibiting parking in this area to ensure that traffic movements and city services are not impeded by parked vehicles. A by-law amendment is not required to accommodate this signing.

Collisions:

A review of the collision history for the three-year period, January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998 reveals one collision reported on Deep Dene Drive, excluding the intersections at Ellesmere Road and at Kingston Road. This collision occurred in 1996 in the vicinity of 20 Deep Dene Drive. This collision occurred when, in two separate incidents, the first motorist lost control and struck a hydro pole and then, 15 minutes later, a second motorist struck the first vehicle. The road condition at the time was icy. No collisions were reported on Bramber Road.

Conclusions:

In summary, our traffic studies reveal that an all-way stop control is not warranted on Deep Dene Drive. However, we are recommending the installation of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit on this street. On Bramber Road we are recommending that the turning basin at the east end of the street be signed as "No Parking Anytime". No by-law amendment is required to facilitate the installation of the parking prohibition signs.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844; Fax: 396-5681; E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"40 Kilometre Per Hour Speed Limit"

Regulation to be Enacted

Highway From To

Deep Dene Ellesmere Kingston

Drive Road Road

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 24, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To investigate the need for a stopping prohibition on Passmore Avenue, between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue, east and west of the Canadian National (CN) railway crossing.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $400.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the stopping prohibition signs are available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget, Cost Centre No.TP0226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the parking regulations identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2) the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Staff from Transportation Services initiated an investigation after observing trucks parking in close proximity to the CN railway crossing on Passmore Avenue between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Trucks making deliveries to Ziner Lumber, located on the south side of Passmore Avenue east of the railway crossing, park along both sides of the roadway in the vicinity of the CN railway crossing. This parking interferes with approaching motorists' view of the operation of the railway signals. Although railway crossing gates have recently been installed at this location, we continue to have concerns.

At present, parking is prohibited on both sides of Passmore Avenue between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue. Regulatory signs have been erected, however, it would appear that more restrictive parking controls are required to discourage the parking of trucks. In view of the hazardous nature of the problem, a "No Stopping Anytime" prohibition on both sides of Passmore Avenue, for a distance of 85 metres east and west of the railway crossing, is proposed.

Our review of the collision history for the period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998 reveals one collision at this location during this time period. This fatal collision occurred on Tuesday, September 30, 1997 at 7:49 a.m. and involved an eastbound motorist striking a southbound GO train. Parking blocking sight lines was not identified as a factor in this collision.

Conclusions:

A stopping prohibition is recommend on both sides of Passmore Avenue, for a distance of 85 metres east and west of the railway crossing, in order to improve sight lines for the general public.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844; Fax: 396-5681; E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Passmore Both Kennedy Midland Anytime

Avenue Road Avenue

Appendix 2

"No Parking"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Passmore Both Kennedy 315 Metres Anytime

Avenue Road further east

Passmore Both Midland 315 Metres Anytime

Avenue Avenue further west

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Passmore Both 315 Metres east 170 Metres Anytime

Avenue of Kennedy Road further east

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 24, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To investigate the need to prohibit vehicles from stopping on a portion of Fundy Bay Boulevard at a proposed School Crossing.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $600.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of the stopping prohibition signs are available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget, Cost Centre No. TP0226.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the parking regulation identified in Appendix 1 of this report be rescinded;

(2) the parking and stopping regulations identified in Appendix 2 of this report be adopted; and

(3) the appropriate by-law be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Transportation Services has been informed by the Toronto Police Service, Community Policing Support Unit that a school safety patrol program is to be established at David Lewis Public School. This program will operate at a proposed School Crossing on Fundy Bay Boulevard at Sandy Haven Drive.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

David Lewis Public School and St. Maximilian Kolbe Catholic School are located on the north side of Fundy Bay Boulevard near Innislawn Road. Fundy Bay Boulevard is located between Birchmount Road and Warden Avenue, north of McNicoll Avenue. Both schools currently have what we refer to as "school side parking/opposite side no stopping".

In order to ensure good sight lines for both directions on either side of the proposed School Crossing, it is necessary to prohibit stopping. As a stopping restriction currently exists on the south side of the street during school times, along with a corner parking prohibition, a stopping prohibition is only necessary on the north side.

Conclusions:

Prohibiting stopping on the north side of Fundy Bay Boulevard, on either side of the School Crossing, will provide clear sight lines, free from parked vehicles, for pedestrians crossing at this location. This recommendation will reduce the available 30 minute permitted parking in front of the school by approximately three vehicles, however, ample parking will remain north and east of the crossing.

Contact Name:

Bruce D. Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Tel: 396-7844; Fax: 396-5681; E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Rescinded

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Maximum

Period

Highway Side From To Times or Days Permitted

Fundy Bay North and 20 metres 20 metres 8:00 a.m. to 30 minutes

Boulevard East north of east of 4:00 p.m.

Seagrave Hawkshead Monday to

Crescent Crescent Friday

(South (West

Intersection) Intersection)

Appendix 2

"Parking for Restricted Periods"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Maximum

Period

Highway Side From To Times or Days Permitted

Fundy Bay North and 20 metres 97 metres 8:00 a.m. to 30 minutes

Boulevard East north of further 4:00 p.m.

Seagrave south Monday to

Crescent Friday

(South Intersection)

Fundy Bay North 34 metres 20 metres 8:00 a.m. to 30 minutes

Boulevard east of east of 4:00 p.m.

Sandy Hawkshead Monday to

Haven Drive Crescent Friday

(West

Intersection)

"No Stopping"

Prohibition to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

Highway Side From To Times or Days

Fundy Bay North and 34 metres 43 metres Anytime

Boulevard East east of further

Sandy Haven west

Drive

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 21, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4:

Purpose:

To investigate the need for pedestrian crossovers at the following locations:

(a) Greenbrae Circuit at Sedgemount Road;

(b) Scarborough Golf Club Road at Gatesview Avenue; and

(c) Washburn Way at Nahanni Terrace

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The $45,000.00 (approximate) funds associated with the installation of three pedestrian crossovers are not available in the Transportation Services 1999 budget. Unless additional funding is identified in 1999, new pedestrian crossover approvals for the balance of 1999 will be placed on a priority list for installation in 2000 and await approval of the appropriate budget item in the 2000 Capital Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that, subject to the availability of funding:

(1) the pedestrian crossovers identified in Appendix 1 of this report be adopted; and

(2) the appropriate by-laws be amended accordingly.

Council Reference/Background/History:

As a result of three separate requests from residents of the affected areas, Transportation Services investigated the intersections of Greenbrae Circuit at Sedgemount Drive, Scarborough Golf Club Road at Gatesview Avenue and Washburn Way at Nahanni Terrace for pedestrian crossing protection.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The justification for the installation of a pedestrian crossover (PXO) is based on a technical warrant established by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). The analysis of this warrant is based on data compiled from an 8-hour traffic study and a 12-hour vehicle count. In all three cases studied the issue is provision of crossing protection for pedestrians crossing "collector" roadways.

Greenbrae Circuit at Sedgemount Road:

Study Date: Tuesday, June 8, 1999

Study Hours: 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

To warrant the installation of a PXO, compliance levels of 100% are required in both of the above categories.

The numerical warrant provides an adjustment factor for senior citizens, unassisted children and physically disabled pedestrians. During our 8-hour study period, the actual recorded pedestrian volume was 525. This pedestrian volume consisted of the following:

Assisted Children are children crossing the road accompanied by a youth, an adult or a senior citizen.

Most of the pedestrian crossing Greenbrae Circuit in this area originated from or were destined to the apartment buildings on the south side of the road.

Toronto Police Service Collision Records:

One collision has been reported in the most recent review period for which we have complete data: January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998. This collision involved a pedestrian, age 37, who, when crossing Sedgemount Drive at the intersection, was struck by an eastbound motorist turning left from Greenbrae Circuit. The injuries were classified as minor.

In conjunction with the installation of a PXO on Greenbrae Circuit at Sedgemount Drive, a parking area reserved for the physically disabled would be modified and relocated a small distance to the east. This zone would still fulfill its primary function: providing boarding and alighting opportunities for residents of and visitors to the adjacent apartment building.

Scarborough Golf Club Road and Gatesview Avenue:

Study Date: Wednesday, April 28, 1999

Study Hours: 7:15 a.m. to 9:15 a.m., 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

To numerically warrant the installation of a PXO, compliance levels of 100% are required in both of the above categories.

The warrant provides an adjustment factor for senior citizens, unassisted children and physically disabled pedestrians. During our 8-hour study period, the actual recorded pedestrian volume was 114. This pedestrian volume consisted of the following:

Most school children crossing Scarborough Golf Club Road in this area were generated by the townhouse complex located on the east side of the road just south of Gatesview Avenue.

