|
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES
AND OTHER COMMITTEES
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on May 13 and 14, 1998
EAST YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL
REPORT No. 7
1 Request for Planning Fees Reduction for Part Lot Control Applications
2 Community Festival Applications by the Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. Wine Festival - June 27 and June 28, 1998
Summer Festival - August 1-3, 1998
3 Encroachment Agreement for 1305 Woodbine Avenue
4 Cash-In-Lieu of Parking Application submitted by Mr. Lee Yao Shoon on behalf of Mr. Peter Calandra regarding 1677
Bayview Avenue
5 Parking Concerns Adjacent to 140 Oak Park Avenue
6 Request for a Variance from Sign By-law No. 64-87 of the Former Borough of East York submitted by A & P Stores for
the "Food Basics" Store at 1070 Pape Avenue
7 Request for a Variance from Sign By-Law No. 64-87 of the Former Borough of East York submitted by the Bank of
Nova Scotia at 1002 Pape Avenue
8 Request for a Variance from Sign By-law No. 64-87of the Former Borough of East York submitted by Cara Operations
Ltd. at 7 Curity Avenue
9 Request to Rename a Portion of William Morgan Drive to Patriarch Bartholomew Way
10 Commemoration of Visit by Patriarch Bartholomew of the Orthodox Church to Toronto in May 1998
11 1998 Membership Ontario Traffic Conference
12 Proposed Turn Restriction from Millwood Road to MacNaughton Road: Traffic Poll Results
13 Other Items Considered by the Community Council
City of Toronto
REPORT No. 7
OF THE EAST YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL
(from its meeting on May 6, 1998,
submitted by Councillor Michael Prue, Chair)
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on May 13 and 14, 1998
1
Request for Planning Fees Reduction
for Part Lot Control Applications
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends as follows:
(1)the adoption of the following report (April21,1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York;
and
(2)the adoption of the amendments to the report (April 21, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services,
East York, as outlined in the following supplementary report (April 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of
Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
This report to the May 6, 1998 meeting of the East York Community Council responds to Council`s request that Planning
Staff:
- detail the costs incurred with respect to the development at 870 Pape Avenue; and
- compare the application fees charged by the former Borough of East York to those that will be charged by the City of
Toronto under the newly approved application fee schedule, and do this comparison for the 870 Pape Avenue and other
applications which are requesting a fee refund;
Recommendation:
That the East York Community Council direct municipal staff to:
- prepare an amendment to the former Borough of East York fee by-law # 87-92 to enable the application
processing fees for the removal of part lot control application by Cohen and Alter Developments Inc. for 870
Pape Avenue to correspond to the fees that have been approved but not yet implemented by the City of Toronto;
- refund Inaugural Developments Inc. the portion of the fees which exceeds the new fees set by the City of
Toronto, for their recent application for the removal of part lot control at 141 Cedarvale Avenue.
and,
iii)prepare an amendment to the former Borough of East York fee by-law #87-92 to enable the application processing fees
for the removal of part lot control application by Oxford Hills Inc. for 930-952 Millwood Road to correspond to the fees
that have been approved but not yet implemented by the City of Toronto.
Background:
Development Costs:
The following chart details the application costs incurred by Cohen and Alter in processing their various applications for a
78 unit housing development at 870 Pape Avenue:
TABLE 1
| Official Plan/Zoning By-law Amendment Applications |
$10,750.00 |
| Site Plan Application |
$10,000.00 |
| Committee of Adjustment |
$500.00 |
| Draft Plan of Subdivision |
$10,500.00 |
| Consulting Fees* |
$61,500.00 |
| TOTAL |
$93,250.00 |
* Includes legal, architectural and engineering consultants.
Discussion:
On April 1, 1998 East York Community Council received a delegation from Mr. H. Cohen, on behalf of Cohen and Alter
Developments Inc. requesting that Council authorize a reduction to the currently applicable application fees for their
impending application for the removal of part lot control at 870 Pape Avenue. Based on the former Borough's application
fees schedule (see attachment 1), these fees would amount to $77,000.00. This is in addition to the fees already paid by
this developer for the processing of their Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment, and Plan of Subdivision and Site
Plan approvals (see Table 1 above) .
Staff advised during the April, 1, 1998, East York Community Council meeting that there may be merit in Mr. Cohen's
request. This is because when these fees were set it was not anticipated that a proposal of this magnitude would be
processed via removal of part lot control. Normally, removal of part lot control is done for much smaller projects,
typically consisting of no more than 20 lots. The cost of this type of application is set at the same level (i.e. $1,000.00 per
lot) as that of a severance since the end result of both is exactly the same.
The creation of new lots is typically handled as part of plan of subdivision approvals without any additional charges.
Cohen and Alter chose to get subdivision approval for blocks only. They now have to break the blocks down into lots
through the removal of part lot control process.. Thus they are faced with this additional substantial cost.
The new City of Toronto fee schedule requires payment of a "base fee" of $1,800.00 and a processing fee of $200.00 for
each new lot. City Council also added a surcharge of 7% for the recovery of costs incurred by the City's Legal department
and a surcharge to recover costs of notice circulation incurred by the Clerk's department. Thus the new fees for this
proposal would amount to $17,200.00 to cover planning fees, and $1,204.00 to cover legal fees for a total of $18,404.00.