Although our study revealed that a PXO is not numerically warranted at this location, we are recommending a PXO on Scarborough Golf Club Road just south of Gatesview Avenue for the following reasons:

(a) On-going concerns with respect to school children crossing a major collector roadway with no pedestrian crossing protection since this is the only walking route to and from their school. The closest crossing protection across Scarborough Golf Club Road is located 230 metres south of Gatesview Avenue at Kingston Road.

(b) The Toronto Police Service, Community Policing Support Unit, is unable to establish a regulation School Crossing at this location due to the distance from Cedar Drive Junior Public School. The location of a regulation School Crossing must be within visual sight or close proximity of the school. (The installation of this type of crossing protection falls under their jurisdiction and is only established in conjunction with a School Child Safety Patrol or an adult School Crossing Guard.)

Toronto Police Service Collision Records:

No collisions have been reported in the most recent review period for which we have complete data: January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998.

Washburn Way and Nahanni Terrace:

Study Date: Wednesday, June 16, 1999

Study Hours: 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

To numerically warrant the installation of a PXO, compliance levels of 100% are required in both of the above categories.

The warrant provides an adjustment factor for senior citizens, unassisted children and physically disabled pedestrians. During our 8-hour study period, the actual recorded pedestrian volume was 441. This pedestrian volume consisted of the following:

Most of the pedestrians crossing Washburn Way at this location were students of Dr. Marion Hillard Senior Public School

Toronto Police Service Collision Records:

Most recent review period for which we have complete data: January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1998

The pedestrian collision occurred on Friday, March 7, 1997 at 3:55 p.m. and involved a student of Dr. Marion Hilliard Senior Public School. The pedestrian was crossing Washburn Way from the southeast corner of the intersection and was struck by the snow plough blade of a southbound vehicle. The motorist did not stop after striking the pedestrian. The driving conditions at the time of the pedestrian collision were good, i.e. light condition - daylight, environment condition - clear, and road surface condition - dry.

In conjunction with the installation of a PXO on Washburn Way at Nahanni Terrace, the southbound Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) bus stop and the City's bus shelter would be relocated south of the intersection to provide adequate sight lines and conform to spacing requirements. This measure would involve the construction of a new landing pad at the new bus stop location. In addition, because of this bus stop relocation, the existing school bus loading zone would be relocated north of the intersection.

Conclusions:

We recommend pedestrian crossovers at all three intersections to primarily assist children crossing these three collector roads on their way to and from area schools. These PXO's will provide additional benefits to all pedestrians wishing to cross the collector roads in the vicinity of the three intersections. Because no funds have been identified within the Transportation Services 1999 budget for these three new PXO's, the installation of newly approved PXO's will have to await approval of the appropriate budget item in the 2000 Capital Budget, unless additional funding is identified in 1999.

Contact Name:

Bruce Clayton, Supervisor, Traffic Engineering, Works and Emergency Services

Telephone: 396-7844; Fax: 396-5681; E-mail: clayton@city.scarborough.on.ca

Appendix 1

"Pedestrian Crossover"

Regulations to be Enacted

Column 1 Column 2

Road At

Greenbrae Circuit and Sedgemount Drive

Sedgemount Drive

Scarborough Golf Club Road and Gatesview Avenue

Gatesview Avenue

Washburn Way and Nahanni Terrace Nahanni Terrace

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 9, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report seeks direction from Council as to the City Solicitor's role at a pending Ontario Municipal Board hearing, as detailed below.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that City Council direct the City Solicitor not to attend any Ontario Municipal Board hearing with respect to Minor Variance Application SC-A19990168.

Comments:

The Committee of Adjustment, on June 16, 1999, refused to grant a minor variance to permit an existing parking garage for an apartment building to remain as constructed, having minimum building setbacks of 1.3 metres (4.2 feet) from the side and rear lot lines, whereas the Ionview Community Zoning By-law No. 8978, as amended, requires a minimum 1.5 metre (4.9 feet) buffer strip to be provided abutting residential uses.

The Committee of Adjustment's decision has been appealed by the owner/applicant. The Ontario Municipal Board has not scheduled a hearing to date. This appeal raises no issues of significant concern to the Corporation to warrant expenditure of the City's limited resources on a Board hearing.

Contact Name:

Bruce Gray, Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-7034; Fax: (416) 396-4265; E-mail: bgray@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 24, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report presents recommendations to grant approval of a draft plan of condominium for a 61 unit industrial development that was completed in the early 1980's. A total of 199 parking spaces are provided.

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council support the Draft Plan of Condominium SC-C19990004 by Pensionfund Realty Ltd., with respect to the lands on the south side of Nashdene Road, between Markham Road and Dynamic Drive, being Lot 4 and Part of Lot 5, Registered Plan M-1981, known municipally as 151 Nashdene Road, subject to the following conditions:

(1) Plan with changes in red stamped "Recommended" this date (see Figure 2);

(2) prior to registration, the owner shall submit the final Condominium Description and Declaration for approval of the Director of Community Planning, East District, identifying areas of exclusive and common use; and

(3) the owner shall obtain a release from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services Department that the development complies with all relevant by-laws, codes and regulations.

Comments:

This application has been circulated to various departments and agencies involved in the review process, none of which indicated objections.

The applicable zoning provisions require 1.07 parking spaces per 100 square metres (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area or spaces. The applicable parking guidelines for multiple unit industrial condominium developments require 1.5 parking spaces per 100 square metres (1,076 square feet) of gross floor area or two spaces per unit, whichever is greater. In this instance, the standard of 1.5 parking spaces per 100 square metres is higher and when applied to this development, requires a total of 126 spaces. The draft plan of condominium provides 199 parking spaces, being a ratio of approximately 3.3 spaces per unit or 2.4 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross floor area. The applicant has indicated that all parking spaces will be held as common element.

The application complies with the Official Plan designation and the Zoning By-law provisions applicable to the site, except for a minor deficiency with respect to the driveway width. Although the site plan drawings approved for a building permit indicate a 6 metre wide driveway along its full extent, the recently completed survey indicates in few spots the driveway's width of 5.7 to 5.9 metres. The applicant has agreed to rectify this deficiency. Condition 3 reflects this requirement.

Contact Name:

Anna Czajkowski, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner, Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-7022; Fax: (416) 396-4265; E-mail: czajkows@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

To recommend approval of a Draft Plan of Condominium for a 226 unit, 19 storey residential building (Phase 3) that is nearing completion and which is part of a phased development located on the southeast corner Finch Avenue and McCowan Road.

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council support the Draft Plan of Condominium SC1998608 by Monarch Construction Limited, being Part of Blocks B, C and D, Registered Plan M-1648, known municipally as 5039 Finch Avenue East, subject to the following conditions:

(1) Plan as stamped "Recommended" this date (see Figure 2).

(2) prior to registration, the Ontario Municipal Board shall have approved the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments which resulted from the Ontario Municipal Board's decision of June 25, 1999, Order No. 1225, and the owner and the City shall have amended the existing Site Plan Control Agreement regarding the requirement for indoor recreation space of three square metres per dwelling unit;

(3) the owner shall complete all conditions of the Site Plan Control Agreement, as amended, applying to the Phase 3 lands as shown on Figure 2, prior to condominium registration, or enter into a Financially Secured Development Agreement with the City secured by a performance guarantee in a form and amount satisfactory to the City Solicitor, to guarantee completion of the site work for the described Phase 3 if the owner chooses to register the condominium prior to the completion of the project;

(4) prior to registration, the owner shall submit the final Condominium Declaration and Description, which includes the Reciprocal Agreements between the future Condominium(s), for the approval of the Director of Community Planning, East District, with respect to all easements and rights-of-way to ensure mutual access between the future Condominium(s) on Blocks B, C, D and E, Registered Plan M-1648, for vehicular and pedestrian movements, parking and areas of exclusive use and recreational facilities; and

(5) the final Condominium Description and Declaration shall contain provisions satisfactory to the Director of Community Planning, East District, to ensure that the recreational facilities and exterior common areas will be available to the future Condominium(s) on a proportionate shared ownership basis.

Background:

In May 1998, Council gave support for a Site Plan Control approval for a phased development at the southeast corner of Finch Avenue and McCowan Road. The approval resulted in one Site Plan Control Agreement for all three phases on the property. Council's support was conditional upon, among other matters, the Site Plan Control Agreement requiring three square metres (32.2 square feet) of indoor recreation space per dwelling unit or 1,410 square metres (15,178 square feet).

The lands on the southeast corner of Finch Avenue and McCowan Road were the subject of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to increase the permitted density on the entire property last year. Council refused the applications in December 1998 and the owner appealed the applications to the Ontario Municipal Board. A subsequent Site Plan Control Application was made in March 1999 and was also appealed to the Board. In June 1999, the Ontario Municipal Board allowed the appeals in part, subject to, among other matters, changes to the Agincourt North Secondary Plan and Agincourt North Zoning By-law. City staff are currently reviewing the proposed amending Bills which would incorporate the Board's decision prior to the Board's issuance of its final Order. The site plan, approved in concept by the Board, is also being reviewed by City staff, in accordance with the Board's decision.