This will save Cohen and Alter some $58,596.00. (There is no requirement for circulation, thus presumably the Clerk will
not require any additional funding).
These new fees are anticipated to come into effect within the next several months (i.e. as soon the City's planning staff
prepares a consolidated fee schedule and the former municipal fee by-laws are repealed by Council). This being the case,
Staff believe that it is appropriate to apply these fees ahead of that time. This can be accomplished in the interim, via an
amendment to the former Borough of East York fee by-law.
We have also recently processed a part lot control removal application by Inaugural Source Inc. for their proposal at 141
Cedarvale Avenue. They submitted their application in the latter part of 1997 in order to avoid potential delays anticipated
as a result of amalgamation. They did this at Planning Staff`s advice. The cost they incurred for that application's
processing was $13,000.00. Inaugural Source Inc. have also requested that these fees be either refunded or lowered.
We believe that this request should be considered in the same light as that made by Cohen and Alter. Removal of part lot
control need not be done until the project is under construction and Inaugural Source Inc., like Cohen and Alter could
have delayed their application until that time. The fee that would apply to their application under the new fees set by the
City of Toronto is $4,708.00. This is $8,292.00 less than that charged by the former Borough and if Council considers
their request to be valid, this is the sum of money that should be refunded.
Conclusion:
Staff are of the opinion that the new application fees set by the City of Toronto are appropriate. If Council concurs, Staff
should be directed to prepare a fee by-law amendment and forward it for approval by the City of Toronto Council.
As regards the request by Inaugural Source Inc., Staff are of the opinion that they should be accorded the same
consideration as Cohen and Alter. Thus we are recommending that Council authorize an $8,292.00 refund of their fees.
Staff note that a third application for part lot control exemption is imminent. It is about to be submitted by Oxford Hill
Inc., for a 26 unit development at 930-952 Millwood Road. If Council approves this fee reduction for 870 Pape, the same
consideration should also be given to 930-952 Millwood Road.
Contact Name:
Jean Besz, Senior Planner - East York
(416) 778-2045
(416) 4669877
jbesz@borough.eastyork.on.ca
Combined Applications to Amend
the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law
Application Fee:$750
Planning Processing Fee:
Residential, except Apartments$200/residential unit to a maximum of $10,000
Residential Apartments$100/residential unit to a maximum of $10,000
Commercial or Industrial$1.00/m2 of floor area to a maximum of $20,000
Mixed Residential and Commercial$100/residential unit plus $1.00/m2 of commercial floor area to a maximum of $20,000
Institutional or Other$0.50/m2 of floor area to a maximum of $10,000
Minor Amendment$750
Minimum Planning Processing Fee$750
Applications for Municipal Review and Comments
Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval for Condominium Registration
Application Fee:$500
Planning Processing Fee:
Residential Condominium$50/unit to a maximum of $10,000
Industrial or Commercial Condominium$200/unit to a maximum of $10,000
Mixed Residential and Commercial$50/residential unit plus $200/
Condominiumcommercial unit, to a maximum of $10,000
Minimum Planning Processing Fee$1,000
Site Plan Development Applications
Application Fee:$500
Planning Processing Fee:
a)Residential:
New except ApartmentsThe greater of $5,000/ha or $100/residential unit, to a maximum of $10,000
New ApartmentsThe greater of $5,00/ha or $50/residential unit, to a maximum of $10,000
Additions, Alterations, Conversions$500 plus tariff as above for each additional
Changes in Use or Otherresidential unit created
Minor Revisions and Amendments to$500
site plan development agreement
Minimum Fee$500
b)Non-Residential
New Industrial or CommercialThe greater of $1.00/m2 of floor area or $5,000/ha of site area, to a maximum of $10,000
New InstitutionalThe greater of $0.50/m2 of floor area or $2,500/ha of site area, to a maximum of $5,000
Additions, Alterations, Conversions,$500 plus tariff as above for any additional
Changes in Use or Otherfloor area created
Minor Revisions and Amendments to$500
site plan development agreement
Minimum Fee$500
c)Mixed Residential and Non-Residential
NewThe greater of $100/residential unit and $1.00/m2 of commercial or industrial floor area, or $5,000/ha or site area, to a
maximum of $10,000
Additions, Alterations, Conversions,$500 plus tariff as above for any additional floor Change in Useareacreated
Minor Revisions and Amendments to$500
site plan development agreement
Minimum Fee$500
Schedule of Fees
Applications to Amend the Official Plan Only
Application Fee:$500
Panning Processing Fee:
Residential, Commercial or
Industrial$10,000/ha to a maximum of $20,000
Institutional or Other$2,500/ha to a maximum of $10,000
Minor Amendment$500
Minimum Planning Processing Fee$500
Applications to Amend the Zoning By-law Only
Application Fee:$250
Planning Processing Fee:
Residential, except Apartments$200/residential unit to a maximum of $10,000
Residential Apartments$100/residential unit to a maximum of $10,000
Commercial or Industrial$1.00/m2 of floor area to a maximum of $20,000
Mixed Residential and Commercial$100/residential unit plus $1.00/m2 of commercial floor area to a maximum of $20,000
Institutional or Other$0.50/m2 of floor area to a maximum of $10,000
Minor Amendment$250
Minimum Planning Processing Fee$250
Applications for Municipal Review and Comments
Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval
Application Fee:$500
Planning Processing Fee:$250/lot to a maximum of $10,000
Minimum Planning Processing Fee$1,000
Other Types of Applications
Application For:
a)Minor Variance under subsection
45(1) of the Planning Act
i)Residential$175
ii)Other$450
Plus $50 for each additional variance
required in the same application for
residential or other
b)Permission under subsection 45(2) of
the Planning Act
i)Residential$200
ii)Other$450
Plus $50 for each additional permission
required in the same application for
residential or other
c)Consent under Section 53 of the Act$1,000
d)Removing of a Holding symbol$1,000
e)Making a cash payment in lieu of$500
providing required parking
f)Approval under Section 8 of the Rental$100/unit with a minimum of $500
Housing Protection Act, 1989to a maximum of $2,500
g)Designation of Lands Not Subject to$1,000 per residential, commercial
Part Lot Control pursuant toand industrial unit
Subsection 51(7) of the Act
The East York Community Council submits the following supplementary report (April 29, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
This report revises the application fees figures quoted in Planning Staff 's April 21, 1998, report which among other
matters compared the application fees charged by the former Borough of East York to those approved by the new City of
Toronto.
Recommendations:
That the East York Community Council receive this report as information.
Background:
The report which staff prepared in response to East York Community Council's directive that we respond to Mr. H.
Cohen's request for a reduction to the application fees charged under the former Borough of East York Planning Fees
By-law #87-92, was prepared in advance of official communication regarding the City of Toronto Council's decision on
these fees. Consequently, the fees set out in that report are incorrect in that they indicate that the surcharge set by Council
for legal services amounted to 7% rather than 7.5%.
The following sets out the revisions to Staff's April 21, 1998, report required to correctly reflect Council's decision:
Replace paragraph 1 on page 3 with the following new paragraph 1:
"The new City of Toronto fee schedule requires payment of a "base fee" of $1,800.00 and a processing fee of $200.00 for
each new lot. City Council also added a surcharge of 7.5% for the recovery of costs incurred by the City's Legal
department and a surcharge to recover costs of notice circulation incurred by the Clerk's department. Thus the new fees for
this proposal would amount to $18,490.00 to cover planning and legal fees. This will save Cohen and Alter some
$58,510.00. (There is no requirement for circulation, thus presumably the Clerk will not require any additional funding)."
Replace paragraph 4 on page 3 with the following new paragraph 4:
"We believe that this request should be considered in the same light as that made by Cohen and Alter. Removal of part lot
control need not be done until the project is under construction and Inaugural Source Inc., like Cohen and Alter could
have delayed their application until that time. The fee that would apply to their application under the new fees set by the
City of Toronto is $4,730.00. This is $8,270.00 less than that charged by the former Borough, and if Council considers
their request to be valid, this is the sum of money that should be refunded."
Replace paragraph 6 on page 3 with the following new paragraph 6:
"As regards the request by Inaugural Source Inc., Staff are of the opinion that they should be accorded the same treatment
as Cohen and Alter. Thus we are recommending that Council authorize an $8,270.00 refund of their fees."
Contact Name:
Jean Besz
Senior Planner - East York
(416) 778-2045
(416) 466-9877
--------
Mr. John Alati, Davies Howe Partners, Toronto, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with
the foregoing.
2
Community Festival Applications by the
Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc.
Wine Festival - June 27 and June 28, 1998
Summer Festival - August 1-3, 1998
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April17, 1998) from the
City Clerk:
Purpose:
To acquire Council's approval of the community festival applications submitted by the Cypriot Community of Toronto
Inc. for the Wine Festival to be held on Friday, June 27, 1998 and Saturday, June 28, 1998 and for the Summer Festival to
be held on Saturday, August 1, 1998 to Monday,August 3, 1998.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
The Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. has submitted the appropriate application fees and the required deposits with
respect to these festivals.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1) the Wine Festival on Saturday, June 27, 1998 and Sunday, June 28, 1998, and for the Summer Festival to be held on
Saturday, August 1, 1998 to Monday, August 3, 1998, hosted by the Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. be deemed as
Community Festivals in the City of Toronto;
(2)City Council grant the Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. community festival permits for the Wine Festival and the
Summer Festival subject to the following conditions:
(i)the approval by the East York Committee of Adjustment of an extension to the Temporary Use By-law No. 53-95 to
permit community festivals in industrially zoned lands in the Leaside area;
(ii)that the applicant be responsible for arranging the private collection and disposal of all waste generated from the two
festivals;
(iii)that adequate garbage containers be supplied to the outdoor festival area to control litter within the permitted area or
the surrounding properties;
(iv)that appropriate barriers for liquor control be erected, portable washrooms and increased security be implemented as
appropriate;
(v)that the festival close at 1:00 a.m. in accordance with the submitted applications and that amplified sound cease in
accordance with the following schedule:
(a)Wine Festival Saturday, June 27, 1998 -12:00 midnight
Sunday, June 28, 1998 -11:00 p.m.
(b)Summer FestivalSaturday, August 1, 1998 -12:00 midnight
Sunday, August 2, 1998 -11:00 p.m.
Monday, August 3, 1998 -11:00 p.m.
(vi)that the applicant adhere to the standard conditions imposed by the City of Toronto Fire Department which shall be
listed on the community festival permits.