Committee of Adjustment, in September 1998, granted a variance for reduced indoor recreation space conditional upon amending the existing Site Plan Control Agreement. The condition has not been satisfied and the variance has no effect. A variance was also granted in August 1999 for reduced underground parking spaces for Phase 3.

Comments:

Phase 3 complies with the current provisions of Agincourt Community Secondary Plan and the Agincourt North Zoning By-law, as varied. The proposal however does not comply with the existing Site Plan Control Agreement which specifically requires three square metres per dwelling unit or 1,410 square metres (15,178 square feet) of indoor recreation space. The Ontario Municipal Board approved a reduced indoor recreation space requirement. Therefore, prior to final registration of the Phase 3 condominium, the existing Site Plan Control Agreement would need to be amended as it pertains to the recreation space requirement and the amending Official Plan and Zoning By-law Bills would need to be approved by the Board.

With the exception of the individual units and associated parking, all other areas and facilities of the development are to be held as common elements. As such, provisions ensuring mutual easements and rights-of-ways for vehicular and pedestrian movements, visitor parking, servicing and maintenance and recreational facilities need to be established.

All technical agencies circulated had no comments or their requirements have been incorporated into the conditions of approval.

Contact Name:

Sylvia Mullaste, Planner

Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-5244

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: mullaste@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated September 21, 1999, from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommends that the report of the Director of Community Planning, East District, be adopted.

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on October 12, 1999, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (September 21, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report recommends approval of applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Part Lot Control Exemption to permit a 13 lot street townhouse development on Andover Crescent in the Lawrence Avenue/Galloway Road area. The subject site is currently zoned "Single-Family Residential" allowing for 11 lots.

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A) Zoning By-law:

amend the West Hill Community Zoning By-law No.10327, as amended, with respect to Lots 4 and 5, R.P. M-617, known municipally as 33 to 39 Andover Crescent, by deleting the "Single-Family Residential" (S) zoning and replacing it with a "Street Townhouse Residential" (ST) zoning with the following Performance Standards:

(1) maximum one dwelling unit per 5.9 metres (20 feet) of frontage on a public street and a minimum area of 230 square metres (2,475 square feet);

(2) minimum front yard building setback 3 metres (10 feet) except that the garage main wall containing the vehicular access shall be setback a minimum of 6 metres (20feet);

(3) minimum rear yard building setback 7.5 metres (25 feet);

(4) maximum building height excluding basements: 3 storeys and 14 metres (46 feet);

(5) general provisions relating to maximum height, basement height, storeys, floor area and a minimum rear yard setback shall not apply;

(B) Part Lot Control Exemption:

(1) enact a Part Lot Control Exemption By-law with respect to Lots 4 and 5, R.P. M-617, known municipally as 33 to 39 Andover Crescent, as shown on Figure 3, after the following conditions have been satisfied:

(i) the owner to make satisfactory arrangements with the Toronto Hydro Electric Commission for water and electrical distribution systems including a street lighting system;

(ii) the owner to make satisfactory arrangements with the Works and Emergency Services Department regarding storm water management and the servicing of this development;

(iii) prior to any removal of trees on this property and lot grading, the owner to obtain the approval of the Tree Conservation By-law Co-ordinator, Scarborough Region of a tree preservation plan for this development;

(2) deem that the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law shall expire one (1) year from the date of the passing of the By-law; and

(C) Miscellaneous:

authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

In 1997, the former Scarborough Council enacted a Zoning By-law Amendment pertaining to this property which reduced the minimum Performance Standards for single-family residential development. The minimum lot frontage requirement was reduced from 15 metres (50 feet) to 7.4 metres (24 feet) and the minimum lot area requirement was decreased from 696 square metres (7,500 square feet) to 274 square metres (3,000 square feet). The rezoning provided for the development of 11 single-family residential lots on the subject lands.

Subsequently, the site was acquired by Connie Realty Limited, the current owner, which has experienced market resistance to a single-family residential project in this location. The owner is therefore seeking to rezone the subject lands to provide for a townhouse development consistent with the standards established in the 56 unit condominium townhouse development recently constructed on the west side of Andover Crescent.

Other land-uses in the vicinity of the subject site include a townhouse development to the immediate south, older detached dwellings to the north and an institutional low-rise apartment building on the west side of Andover Crescent. The property is bordered on the east side by the parking lot of the Giffen-Mack Funeral Home.

The applicant's proposal consists of two street townhouse blocks as shown on Figure 3. The proposed elevation treatment is shown on Figure 4. Each dwelling is 3 storeys in height with an average unit size of approximately 140 square metres (1,500 square feet).

During the review of the 1997 rezoning application, Scarborough Council determined that the Medium Density Residential designation in the Official Plan which applied to the townhouse development on the west side of Andover Crescent also applied to the subject lands. This designation provides for townhouse and low-rise apartment dwelling units to a maximum density of 100 units per hectare (40 units per acre). The proposed development represents a density of 43 units per hectare (18 units per acre) and conforms to the Official Plan.

Comments:

At the time of the Preliminary Evaluation Report, the application was for 16 townhouses based on a minimum lot frontage of 4.8 metres (16 feet) on Andover Crescent. Staff indicated a concern that the narrow frontages combined with front yard garages would not foster a desirable streetscape treatment. Council responded by directing staff to negotiate with the applicant to provide an improved street relationship of the dwellings through an increase in frontage to 6 metres (20 feet) and/or alternatively, through the introduction of rear yard garages.

The applicant has responded to this direction by widening the lot frontages to 5.9 metres (19.6 feet). This has improved the streetscape on Andover Crescent by allowing for a balance between the garage and front entrance on the front facade of the dwellings, reducing the dominance of the garages in the front yard and increasing the opportunity for front yard landscaping. The number of lots proposed has been reduced from 16 to 13.

The applications have been circulated to the affected city departments and agencies. No objections were received. Conditions requested by the Works and Emergency Services Department and the Toronto Hydro Electric Commission have been incorporated as preconditions to Council adopting the Part Lot Control By-law. A tree preservation plan will also be required.

Conclusion:

The proposed development has the potential to create an attractive streetscape on Andover Crescent and contribute positively to the rejuvenation which is underway in this area. The site plan and elevation plans together with the proposed landscaping treatment indicate a quality development which should have a positive impact on the desirability of this area. Moreover, the proposed development will add to the supply of affordable ownership housing in this neighbourhood and increase the utilization of existing neighbourhood services and facilities.

Contact Name:

Ms. Jayne Naiman, Senior Planner

Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-7040

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: naiman@city.scarborough.on.ca

Mr. Robert De Angelis, appeared before the Community Council on behalf of the applicant, and expressed support for the staff recommendations.

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated September 12, 1999, from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommends that the report of the Director of Community Planning, East District, be adopted, subject to adding a further condition No. (14) under "B. Draft Plan of Subdivision", viz:

"(14) the Director of Transportation Services, District 4, be requested to investigate the installation of traffic signals and/or a pedestrian crosswalk at this location, and if such is recommended, the cost of installation be at the applicant's expense."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on October 12, 1999, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (September 12, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report recommends approval of applications for a draft plan of subdivision and corresponding Zoning By-law amendment to permit a 38 unit freehold street townhouse development on a 0.92 hectare (2.27 acre) property. The subject site is located on the south side of Kingston Road east of Morningside Avenue and is currently zoned "Highway Commercial."

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A) Zoning By-law:

amend the West Hill Community Zoning By-law No.10327, as amended, with respect to Part of Lot 10, Concession 1, known municipally as 4585 Kingston Road, by deleting the "Highway Commercial" (HC) zoning and replacing it with a Street Townhouse Residential" (ST) zoning with the following Performance Standards:

(1) maximum one dwelling unit per 158 square metres ( 1,700 square feet) of site area;

(2) a garage shall be attached to each dwelling unit and be setback a minimum distance of 6 metres (20 feet) from the street line;

(3) minimum building setback 3 metres (10 feet) from the Kingston Road street line;

(4) maximum building height: 3 storeys and 14 metres (46 feet);

(5) maximum building coverage 50 percent of the site area;

(6) minimum rear yard building setback 7.25 metres (24 feet);

(7) general provisions relating to maximum height, basement height, storeys, floor area and a minimum rear yard setback shall not apply.