Council Reference/Background/History:
In accordance with former Borough of East York By-law No. 67-95 entitled "Being a by-law to regulate and licence
community festivals and other places of amusement", the Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. submitted two applications
to hold community festivals on their property at 6Thorncliffe Park Drive. The Wine Festival shall be held on June 27,
1998 and June 28, 1998. The Summer Festival shall be held on August 1-3, 1998. The Cypriot Community of Toronto
Inc. have held both of these festivals in past years.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
When an event is categorized as a community festival, under the liquor licensing requirements, the Liquor License Board
of Ontario requires the person/organization to acquire a sanction from the municipality where the event shall be held. To
manage the various issues relating to community festivals, such as noise by-law requirements, parking issues, health
regulations and garbage control, the Borough of East York adopted By-law No. 67-95 which regulates and licenses
community festivals. (The Community Festival By-law)
Under the Community Festival By-law, the Clerk is entitled to issue a permit for a community festival subject to the
applicant meeting appropriate conditions outlined within the by-law. If the Clerk determined that it was appropriate to
impose conditions, the applications may be referred to Council and Council may grant the Licence subject to certain terms
and conditions.
Upon receipt of these applications, they were circulated to the Fire Department, Health Unit, Parks, Recreation and
Operations Department, and Development Services Department for comments. The following comments were received:
Fire Department:No objections to the festivals; however, the following requirements should be strictly adhered to:
1.No open flames, candles permitted on tables etc.;
2.All decorative materials are to be of non-combustible material or treated for flame resistance;
3.Provide and maintain clear aisles to all exit doors;
4.Provide portable fire extinguishers through the entire building and festival area in conformance with the fire code;
5.Flammable compressed gas cylinders (propane) are not to be stored or used inside the building;
6.The number of people permitted shall not exceed the occupant load as calculated by this department;
7.Emergency procedures must be posted.
Health Unit:No objections.
Parks, Recreation1. The applicant shall be responsible for arranging the private collection and Operationsand disposal of
all waste generated from these festivals;
Department:
2.Where the festival takes place outdoors, the applicant shall ensure adequate containers are provided to control litter and
that the containers are emptied on a regular basis to ensure that litter does not become a problem on the permitted or
surrounding properties;
3.For any portion of the event to be held outdoors, the applicant shall ensure there is provision of barriers for liquor
control, portable washrooms and increased security; and
4.For the protection of nearby residents, the sound pressure level shall not exceed 100 decibels measured at a 100 foot
radius. Noise levels above this limit are prohibited. (This is the policy that is used for festivals/events within parks;
however, the Interim Functional Lead for By-law Enforcement is in agreement with this sound pressure level)
Development 1.Community Festivals are permitted through the provisions of
ServicesTemporary Use Zoning By-law Nos. 28-94 and 53-95 which permitted Department:community festivals in
industrially zoned lands in the Leaside area.
The zoning by-laws were passed as temporary use by-laws to determine if community festivals had any significant impact
on the community. By-law No. 28-94 expired after a period of one year. By-law No. 53-95 was passed on May 1, 1995,
and expires on May1, 1998.
Unfortunately, there will not be sufficient time to bring this issue before the East York Community Council and City
Council in time for another by-law to be in force prior to the June 27th and June 28th event since these by-laws must go
through the formal planning process.
Planning staff have advised the applicant to apply for an extension of the by-law to the East York Committee of
Adjustment. The applicant has been advised that the application before the Committee of Adjustment will be supported by
staff. Staff will also be advising the Committee that it does not oppose the refund of the application fees. The meeting of
the Committee of Adjustment where this issue will be discussed is scheduled for May 19, 1998.
Further, planning staff is proposing to address the matter of the use of industrial lands for community festivals in a report
to the EastYork Community Council in the near future;
2.Currently, there is a structure located in the garden area of the property and the Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. was
requested by the Council of the Borough of East York to remove or legalize this structure by October 1, 1997. The
Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. Has made application to the East York Building Department to legalize this structure
and are in the process of doing so; and
3.Amplified sound shall cease in accordance with the following schedule:
(a)Wine Festival-Saturday, June 27, 1998-12:00midnight
Sunday, June 28, 1998-11:00 p.m.
(b)Summer Festival-Saturday, August 1, 1998-12:00 midnight
Sunday, August 2, 1998-11:00 p.m.
Monday, August 3, 1998-11:00 p.m.
Police Department:The Police shall be advised of the events; however, it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
appropriate security is provided. The applicant has be asked to review their security plans with the Police Department and
to provide comments to the Clerk's Department prior to the May 6, 1998, East York Community Council meeting.
With respect to these applications, it is necessary to have Council impose conditions on the approval of the permit to
ensure noise is kept within reasonable levels and that garbage is appropriately maintained and consistent with the type of
event proposed, zoning issues are recognized and to address the legalization of the structure in the garden area at 6
Thorncliffe Park Avenue.
The Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. requires City Council to sanction the events at this time so that they can apply for
the liquor license permit for the June event which must be submitted within 30 business days of the event. The Council
can also approve the permit applications subject to the applicant meeting the noted conditions. Should the applicant fail to
meet all the conditions imposed on them, the Clerk will not issue the permit. If there are major concerns with the ability of
the applicant to meet the conditions or should the Committee of Adjustment fail to extend the by-law then these matters
can be further reported to the May 27th meeting of the East York Community Council. It must be noted that the
Committee of Adjustment decision has a 21 day appeal period which would expire in early June, after the June 3 and 4,
1998, City Council meeting.