(B) Draft Plan of Subdivision:

grant draft plan approval to application SC -T1998016, Hopewell Construction Limited, for the lands described as Lot 10, Concession 1, known municipally as 4585 Kingston Road, subject to the following conditions:

(1) Plan as stamped approved this date as shown on Figure 3;

(2) the owner to make satisfactory arrangements with the Toronto Hydro Electric Commission for Water and Electrical Distribution Systems including a street lighting system;

(3) the owner to make satisfactory arrangements with Bell Canada regarding any Bell Canada facilities required to service this development;

(4) the owner to dedicate all streets, corner roundings and road widenings as shown on the draft plan;

(5) all road reserves and road widenings shall be deeded at no charge to the City;

(6) the owner to make satisfactory arrangements with the City regarding all services and easements;

(7) the owner to construct at its sole cost all external services required to service its lands;

(8) the owner to construct Street "A" as a fully serviced municipal road;

(9) the owner to provide adequate privacy fencing at the turning circle to screen vehicular lights as well as a landscaped island/or alternative landscaped feature at the turning circle to the satisfaction of the Works and Emergency Services Department, in consultation with Urban Planning and Development Services Department;

(10) the owner to obtain the approval of the Works and Emergency Services Department regarding streetscaping of the Kingston Road boulevard;

(11) the owner to agree to practice Storm Water Management in the development of these lands;

(12) the owner to agree to pay:

(i) $300.00 per hydrant for fire hydrant maintenance;

(ii) $40.00 per unit for geodetic surveys and aerial mapping;

(iii) $300.00 per dwelling unit for planting and maintenance of street trees on the public road allowance;

(13) prior to the registration of the plan and lot grading, the owner to obtain the approval of the Tree Conservation By-law Co-ordinator, Scarborough Region of a tree preservation plan for this development; and

(C) Miscellaneous

authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Zoning By-law as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

The subject site is currently vacant with limited perimeter vegetation. It is surrounded by a restaurant on the west side and various retail stores on the east side. To the southwest, on Collingsgrove Road, is a condominium townhouse development. On the southeast boundary, on West Hill Drive, are single-family homes.

The development concept is shown on Figures 3 and 4. The development consists of a number of freehold townhouse blocks based on an 18.5 metre (60 feet) public road with 8 metre (26 feet) pavement width. Each of the proposed lots is a minimum of 6 metres (20 feet) frontage except for the lots fronting onto the cul-de-sac which are on average 6 metres in frontage. The proposed dwellings are three storeys in height ranging in size from 109 square metres to 154 square metres (1174 square feet. to 1660 square feet). The proposed elevation treatment is shown on Figure 5.

The subject site is designated Highway Commercial in the Official Plan which permits Medium Density Residential uses to a maximum density of 100 units per (net) hectare (40 units per acre). The proposed development represents a net density of 63 units per hectare (26 units per acre) and conforms to the Official Plan.

Comments:

The applications have been circulated to the affected city departments and agencies. No objections were received although the Scarborough Separate School Board noted serious overcrowding concerns in the local elementary and high school. Standard conditions requested by the Works and Emergency Services Department, Toronto Hydro Electric Commission and Bell Canada are reflected in the recommended conditions of draft approval. A tree preservation plan is currently under review by the Tree Preservation By-law Co-ordinator, Scarborough District and as required by Condition No. 13 of the recommended conditions of draft approval, approval will be required prior to the registration of the plan and before any grading is undertaken.

The actual division of the proposed lots within the blocks being created under this subdivision plan will be achieved by an application for Part Lot Control Exemption at the time the foundations of the proposed dwellings are constructed.

Conclusion:

The proposed development represents an appropriate development scheme in conformity with the Official Plan for this area. A townhouse development is compatible with the mix of land-uses in this neighbourhood and would add to the supply of medium density housing in this neighbourhood. The site plan and elevation plans together with the proposed landscaping treatment indicate a quality development which should have a positive impact on the desirability of this neighbourhood. There are similar vacant and underutilized properties in the vicinity of the subject site and the standard of development established on this site may act as a catalyst for the (re)development of these properties and lead to an overall upgrading of this section of Kingston Road.

Contact Name:

Ms. Jayne Naiman, Senior Planner, Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-7040; Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: naiman@city.scarborough.on.ca

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

- Mr. Gary Templeton, representing the applicant, and expressing support for the staff recommendations; and

- Mr. Brad Grant, owner of the property immediately to the east of the subject site, expressing concerns respecting inadequate setback of the proposed buildings from Kingston Road; the proposal to use masonry, as opposed to wooden, fence materials; potential ingress/egress traffic difficulties, and insufficient parking provisions which may result in overflow parking onto his property.

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (October 25, 1999) from J. McDermott, Principal Planner, McDermott and Associates Limited, Land Use and Environmental Planning Consultants, requesting that Council refer the application respecting 4585 Kingston Road back to the Scarborough Community Council for further review and consideration.)

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council, after considering the deputations and based on the finding of fact, conclusions and recommendations contained in the report, dated September 7, 1999, from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommends that the report of the Director of Community Planning, East District, be adopted, subject to adding a Performance Standard (vii) under "(A)", as follows:

"(vii) minimum of 480 parking spaces shall be provided for this development."

The Scarborough Community Council reports having held a statutory public meeting on October 12, 1999, in accordance with Section 17 and Section 34 of The Planning Act and the regulations thereunder.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the following report (September 7, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report recommends approval of an application to amend the Zoning By-law for the property at 4711 Steeles Avenue East, which also has frontage on the west side of Silver Star Boulevard, to permit redevelopment of the site with retail and restaurant uses.

Financial Implications:

None at this time.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council:

(A) amend the Employment Districts Zoning By-law No. 24982 (Milliken), as amended, with respect to Part of Lot 27, Concession 5, known municipally as 4711 Steeles Avenue East, by deleting the current zoning and replacing it with "Mixed Employment" (ME) and "Mixed Employment - Holding" (ME-H) zoning with the following Performance Standards:

(i) gross floor area of all buildings shall not exceed 7,270 square metres (78,250 square feet);

(ii) gross floor area of all restaurants shall not exceed 929 square metres (10,000 square feet);

(iii) minimum street yard building setback of 3 metres (10 feet);

(iv) minimum side yard building setback of 3 metres (10 feet);

(v) minimum rear yard building setback of 3 metres (10 feet); and,

(vi) the provisions of this By-law shall apply collectively to this land, notwithstanding its future division into two or more parcels;

(B) apply the Holding Provision (H) to that portion of the subject site identified as being potentially necessary to enable the City to construct a Steeles Avenue/CN Rail grade separation in future, and providing that prior to the removal of the Holding Provision (H) from the zoning, only landscaping and parking uses shall be permitted;

(C) direct that the Holding Provision (H) used in conjunction with the Mixed Employment (ME) zone shall be removed in whole or in part by amending By-law when Council is satisfied that the lands are no longer required for temporary use or permanent acquisition by the City; and

(D) authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes as may be necessary to the Zoning By-law to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

Background:

546958 Ontario Limited is proposing to redevelop the 3 hectare (7.5 acre) former Nelson Aggregates site with 7,268 square metres (78,236 square feet) of commercial space in four single-storey buildings, which includes a maximum of 929 square metres (10,000 square feet) of restaurant space, with the remainder intended for retail uses, as follows:

(1) a 2,369 square metre (25,500 square foot) building "A" across the south end of the site, to contain a Business Depot store;

(2) a 3,300 square metre (35,522 square foot) building "B" running along the west side of the site adjacent to the CNR line, which includes retail uses and a 446 square metre (4,800 square foot) restaurant;

(3) a 1,116 square metre (12,013 square foot) retail building "C" on the north-west portion of the site adjacent to Steeles; and,

(4) a 483 square metre (5,200 square foot) restaurant building "D" on the north-east portion of the site adjacent to Steeles.

A total of 512 parking spaces would be provided, which is well in excess of the minimum by-law requirement of 290 spaces. The requested density and site coverage is 24 percent of the lot area.

The overall development concept under Site Plan Control application SC-S19990045 is shown generally on the enclosed figures. The overall scale of the development has been reduced substantially by the owner from the original application, which proposed 10,027 square metres (107,933 square feet) of development, including 2,162 square metres (23,270 square feet) of restaurants.

The owner, King-Century Corporation, is also redeveloping the larger former Lafarge lands immediately to the east with approximately 15,050 square metres (162,000 square feet) of similar commercial development.

On May 26, 1999, Scarborough Community Council considered and approved the staff Preliminary Evaluation Report which recommended normal processing of this application. The Committee's direction also included requirements that the owner submit traffic and parking impact and stormwater management reports, as well as consent applications to address any mutual easement requirements for parking and circulation purposes to be shared with the adjacent King-Century block at the south-west corner of Steeles and Silver Star. In addition, the Committee required the reduction of proposed restaurant space to the 929 square meters (10,000 square feet) now proposed.

The subject lands are designated Special District Commercial, with an additional permission for Vehicle Service Uses. These were applied in 1997 to that portion of Milliken Employment District north of Passmore Avenue as a result of commercial reviews initiated by the former City of Scarborough in response to the development applications on the larger Lafarge property. The current application would comply with the intentions of the former municipality to diversify business and employment opportunities in this portion of the District.

Comments:

The applicant advises that the owner has secured a tenant for building "A" in Business Depot, and that a further tenant has been identified for building "C". The Public Meeting in this regard has been scheduled for this agenda at the applicant's express request, given his client's due diligence obligations to these prospective tenants.

No concerns with respect to the rezoning application itself have been raised by the commenting agencies, however a variety of site plan details continue to be discussed. As per Community Council's direction, traffic, parking and site servicing reports have been submitted by the applicant. The current proposal is for all vehicle traffic to access the site via Silver Star Boulevard, which has been designed for this purpose. The site will be amply supplied with parking, however the details of the parking arrangements are still being discussed. Accordingly, the applicant has not yet filed the necessary consent applications to create specific mutual easements between the subject and abutting lands. Planning staff recommend that this is a matter that can be dealt with adequately through further refinement of the site plan and which should not further delay implementation of new zoning on the site.

The construction of the Silver Star extension to Steeles Avenue was completed a few months ago. Works and Environmental Services staff advise that the design of the new road, including all underground servicing facilities (storm and sanitary) fully take into account the anticipated future development of the subject site. Additional site stormwater management detail will flow from further refinement of the site plan which also should not further delay implementation of new zoning on the site.

The most significant issue with this site involves the potential impact from a future grade separation of Steeles Avenue and the CN rail line running adjacent to the west side of the property. The City, some years ago, completed an Environmental Assessment for a Steeles overpass of the rail line, which has been approved by the Province, although there is no capital program yet in place. The possibility of such a grade separation is one key reason why Silver Star now jogs through the Lafarge site to line up with the Steeles intersection with Old Kennedy Road in Markham. Such an overpass would preclude direct site access from Steeles, and this is reflected in the current site plan.

More recently, Council has directed Works and Emergency Services staff to prepare an addendum to the Environmental Assessment that considers the alternative of Steeles Avenue going under the rail line as an underpass. Work in this regard, while well advanced, is not yet complete. It is apparent, however, that the underpass option would impact the subject site significantly. Additional lands for a widening of Steeles Avenue would be necessary to accommodate working easements and buried services, beyond those otherwise required for a simple widening of the Steeles road allowance without a grade separation.

Similarly, it would be necessary to realign the CN rail line onto the subject site temporarily to enable construction of a new bridge over the depressed Steeles roadway. A temporary realignment to the west is not possible given the existence of a Canadian Tire store. The realignment can potentially also be done more conveniently on the subject site using remnant rail beds for spur lines previously serving Nelson Aggregates. The extent of the City's potential land requirements in this regard is indicated on the attached site plan.

It is evident that the City's land requirements would significantly impact portions of buildings "B" and "C". The owner has expressed strong concern that the length of the Environmental Assessment process and uncertainty as to when, if ever, a grade separation might proceed, effectively sterilizes this portion of the site from development, which would have severe financial repercussions.

Planning staff understand the owner's concern, and certainly the City is not yet in a position to conclude the necessary land takings and related compensation negotiations. Staff feel, however, that ample opportunity exists to redesign the project such that any lands required by the City in future can be kept clear of buildings. The lands required can continue to be used for parking or landscaping and, when required by the City, would not create a parking non-conformity given the substantial oversupply being proposed by the owner. Application of a Holding Provision (H) is recommended at this time to ensure this portion of the site remains clear of buildings. Staff will continue to pursue options for redesign of the current proposal with the owner through the Site Plan Control process.

Conclusions:

The proposed rezoning implements the City's 1997 vision for enhanced mixed employment opportunity in this portion of Milliken Employment District, and would result in development which will be similar to and very compatible with that now commencing on the adjacent Lafarge lands. This is a prominent site on the northern edge of the new City and will assist local business to establish, expand and compete with our northern neighbour, with attendant employment and assessment benefits. On this basis, the application is recommended for approval.

Contact Name:

Rod Hines, Principal Planner

Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-7020

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: hines@city.scarborough.on.ca

The Scarborough Community Council submits, for the information of City Council, the following communications:

(September 20, 1999) from Amy Au:

This is written in response to the notice of public meeting, regarding the above request to amend the Zoning By-law. As I will not be able to attend the meeting, I hereby put forward my concern.

I am an owner and a resident in the Midland and Steeles area. I am very much concerned about the above request for the following reasons:

1. The owner proposes the redevelopment of the site with commercial space, that includes a restaurant and some retail uses. This will definitely increase the volume of traffic in that area. At present, Steeles Avenue between Midland Avenue and Kennedy Road is already a high traffic volume area, with severe traffic jam during rush hours, and many accidents (minor or major). Steeles Avenue with only two lanes on each direction cannot afford any additional traffic.

2. It is noted that there is a proposed road connecting Steeles Avenue and Passmore Avenue. With the proposed plan, there will be increased traffic on Passmore Avenue. The present road condition on Passmore Avenue at the CN railway crossing is extremely bad - very bumpy! The increased traffic will no doubt worsen the situation.

I hope that the Scarborough Community Council will take the above two reasons into consideration before recommending the proposal to Toronto City Council. I will expect some solutions to the above problems before the plan is approved and operated.

Thank you for your attention.

(September 22, 1999) from Justina Chan and Willy Yau:

This is to respond the above amendment Application. I am the owner of 7 Staverton Court, Scarborough. We objected the above zoning replaced by mixed Employment Zone (ME).

Reasons:

(1) There are lots of restaurants, plaza, and retail stores on Steeles Avenue between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue, and the traffic is so bad already. If the zoning you mentioned become mixed employment zone, that means more shops and restaurants will be built in the district, and brings more shoppers and vehicles to this area in order to increase high volume of traffic and make the road situation get more worse.

(2) We are concerned about our living environment. If more shops and restaurants surrounded our residences, we have to watch out their garbage and waste to avoid growth of rats, fly and mosquito, etc.

For the above reasons, we wish the proposal zoning remain unchanged.

Please kindly keep us posted development result.

(September 22, 1999) from K.T. Chan:

I would like to express my concerns regarding this amendment request. Right now the traffic in that area is already overloaded. That part of Steeles Avenue East (between Kennedy and Midland) is particularly busy. During the office rush hours, there is always traffic jam and in addition, we have the Go-Train passing at that time. During the other day time hours, cars going in and out the Market Village, Pacific Mall, Canadian Tyre, gas stations, donut shop and garage already make traffic a mess; and on weekends, it is even even worst.

By changing the purpose of the said property, I would imagine that in the future the traffic there will be totally out of control.

I therefore have no choice but to object to this amendment.

Thanks.

(September 23, 1999) from John Lo:

We object to the above request to amend and the therein Re-zoning. We have already had two large Malls and the associated Plaza in the area. Although these Malls are in the City of Markham but geographically we are looking at the same spot. We have enough Malls there.

The traffic in the area and the vicinity at present is extremely bad; it has been worsen quickly within the three plus years and the Governments are unable to improve it. By adding the proposed new Mall on the Scarborough side of Steeles Avenue, we know it will be worse further.

Also, when the area gets busier, crimes will come with it. We all are living in the City long enough so we should know about it.

Please present our submission to the Public in the meeting. Thank you for your consideration.

(September 27, 1999) from Sandra Chan, Property Planning and Development, Canadian National Railway (CN):

We have reviewed your letter dated 17 September 1999, regarding the above noted application and have the following comments:

1. The Owner must install and maintain at his own expense, a chain link fence of minimum 1.83 metre height along the mutual property line.

2. Any proposed alterations to the existing drainage pattern affecting Railway property must receive prior concurrence from the Railway and be substantiated by a drainage report to the satisfaction of the Railway.

In addition, rail noise, vibration and safety should be considered in the design of the development, to the satisfaction of the municipality. Appropriate mitigation measures should be included in the Zoning By-law Amendment. CN's current guidelines recommend that the acceptable protective measures for the land use proposed include the following:

1. A minimum 30 metre building setback from the railway right-of-way in conjunction with an earthen berm. The berm should be 2.0 metres above grade at the property line, having side slopes not steeper than 2.5 to 1, adjoining and parallel to the railway right-of-way with returns at the ends.

2. We recommend that the Owner engage a consultant to undertake an analysis of noise and vibration and to undertake appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from noise and/or vibration that were identified.

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.

(October 1, 1999) from John Lau, President, Pacific Mall, 4300 Steeles Avenue East, Markham:

Reference is made to the Notice of Public Meeting on the rezoning application (No. SC-Z1999015) for 4711 Steeles Ave. East, Scarborough.

As the Board of Directors of Pacific Mall Corporation, we represent the interest of Pacific Mall. In our opinion, the above application is a real threat to the traffic in the areas of Steeles and Kennedy.