Conclusions:
Staff recommends that the Wine Festival and the Summer Festival planned by the Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. be
sanctioned by the East York Community Council and the City Council and that the permit applications be conditionally
approved. These events are culturally significant to the East York Community.
Contact Name:
Terry Fenton,
Interim Contact,
East York Community Council
778-2002
3
Encroachment Agreement
for 1305 Woodbine Avenue
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April21, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
This is to report to the May 6, 1998, East York Community Council meeting. The owner of 1305 Woodbine Avenue
would like to enter into an encroachment agreement with the City with respect to an existing wheel chair ramp on City
property.
Financial Implications:
The City has received a deposit from the owner to cover all costs associated with the preparation and registration of the
agreement.
Recommendations:
"It is recommended that the City be authorized to enter into an encroachment agreement with the owner of 1305
Woodbine Avenue; and that the appropriate person be authorized to execute such documents and take such steps as may
be necessary to give affect there to."
Background:
The owner purchased the property last year and had a wheel chair ramp installed before the winter so that he, as well as
the other occupants who are disabled would be able to access the house.
Discussion:
An encroachment agreement is required for a structure in the City Right of Way when the structure is:
- more than 0.6 metres ( 2 feet ) above grade.
- attached to a building; and
- affecting Public Utilities.
In this case the wheel chair ramp is more than 2 feet above grade and attached to the house. The house is situated on a
corner lot with the ramp sloping back along the side of the house to the backyard. Since the property line is quite close to
the side of the house, most of the ramp encroaches onto the boulevard ( flankage ) on Holborne Avenue. A legal six foot
high privacy fence encloses the flankage area and separates the wheel ramp from the public pedestrian traffic.
In addition, all clearances and approvals have been obtained from the Public Utilities affected.
Conclusions:
We recommend that approval be granted for this encroachment since the structure is away from the travelled portion of
Woodbine Avenue and Holborne Avenue. The agreement shall stipulate that if required the structure may be moved at the
owner's expense after reasonable notice is given by the affected Public Utility.
Contact Name:
Frank Pugliese
Coordinator of Engineering Services
East York Office
Telephone No.:(416)778-2226
Fax No.:(416)466-9877
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Encroachment
4
Cash-In-Lieu of Parking Application
submitted by Mr. Lee Yao Shoon on
behalf of Mr. Peter Calandra
regarding 1677 Bayview Avenue
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April3,1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
The Planning Division (East York Division) has received an application for Cash-in-Lieu of Parking for the property
located at 1677 Bayview Avenue.
This application has been submitted by Mr. Lee Yao Shoon on behalf of the owner, Mr. Peter Calandra. The application
has been submitted in order to request cash-in-lieu of parking for a proposed restaurant use on the ground floor of 1677
Bayview Avenue.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that East York Community Council approve this Cash-in-Lieu of Parking application, subject to the
owner entering into an agreement with the City of Toronto for the payment of $ 11,827.50 in lieu of 7 parking spaces. The
first two spaces are free as per the City of Toronto (East York Division) Policies and Procedures for Cash-in-Lieu Parking
as amended (see Appendix"A").
The maximum Public Floor Area to be used for this unit shall be 62.4m2
Source of Funds:
Not Applicable
Background:
On January 20, 1998, the Committee of Adjustment granted a variance from the required parking standard set out in
Zoning By-law No. 1916 for the subject property (see Appendix "B"). The application was submitted in order to request a
variance from providing 13 new parking spaces
required for the proposed restaurant use, and to maintain the 5 existing spaces.
The application was appealed by several neighbouring property owners to the Ontario Municipal Board. The appeal is still
waiting to heard.
If this application is approved, the Ontario Municipal Board hearing may not be necessary.
Comments:
Ownership
The owner of the subject property is Mr. Peter Calandra.
Proposed Changes
The change in use is from a bank to a restaurant. The only physical changes to the unit are the new signage at the front of
the building and interior layout alterations.
Parking:
The requirement for a restaurant is 1 parking space/4.8m2 of Public Floor Area, or in this case, 13 parking spaces.
The previous use in the subject unit was a bank, where the parking requirement is 1 parking space/47m2 of Gross Floor
Area, or in this case 6 parking spaces. The increased number of required parking spaces for a restaurant would be 7. The
owner proposes to maintain the existing 4 rear yard spaces which are accessed from the rear lane.
Therefore, if the Cash-in-Lieu of Parking for 7 spaces is approved, then there will no longer be a requirement for a minor
variance to forgive 13 spaces. This is because the cash-in-lieu contribution only needs to be applied to additional parking
required for the new use. The previous shortfall of 6 spaces for the bank is viewed as a legal-non-conforming condition.
Incidentally, the minor variance application was for 13 parking spaces because variance applications must deal with the
entire shortfall, even if part of it was a legal non-conforming situation.
Planning staff have reviewed this application in conjunction with Transportation staff, East York Division.
Transportation staff are in support of this proposal and their comments are as follows:
*the proposed restaurant will serve mostly residents of the adjacent communities of Leaside and South Eglinton;
*many patrons will walk instead of using their vehicles which will lesson the demand for parking spaces; and
*on-street metered parking is available on Bayview Avenue which will provide additional parking spaces.
The Toronto Parking Authority has accumulated funds for additional parking lots in areas of the city. The commercial
strip on Bayview Avenue, where the subject property is located, is high on their priority list for construction of new public
parking lots. Any additional cash-in-lieu of parking monies would be added to this fund.