As a matter of fact, the existence of Pacific Mall, Market Village and Canada Trust in the same corner has been generating a great deal of traffic in the small area. It is now even well known to the people in the district that traffic congestion has been a serious problem, which still waits to be solved. We think that if the above application will succeed, the loading to the traffic will be greatly increased.

We are therefore writing to strongly object to this application.

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

- Mr. Bruce McMinn, Solicitor for the applicant, expressing support for the staff recommendations; confidence that the outstanding issues respecting the site plan can be resolved; and advising Community Council that his client's proposal could be accommodated within the existing road conditions;

- Mr. Lawrence Zucker, Solicitor representing Pacific Mall, who tabled a 236-signature petition in opposition to the proposed development, and voiced his client's concerns respecting parking and traffic, specifically that the staff proposal for the provision of 512 parking spaces should be formally included in the recommendations as a Performance Standard; suggesting that it is premature to approve this application when there are already significant traffic problems in the area and requesting that it not be approved until the widening of Steeles Avenue has taken place; and

- Mr. Sam Cohen, developer of the Pacific Mall, expressing similar concerns to those of Mr. Zucker respecting the difficult traffic conditions in the area, the increase to be generated by the proposed development, and the urgent need for the widening of Steeles Avenue.

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (October 7, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To advise that the City did not received notice of the hearing of this matter from the Ontario Municipal Board. As the hearing took place in September, authorization of the City Solicitor's actions to request the Board to rehear this matter is required.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no funding implications.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that City Council confirm the City Solicitor's actions to request the Ontario Municipal Board to rehear this matter.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Council, at its meeting held on July 27, 28 and 29, 1999 adopted the recommendations of the Director of Community Planning, East District, that the City Solicitor attend at the Ontario Municipal Board in support of the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of an application to permit a portion of the existing building to be used as a vehicle repair garage for the use of servicing dealers' vehicles only, whereas the Zoning By-law permits "General Industrial Uses" (MG) and does not include vehicle repair garages as a permitted use.

It was brought to staff's attention on October 6, 1999 that the hearing with respect to this matter was held by the Board on September 10, 1999 and in a verbal decision, the Board allowed the appeal. A written order is expected shortly. Neither the City Clerk, the City Solicitor nor the Deputy Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment received the Appointment for Hearing. As a result, staff did not attend at the hearing pursuant to Council's direction.

The City Solicitor is taking the necessary action to request the Board to rehear the matter due to the lack of notice.

Conclusions:

It would be appropriate to confirm the City Solicitor's actions to have this matter reheard by the Ontario Municipal Board so that staff can appear in support of Council's position with respect to this matter.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski, Director of Planning & Development Law

tel: 416-392-0080; fax: 416-397-4420

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (September 10, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To report on the Ontario Municipal Board Decision respecting 5039 Finch Avenue East and 2627 McCowan Road and advise of additional funds required to pay planning consultant Jassie Khurana.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

$6,600.00 to pay the balance of Mr. Khurana's account is in the Legal Services operating budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that an additional $6,600.00 be allocated from the Legal Services operating budget for the retention of an independent planning consultant for the Ontario Municipal Board hearing respecting 5039 Finch Avenue East and 2627 McCowan Road in addition to funds already approved by Council.

Council Reference/Background/History:

On December 16 and 17, 1998, Council adopted Clause 21 embodied in Report No. 12 of the Scarborough Community Council and refused the application by Monarch Construction Limited to increase the density for their lands at the southeast corner of Finch East and McCowan. On March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, Council amended and adopted Clause 10 embodied in Report No. 2 of the Scarborough Community Council, authorizing expenditure of up to $15,000.00 for a planning consultant.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The OMB Decision

Monarch purchased land at the southwest and southeast corners of Finch East and McCowan in 1963. In 1973, Scarborough granted Official Plan and Zoning permission to construct high and medium density residential dwellings on these sites, but Monarch did not proceed. In 1989, the developer requested new Official Plan and Zoning provisions increasing maximum permitted densities.

After over a year of tough negotiation involving residents' associations, the former City enacted by-laws to combine the high and medium density areas on each corner, assign a maximum number of units on each side of McCowan and establish an overall height limit of 54 m (19 storeys). Monarch submitted a concept plan showing how the units would be deployed:

- on the southwest corner, 338 units in an 18 storey apartment building on the south side of Finch East (Phase I) and a 12 storey building on the west side of McCowan (Phase II); and

- on the southeast corner, 470 units in an 18 storey building on the south side of Finch East (Phase III), a 12 storey building on the east side of McCowan (Phase IV) and townhouses to the east (Phase V).

Because the general limit of 54 metres applied throughout, height was not in issue in this hearing. Rather, the Board had only to consider a proposed increase in the total number of units from 470 to 616 for Phases III, IV and V and a decrease in the units-to-indoor recreation space ratio so that the recreation centre already built with Phase III would cover the increased number of units.

The City's position was that the maximum number of units should not be increased, partly because of the hard-fought settlement in 1990, but mainly because the goals of good planning in 1999 - including a better balance of built form and numbers of units between the southwest and southeast corners of this intersection, buildings of similar size and proportion facing one another across McCowan and achieving a Phase IV that would relate much better to the houses to the southeast - showed that the original concept was superior.

Residents living in the ten storey Phase II on the west side of McCowan gave uncontradicted evidence that Monarch sales staff had told them a "mirror image" building would be built on the Phase IV. There was also uncontradicted evidence that Monarch had previously supported an increase in the height of Phase III from 18 to 19 storeys by arguing grade differences would make it appear to be the same height as the 18 storey Phase I.

Under the previous zoning, Phase IV could have 210 units. Monarch could have erected a 19 storey building with 210 units without any zoning amendment. Phase III has 19 storeys and 226 units. The request to increase Phase IV to 350 units obviously called for a building significantly wider than either Phase II or III. The City was successful in opposing an increase in the width of Phase IV and in having the height limit reduced for the Phase V townhouse site, so that Monarch cannot say it wants to build a medium or high rise building in that area, instead of townhouses.

The Board has required Monarch to develop a new site plan showing the number of units it proposes for Phase IV up to 19 storeys, but being no wider than Phase II. I have made inquiries, but do not yet have a response from Monarch as to how many units the developer now proposes for Phase IV.

Additional Funds for Planning Consultant

The original $15,000.00 estimate was the best that could be made at the time, as no prehearing conference had been held and no issues list had been drawn. Mr. Khurana was retained late in May 1999, at which time he submitted a budget and workplan for $18,000.00 in fees and $400.00 for disbursements plus GST. Having regard for the issues list that was then available and the length of time allowed by the Board for the hearing. I found this reasonable.

Mr. Khurana's account is for a fee of $21,150.00, already discounted from the time he actually invested, and disbursements of $446.17 plus GST. Significant, but necessary, extra time and effort were expended by him in reviewing and preparing evidence relating to the extensive planning history of the five phases of Monarch's development lands on both sides of McCowan and several supposedly comparable developments raised by Monarch. The City's position was that these other projects were not relevant to this case; however, evidence concerning them had to be prepared.

Conclusions:

When a settlement is achieved by residents' groups, a developer and the City that calls for varying heights and densities in different phases of a project, it may be advisable to consider enacting zoning regulations specific to each phase, rather than establishing general height limits and overall unit counts. That may reduce the likelihood of the developer later succeeding in varying from the settlement, but it will not legally prevent the re-opening of a settlement, even when some phases have been built in compliance with the agreement and even when buyers in an early phase have been told a building in a later phase will be no larger than theirs.

Contact Name:

John A. Paton, Legal Services

phone: 392-7230; fax: 397-4420

e-mail: jpaton@toronto.ca

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Scarborough Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (October 6, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District:

Purpose:

This report seeks direction from Council regarding the City Solicitor's role at an upcoming Ontario Municipal Board hearing on various applications received to facilitate the redevelopment of the lands at the northwest corner of McCowan Road and Sheppard Avenue.

Financial Implications:

None.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Scarborough Community Council recommend that Council direct the City Solicitor to appear at any Ontario Municipal Board hearing on the following basis:

(1) to support the Site Plan Control and Consent Applications in a manner that maintains the City's interest of providing for the Nugget Avenue extension and in support of Committee of Adjustment's decision on the variances; and

(2) to ensure that any site plan and site plan agreement provides for site details and conditions to the satisfaction of the City.

Background:

The above applications were submitted in order to facilitate the redevelopment of the Canadian Tire store at 4630 Sheppard Avenue East. The Site Plan Control and Consent applications were appealed in April 1999 for the absence of a site plan approval and consent decision. The applicant's solicitor subsequently requested that the variance applications be brought forward to Committee of Adjustment. Committee refused the variances on September 8, 1999 and the applications were appealed.

One of the stumbling blocks in the redevelopment of the lands has been the provision for and alignment of the extension of Nugget Avenue. The extension of Nugget Avenue west of McCowan Road and terminating at Sheppard Avenue opposite Brownspring Road, is in the Scarborough Official Plan with a specific policy indicating that the extension shall not include any of the lands owned by St. Lawrence Cement (north side of the watercourse). Moreover, the extension shall be designed and constructed so as to avoid any interference with, or disruption to the St. Lawrence Cement lands. This specific policy resulted from Scarborough Council's consideration of the proposed redevelopment of 1940 McCowan Road in 1992, now occupied by Business Depot and donut shop. The policy was worded to alleviate concerns raised by St. Lawrence Cement.

The proposed site plan proposal indicates an alignment for Nugget Avenue that crosses a portion of the St. Lawrence Cement lands. City staff were advised by the applicant that St. Lawrence Cement was agreeable to a small crossing and that a letter from St. Lawrence Cement would be forthcoming to this effect. Such a letter has not been received by the City. Moreover, the proposed alignment is not a preferred alignment of City staff from a technical point of view.

Works and Emergency Services staff have indicated that the Nugget Avenue extension is within the proposed five year Capital Works Program and is proposed for construction in 2000. The five year Capital Works Program however still requires Council approval.

Comments:

The provision for Nugget Avenue was introduced in the Official Plan in 1992 to reduce the traffic congestion problems experienced in the area. The specific policy regarding the road extension was to alleviate concerns of St. Lawrence Cement. In turn, any redevelopment scheme that affects the extension of Nugget Avenue must have regard to the Official Plan policy. As a mutual agreeable alignment between the applicant and the City has not been established and as St. Lawrence Cement has not signed off in writing, City staff can not confirm that the redevelopment scheme maintains the intent of the specific policy in the Official Plan.

Conclusions:

The City Solicitor be directed to support the recommendations at the Ontario Municipal Board.

Contact Name:

Sylvia Mullaste, Planner

Scarborough Civic Centre

Telephone: (416) 396-5244

Fax: (416) 396-4265

E-mail: mullaste@city.scarborough.on.ca

(City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999, received this Clause, as information.)

(a) The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the presentation made by Ms. Odette Birrell, President of the Scarborough Needle Arts Guild, of the "Bi-Centennial Quilt", which was designed and quilted by the Needle Arts Guild to commemorate the Bi-Centennial of the former City of Scarborough. The Chairman received the Quilt on behalf of the City of Toronto, for retention in the City's permanent art collection.

(b) Organizational Structure for the New Committee of Adjustment

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received a presentation by Ms. Denise Rundle, Manager, Committee of Adjustment, East District;

(2) recommended to the Planning and Transportation Committee that:

(a) the composition of the East District Panel be 6 members, composed as follows:

- 2 from East York; and

- 4 from Scarborough;

with a review of the East District Panel composition to take place during the first year of the next term of Council;

(b) the City Solicitor be requested to report to Planning and Transportation Committee on the appeal process timelines, taking into consideration the new composition of the Committee of Adjustment; and

(c) the City Solicitor and the Acting Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to report to Planning and Transportation Committee on a procedure for requesting the Province to enact special legislation to exempt the City of Toronto from the appeal process respecting Committee of Adjustment decisions; and

(3) advised the Planning and Transportation Committee that the Scarborough Community Council does not support the following Recommendations contained in the report of the Acting Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

(a) Recommendation No. (2) (iv): "each Hearing be conducted by three of the respective District Panel members, the sitting members to be assigned on a rotational basis;" as it applies to the East District Panel; and

(b) Recommendation No. (2) (v): "each Committee Hearing be held during regular business hours."

Recorded Votes:

Upon the question of the adoption of Community Council Recommendation No. (1):

Yeas: Councillors Ashton, Balkissoon, Cho, Duguid, Kelly, Mahood - 6

Nays: Councillors Altobello, Berardinetti, Moeser, Shaw, Tzekas - 5

Upon the question of the adoption of Community Council Recommendation No. (3):

Yeas: Councillors Altobello, Balkissoon, Duguid, Mahood, Moeser, Tzekas - 6

Nays: Councillors Ashton, Berardinetti, Kelly, Shaw - 4

(September 14, 1999) communication from the City Clerk (Planning and Transportation Committee) referring Recommendations Nos. (2) to (6) in the report (August 26, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services respecting the Organizational Structure for the New Committee of Adjustment, and motions by Councillors McConnell and Berger related thereto, and requesting that Community Council forward its comments thereon to the Planning and Transportation Committee meeting scheduled to be held on November 1, 1999; and

(September 24, 1999) report from the Acting Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services providing further information respecting this issue, as requested by the Planning and Transportation Committee at its meeting held on September 13, 1999.

Mr. James Henderson, a Member of the Scarborough Committee of Adjustment, appeared before the Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

The Community Council also received written submissions from Mr. Henderson, and Mr. Clancy Delbarre, President, Highland Creek Community Association, a copy of which was provided to all Members of Community Council, and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, Scarborough Civic Centre.

(c) Capital Improvements to the Scarborough Civic Centre

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received a presentation by Mr. Mark Davies, Director of Facilities Services, respecting the Capital Repair and Replacement Program for the Scarborough Civic Centre; and

(2) on the recommendation of Councillor Ron Moeser, referred the following motion by Councillor Shaw to the Office Consolidation Sub-Commitee for consideration within the context of the office consolidation report anticipated for December, 1999, with the request that such report be forwarded to the Scarborough Community Council for comment:

"RESOLVED that Scarborough Community Council request staff to report on the following:

(i) specific information on the status of the Toronto District School Board's space in the Scarborough Civic Centre;

(ii) expansion proposal for the Scarborough Civic Centre and staffing relocation thereto;

(iii) historical break-down of the Scarborough Five Year Capital Plan; and

(iv) the capital budget requests to support the other Civic Centres."

(d) Fence By-law Exemption Process

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report, with the request that the East District Manager, Municipal Licensing and Standards, report to Community Council at its first meeting in January 2000 as to the status of the harmonization of the Fence By-laws of the former municipalities:

(September 20, 1999) from the East District Manager, Municipal Licensing and Standards, responding to Community Council's request for a report to this meeting respecting the possibility of implementing a staff approval process for Fence By-law Exemption Applications, and recommending that the Division examine alternative procedures for such requests and include such procedures for consideration when the draft Fence By-law is presented for Community Council review.

(e) Boulevard Alterations at No. 10 Howarth Avenue Ward 14 - Scarborough Wexford

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following communication, at the request of Councillor Kelly, to its meeting scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 9, 1999:

(September 16, 1999) from Councillor Kelly requesting that the Community Council consider the issue of the beautification of the boulevard on Howarth Avenue at The Church of St. Jude (Wexford), as described in the attached communication (May 31, 1999) from the Transportation Services Division to the Rev. Ian G. Noseworthy, and the costs associated therewith.

(f) Community Council Approval of Minor Street Stop Signs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report:

(September 24, 1999) from the Director of Transportation Services, District 4, responding to Community Council's request for a report on the possibility of implementing a system whereby staff would automatically approve new stop controls without the need for report to the Community Council, unless requested to do so by the Ward Councillor(s); advising that, in accordance with the Procedural By-law, the enactment of an amending by-law is required to be authorized by a Report from the Community Council, as adopted by City Council; and suggesting that, in future, the presentation of minor traffic issues to Community Council be contained in one comprehensive report.

(g) Official Plan Amendment Application SP1998018 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SZ1998036 George and Cindy Samonas, 3291 Kingston Road Scarborough Village Community Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the recommendation of the Director, Community Planning, East District, that the aforementioned applications be deferred for consideration at the Community Council meeting scheduled to be held on November 9, 1999:

(June 4, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommending that City Council:

(A) Official Plan:

amend the Scarborough Village Community Secondary Plan with respect to 3291 Kingston Road, by repealing Numbered Policy 5;

(B) Zoning By-law:

amend the Scarborough Village Community Zoning By-law No.10010, as amended, with respect to Part of Lot 20, Concession C, known municipally as 3291 Kingston Road, as follows:

(1) one dwelling unit per 199 square metres (2,140 square feet) of lot area;

(2) Day Nursery maximum 520 square metres (5,600 square feet) gross floor area;

(3) an enclosed refuse storage room shall be provided on the site;

(4) minimum front yard setback 3 metres (10 feet);

(5) minimum building setback of 7.5 metres (25 feet) abutting the Single-Family Residential Zone;

(6) parking for Day Nurseries 1.5 spaces per 100 square metres of gross floor area;

(7) parking is permitted in the front yard;

(8) the provisions of this By-law shall apply collectively to this property notwithstanding its division into two or more parcels;

(9) delete Exception Numbers 15 and 22; and

(C) Miscellaneous:

authorize such unsubstantive technical, stylistic or format changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments as may be required to properly carry out the intent of this resolution.