In view of the above, Planning staff recommend that this application be approved subject to the owner entering into a
Cash-in-Lieu of Parking Agreement with the City of Toronto, for which the owner shall pay $11,827.50 in lieu of the
shortfall of on-site parking spaces.
Contact Name:
Ron Lisabeth
Planning Technician
Development Services (East York Location)
Planning Division
ph - 778-2044
--------
Mrs. Wong, Wong & Wong Engineering, Etobicoke, on behalf of the owner, appeared before the East York Community
Council in connection with the foregoing.
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Location Map
5
Parking Concerns Adjacent
to 140 Oak Park Avenue
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April22, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
To report to the May 6, 1998, meeting of the East York Community Council on the implementation of a "No Parking
Anytime" zone adjacent to 140 Oak Park Avenue.
Financial Implications:
The recommended changes can be accommodated in the existing Operating Budget.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)By-law No. 92-93 entitled "To regulate traffic on roads in the Borough of East York" be amended to implement a "No
Parking Anytime" restriction on the west side of Oak Park Avenue from a point 49.7 metres north of Epsom Avenue to a
point 53.4 metres north of Epsom Avenue; and;
(2)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Background:
The Works and Emergency Services Department received a letter from Mr. Dino Dinatale, 140 Oak Park Avenue, on
March 16, 1997, requesting that the curb space between the parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue and the parking pad at
142 Oak Park Avenue be regulated by a "No Parking Anytime" restriction. Mr. Dinatale is concerned about vehicles
parking in this space, overhanging his driveway, and make it difficult to access the parking pad at his home.
On April 9, 1998 this office received a memo from Councillor Prue with an attached letter from Ms. Ethel Koumarellas,
142 Oak Park Avenue, concerning a widening of the parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue and it's effect on the length of
the parking space between the parking pads at 140 and 142Oak Park Avenue.
Discussion:
Department staff have been mediators between the residents of 140 and 142 Oak Park Avenue in an on-going dispute over
use of curb space adjacent to 140 Oak Park Avenue for parking. There are three issues are interrelated:
1. The parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue;
2. The curb space adjacent to 140 Oak Park Avenue, between the parking pads at 140 and 142 Oak Park Avenue, and;
3. The effect of the proposed "No Parking Anytime" zone on the existing Overnight Permit Parking regulation on Oak
Park Avenue.
These issues are discussed below.
1.Parking Pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue
The owners of 140 Oak Park Avenue obtained a Residential Boulevard Parking Licence for an existing parking pad in
September 1995. They were required to reduce the width of the existing pad from the existing width of 2.74 metres (9.0
feet) to the maximum 2.44 metres (8.0 feet) that was permitted under the by-law. Mr. Dinatale subsequently reduced the
width of his pad to 2.44 metres by adding a wooden strip along one side.
Subsequent to this, the by-law was amended to change the date in which residents could apply for a Special Licence for
parking pads that existed prior to regulatory by-laws. The effective date was changed from April 17, 1950 to October 17,
1966. When Mr. Dinatale obtained a Special Licence for his parking pad, staff erroneously advised him that he had to
maintain the 2.44 metre width that was previously approved. In fact, he would have been eligible to widen the pad back to
it's original width of 2.74 metres. Staff are willing to revise his licence if he wishes to widen the pad to its original width
of 2.74 metres.
2.Curb Space between 140 and 142 Oak Park Avenue
In 1995, parking pads at each property were approved, leaving a 5.1 metre long curb space between the parking pads. The
Uniform Traffic By-law restricts parking within 0.6 metres of a driveway, therefore the legal parking area would be
reduced to 3.9 metres. This parking space may fit a small vehicle, however the owners of 140 Oak Park Avenue have
expressed concern that larger vehicles may park there and block access. Conversely, other residents have viewed this area
as a parking space and use it as such whenever possible.
The owners of 140 Oak Park Avenue have taken various steps to reduce the use of this curb space for parking. This office
received a complaint in November 1996 that the curb beside the parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue had been painted
yellow to indicate the necessary clearance for the parking pad. Staff investigated and found that the painted area actually
extended 1.6 metres beyond the legal edge of the parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue, reducing the apparent legal curb
space to 2.9 metres long. Since painted curbs have no legal standing under East York by-law, staff removed the paint.
Complaints have also been received about constant enforcement by the Toronto Police Parking Enforcement Unit for
perceived parking infractions of vehicles encroaching into the 0.6 metre clearance to the parking pad access at 140 Oak
Park Avenue.
Ms. Ethel Koumarellas, 142 Oak Park Avenue, expressed concern in her letter of April 7, 1998, about the apparent
widening of the parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue and its effect on the curb space between the parking pads. In fact,
there would be a negligible beneficial effect on this street parking space if the residents of 140 Oak Park Avenue were
required to narrow their pad.
The curb space on the street would not be considered a legal parking space because it is not long enough. Parking spaces
must be at least 5.5 metres long to qualify as a space for overnight permit parking use. If the wood barrier were to be
reinstalled, the reduction in the width of the parking pad at 140 Oak Park Avenue would only be 6 inches, which would
have no significant effect on the curb space and it's use for parking. Staff concur with Mr. Dinatale's concern that larger
vehicles block access to his parking pad. Therefore, we are recommending that it be regulated by a "No Parking Anytime"
restriction.
A similar situation occurred on Millwood Road in July 1994 in which a 4.9 metre curb space between legal parking pads
was being used for parking, subsequently blocking access to the adjacent parking pads. Borough Council approved a "No
Parking Anytime" restriction in this area to eliminate the problem that the adjacent residents were having with parked
vehicles blocking their access.
3.Overnight Permit Parking on Oak Park Avenue
Presently, the Overnight Permit Parking By-law No. 20-96 states that there are 37 overnight permit parking spaces
available on Oak Park Avenue. Staff studied the available curb space on Oak Park Avenue to determine if the installation
of a "No Parking Anytime" zone adjacent to 140 Oak Park Avenue would reduce the number of available overnight permit
parking spaces. Our study showed that the curb adjacent to another property is long enough to accommodate a legal
parking space but was not included as such when the street was initially studied. Therefore, the implementation of a "No
Parking Anytime" zone adjacent to 140 Oak Park Avenue will not affect the available overnight permit parking spaces. It
should also be noted that for the past four permit periods, about 27 permits (73 percent) of the 37 available permits have
been sold.
Conclusions:
Department staff have been involved in an ongoing dispute between the residents of 140 and 142 Oak Park Avenue
regarding the curb space between their parking pads. Staff concur with Mr. Dinatale's concern that owners of large
vehicles may see a small vehicle parked in this curb space and, believing that it is a parking space, proceed at a later time
to park their vehicle there and thus block access to his parking pad. He requested a "No Parking Anytime" zone be
implemented adjacent to his property to prevent this from occurring. This situation is similar to an issue on Millwood
Road in July 1994, in which Council approved the installation of a "No Parking Anytime" zone to eliminate the problems
caused by vehicles blocking parking pads.
An investigation conducted by staff revealed a parking space adjacent to another property on the street that is long enough
to accommodate another space. Therefore, available parking on the street will not be affected if this "No Parking
Anytime" zone is implemented. It should also be noted that the street has not sold out of overnight parking permits in the
last four permit periods.
Contact Name:
Bryan Muir, Transportation Technologist
East York District
778-2227
bmuir@borough.eastyork.on.ca
--------
The following persons appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing:
-Mr. Dino Dinatale, East York, on behalf of the owner of 140 Oak Park Avenue; and
-Ms. Ethel Koumarellas, East York.
6
Request for a Variance from Sign By-law No. 64-87 of the Former
Borough of East York submitted by A & P Stores for the
"Food Basics" Store at 1070 Pape Avenue
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April14, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
To report to the May 6, 1998 East York Community Council regarding a request to allow the installation of facial and
directional signs for the "Food Basics" store, at 1070 Pape Avenue, with larger dimensions and sign areas than what is
permitted in the East York Community Sign By-law No. 64-87 as amended.
Financial Implications:
There are no financial implications.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the request to install facial and directional signs for the "Food Basics" store, at 1070 Pape Avenue,
with larger dimensions and sign areas than what is permitted in the East York Community Sign By-law, be denied.
Background:
The Municipal Act authorizes Council to pass By-laws for prohibiting or regulating signs and advertising devices. The
Act also authorizes Council to grant minor variances from the by-laws where such variances, in the opinion of Council,
would maintain the general intent of the by-law.
Discussion:
The request for variance arises because the present Sign By-law allows for free standing commercial establishments:
a)One (1) facial or canopy sign for each face of wall exposed to and abutting a street, parking area or a permanent open
space in front or side yard provided the height of signs is not greater than 1.0 or 1.2 metres, respectively.
b) One(1) non-illuminated facial sign erected on the rear wall, where the building is accessed by a private or public lane,
provided the sign area does not exceed 0.8 square metres.
c)Directional signs in parking areas and driveways provided no sign is closer to a street line than 0.46 metres, does not
exceed 2.0 metres in height and has a total area not exceeding 0.3 metres square.
The applicant has installed, prior to obtaining a sign permit, the following signs:
a) A facial sign ( Gino's Food Basics), facing Pape Avenue, with a height of 2.89 metres (9'-6:) and a width of 6.6 metres
(21'-8");
b) a second facial sign (Best Prices Everyday!!!), facing Pape Avenue, with a height of 0.53 metres (1'-9");
c) a third facial sign (customers' parking), facing Pape Avenue, with a height of 1.2 metres (4'-0") and a length of 2.74
metres (9'-0");
d) a facial sign ( Food Basics, Best Prices Everyday!!!), facing Gamble Avenue, with a height of 2.13 metres (7'-0") and a
length of 16.3 metres (53'-6");
e) a second facial sign ( for customer parking), facing Gamble Avenue, with a height of 0.90 metres (3"-0") and a width of
4.26 metres (14'-0");
f)a facial sign, ( indicating maximum height at underground parking entrance), facing Gamble Avenue, with height of
0.30 metres (1'-0) and a length of 3.65 metres (12'-0"); and
g)a ground sign (directional) at the rear of the property with an aggregate area of 6.32 square metres and an overall height
of 3.18 metres.