(September 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the status of the discussions between the applicant and the community on outstanding issues respecting these applications, and recommending that Community Council defer the recommendations contained in the June 4, 1999, report for consideration at the Scarborough Community Council meeting scheduled to be held on November 9, 1999.

(h) Preliminary Evaluation Report Official Plan Amendment Application SC-P19990015 Zoning By-law Amendment Application SC-Z19990026 Petro Canada, 3270 Kingston Road and 5 Bellamy Road South Scarborough Village Community Ward 13 - Scarborough Bluffs

The Scarborough Community Council reports having approved the following report:

(September 28, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, recommending that Community Council convene a Public Meeting to consider the applications, targeted for the first quarter of 2000, subject to staff:

(1) convening a Community Information Meeting, in consultation with the Ward Councillors; and

(2) providing notice of such meeting to all properties within 120 metres (400 feet) of the subject property and those attending the Community Information Meeting.

(i) New Applications - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(September 28, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the new applications received during the four-week period ending September 22, 1999; and recommending that this report be received for information.

(j) Site Plan Control Approvals - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(September 28, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the Site Plan Control Approvals granted by the Director, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(k) Consent Applications - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(September 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the Consent Decisions granted by the Director, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(l) Ontario Municipal Board Hearings - All Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report:

(September 29, 1999) from the Director of Community Planning, East District, advising Community Council of the status of current appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(m) Decision-making Protocol for Parks and Recreation Matters - All Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following report and having made no comment thereon:

(September 16, 1999) from the City Clerk (Economic Development and Parks Committee) referring the report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, respecting a protocol for dealing with parks and recreation matters, for consideration and comment thereon to the Economic Development and Parks Committee meeting scheduled to be held on November 8, 1999.

(n) Centennial Community and Recreation Association

The Scarborough Community Council reports having received the following communication:

(September 20, 1999) from Gay Cowbourne, President, expressing appreciation for the Special Citation awarded to the Centennial Community and Recreation Association at the recent Recreation Recognition Awards event.

(o) Fire and Ambulance Services KPMG Fire Station Location and Fire/Ambulance Facilities Study

The Scarborough Community Council reports having advised the Community Services Committee that it:

(1) received a presentation by Deputy Chief Richard A. Simpson respecting the recommendations of the KPMG Study, as it affects the East District; and

(2) requested that the Fire Chief report directly to Community Services Committee at its meeting scheduled to be held on November 4, 1999, on the potential use of the Police Substation at Bluffer's Park as part of the Fire Services marine response:

(September 28, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, Fire Chief, Toronto Fire Services and the General Manager of Toronto Ambulance Services recommending that City Council adopt the recommendations of the KPMG Study, as amended by this report, and that the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to implement those recommendations in accordance with the implementation schedule included as Attachment "B", and requesting that Scarborough Community Council submit its comments thereon to the Community Services Committee for consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on November 4, 1999.

(September 28, 1999) supplementary report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Fire Chief, Toronto Fire Services responding to a request by Councillor Duguid to consider alternative options for the closing of Fire Stations Nos. T26 and T31, as recommended in the KPMG report, and recommending that City Council receive this report for information.

(September 28, 1999) supplementary report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Fire Chief, Toronto Fire Services responding to a request by Councillor Fotinos, on behalf of Councillor Adams, for additional information respecting the KPMG recommendations, and recommending that City Council receive this report for information.

(September 28, 1999) supplementary report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Fire Chief, Toronto Fire Services, responding to a request by Councillor Balkissoon for additional information respecting the KPMG recommendations, and recommending that City Council receive this report for information.

A copy of attachments "A" through "D2" respecting the aforementioned reports were provided to all Members of the Scarborough Community Council and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, Scarborough Civic Centre.

(p) Communication Strategy for User Fee Policy Implementation All Former City of Scarborough Wards

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received the following report; and

(2) by unanimous vote of the Members present and voting, requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

(i) to reconsider and reinstate the two-hour line dancing program at L'Amoreaux Community Centre;

(ii) to reinstate the fee of $13.00;

(iii) to conduct an ongoing dialogue with L'Amoreaux Seniors to discuss any changes in future fee structures;

(iv) to report back to Scarborough Community Council on a public consultation process for any future changes;

(v) to consider establishing an Advisory Group at L'Amoreaux Community Centre; and

(vi) to report on all of the foregoing to the Scarborough Community Council meeting scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 9, 1999, such report to be considered at 5:00 p.m.:

(September 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, responding to Community Council's request, providing an overview of the consultation process regarding the implementation of recreation programs and user fee changes in the East District, and recommending that this report be received for information.

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

- Jean O'Bright, Member, L'Amoreaux Line Dance Committee;

- Stella McLaughlin, Line Dancing Participant; and

- Ross Bradshaw, Line Dancing Instructor.

(q) O.M.B. Hearing - Ontario Hydro Corridor

The Scarborough Community Council reports having deferred the following report, at the request of Councillor Kelly, for consideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on November 9, 1999:

(September 30, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer advising Community Council of the Council-authorized disbursements from the Contingency Fund to Community and Ratepayers' Associations respecting the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing on Ontario Hydro Corridor lands, and recommending that:

(1) the additional funds, in the amount of $917.00 for the South Bridlewood Residents' Association, and $1,560.00 for the North Bridlewood Residents' Association be approved;

(2) the request by the North Bridlewood Residents' Association for additional funding be approved in the amount of $7,349.00; and

(3) the total of all expenses paid, including those for any additional hearing, not exceed in total the $50,000.00 approved by Council in June, 1998.

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

- Sheryle Saunders, North Bridlewood Residents' Association; and

- David Wheeler, Terraview-Willowfield Residents' Association.

The Community Council also received a written submission from Lynda Wheeler, President, Terraview-Willowfield Residents' Association, a copy of which was provided to all Members of Community Council, and a copy thereof is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, Scarborough Civic Centre.

(r) Harmonization of the Sign By-laws

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) requested that the Acting Commissioner, Urban Planning and Development Services, report directly to Planning and Transportation Committee, at its meeting scheduled to be held on November 1, 1999, on the changes to the Scarborough Sign By-law which are proposed to be incorporated into the City-wide Sign By-law;

(2) directed that the Planning and Transportation Committee be advised that the Scarborough Community Council is opposed to the harmonization of the Sign By-laws of the former municipalities, pending further detailed comment from the Community Councils;

(3) requested that the Manager, Sign Section, East District, provide a presentation to the meeting of the Community Council scheduled to be held on November 9, 1999, respecting the Scarborough Sign By-law and all issues surrounding harmonization; and

(4) reaffirmed its position taken at its April 13, 1999, meeting that the Acting Commissioner, Urban Planning and Development Services, "be requested to report to Scarborough Community Council, at the appropriate time, on the matter of harmonization of the Sign By-laws and department fees across the new City of Toronto.":

(October 12, 1999) communication from the City Clerk (North York Community Council) advising that City Council, at its meeting held on September 28 and 29, 1999, struck out and referred Item (h) contained in Report No. 8 of the North York Community Council, entitled: "Harmonization of the Sign By-law" and referred it to the Community Councils for consideration and report thereon to the Planning and Transportation Committee meeting scheduled to be held on November 1, 1999.

(s) No. 3 Fallingbrook Crescent

The Scarborough Community Council reports having:

(1) received the following confidential report for information;

(2) requested that the City Solicitor report to the Community Council meeting scheduled to be held on November 9, 1999, on the status and evaluation of outstanding reports respecting this matter; and

(3) directed that the Solicitor for the owners of No. 5 Fallingbrook Crescent be so notified:

(October 1, 1999) confidential report from the City Solicitor responding to Community Council's request for a report respecting No. 3 Fallingbrook Crescent, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(t) Retention of Boundary Signs of the Former Municipalities

The Scarborough Community Council reports having been advised:

(1) by Councillor Kelly that Mr. Richard Schofield of the Scarborough Historical Society has requested, on behalf of the Board, that Community Council ensure that the Society is able to acquire one of the boundary signs of the former City of Scarborough for retention by the Board;

(2) by the Director of Transportation Services, East District, that City Council, at its meeting held on September 28 and 29, 1999, by its adoption of Clause 4 embodied in Report No. 3 of the Works Committee, entitled: "City of Toronto Boundary Identification Signs" directed "that the signs identifying the former Area Municipalities be returned to the respective Community Councils for a decision on their disposition"; and

(3) having requested that the Director retain all boundary signs until Community Council has had an opportunity to consider this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

BAS BALKISSOON

Chair

Toronto, October 12, 1999

(Report No. 12 of The Scarborough Community Council, including an addition thereto, was adopted, without amendment, by City Council on October 26 and 27, 1999.)