Staff's comments on the above signs in relation to requirements of the Sign By-law are as follows:
1.The facial sign under item (a) above, is not permitted; it is larger than the sign by-law variance for a 12'-6" high x 8'-6"
wide facial sign granted by the previous Council of the Borough of East York, on February 18, 1991;
2.the facial sign under item (b) above, is in compliance with Council's decision of February 18, 1991, therefore, no
variance is required;
3.the facial (directional) sign under item (c) above, is not in compliance with the Sign By-law; it has an area of 3.29
square metres which is much greater than the permitted area of 0.3square metres; it would also be the third facial sign on
the same wall, while only two are permitted;
4.the facial sign under item (d) above, is not in compliance with the Sign by-Law; it has a height of 2.13 metres (7'-0")
which is much greater than the permitted height of 1.0 metre (3'-3");
5.the facial (directional) sign under item (e) above, is not in compliance with the Sign By-law; as directional sign is
greater in area than the permitted 0.3 square metres and as facial sign is not permitted at all being the second facial sign on
the same wall;
6.the facial (directional) sign under (f) above, is not in compliance with the sign by-law; it hasan area of 1.11 square
metres which is much greater than the permitted 0.3 square metres; and
7.the ground sign, under item (g) above, is not in compliance with the sign by-law; a ground sign is not permitted in
commercial buildings located in a commercial strip, as the one on Pape Avenue.
Staff is of the opinion that the above signs are likely to be objectionable to the neighbours, or create an adverse effect on
the signage of the area. The signs (except one facial sign) are either not permitted at all by the Sign By-law, as stated
above, or have much greater dimensions or much larger sign areas.
Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are not minor and do not maintain the general intent of the By-law. Due
to the magnitude of the request, may not be dealt with as a minor variance from the Sign By-law requirements. If the
Community Council wishes to permit these signs, it may be way of a site specific Sign By-law amendment for the
property at 1070 Pape Avenue.
Conclusion:
For all reasons stated above staff is of the opinion that the requested variances be denied.
Contact Name:
Iraklis (Eric) Tsotsos,
Manager of Plan Review,
at (416) 778-2239.
7
Request for a Variance from Sign By-Law No. 64-87 of the Former
Borough of East York submitted by the Bank of Nova Scotia
at 1002 Pape Avenue
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April14, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
To report to the May 6, 1998 East York Community Council regarding a request to allow the installation of the bank of
Nova Scotia logo as a second facial sign on the south elevation of the building, facing Gowan Avenue, at the above
address.
Financial Implications:
There are no financial implications.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the request to install the Nova Scotia logo as a second facial sign on the south elevation of the
building, facing Gowan Avenue, be granted.
Background:
The Municipal Act authorizes Council to pass By-laws for prohibiting or regulating signs and advertising devices. The
Act also authorizes Council to grant minor variances from the by-laws where such variances, in the opinion of Council,
would maintain the general intent of the by-law.
Discussion:
The request for variance arises because the present Sign By-law of the Community of East York, allows, for commercial
buildings in commercial strips as the one on Pape Avenue, One facial or canopy sign for each face of wall exposed to and
abutting a street, parking area or a permanent open space in front or side yard, provided the height does not exceed 1.0 or
1.2 metres respectively.
The applicant has applied for and obtained a permit to install a facial sign on the south wall, which faces Gowan Avenue.
The applicant wishes to install on the same wall a Bank of Nova Scotia logo as well with a height and a width of 1.2
metres (4'-0"). Two facial signs, though, on the same wall are not permitted by the Sign By-law as indicated above.
The wall on which this second facial sign is proposed to be installed, has a large area and does not have any other signs
except the facial sign mentioned above. The ratio of the sign area vs the wall area, including the second sign, would be
approximately 1:60; a very small ratio. In addition, the neighbouring area is predominantly commercial and the buildings
on the opposite side of the bank on Gowan Avenue are also commercial. Under these circumstances , staff is of the
opinion that the proposed sign is unlikely to be objectionable to the neighbours, or have an adverse impact on the general
signage of the area.
Conclusion:
Staff recommends that the requested variance be granted.
Contact Name:
Iraklis (Eric) Tsotsos,
Manager of Plan Review,
at (416) 778-2239.
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Exterior Signage
8
Request for a Variance from Sign By-law No. 64-87
of the Former Borough of East York submitted by
Cara Operations Ltd. at 7 Curity Avenue
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April14, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
To report to the May 6, 1998 East York Community Council regarding a request to allow the installation of an additional
facial sign on the north elevation of the building at the above address, for a Harvey's and Second Cup restaurant at the
above address.
Financial Implications:
There are no financial implications.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the request to install an additional facial sign on the north elevation of the building, at 7 Curity
Avenue, for a Harvey's and Second Cup restaurant, be granted, subject to approval of the Zoning By-law amendment
application, currently in process, to allow restaurant use at this address.
Background:
The Municipal Act authorizes Council to pass By-laws for prohibiting or regulating signs and advertising devices. The
Act also authorizes Council to grant minor variances from the by-laws where such variances, in the opinion of Council,
would maintain the general intent of the by-law.
Discussion:
The request for variance arises because the present Sign By-law in the Community of East York, allows for free standing
commercial establishments:
One (1) facial or canopy sign for each face of wall exposed to and abutting a street, parking area or a permanent open
space in a front or side yard provided the height does not exceed 1.0 or 1.2 metres respectively.
The applicant proposes to install on the north building elevation an additional facial sign for Harvey's and Second Cup
restaurant business, operating as a separate entity from within the main Home Depot store. This additional facial sign,
though, is not in compliance with the Sign By-law for the following reasons:
a) It would be the third sign on the same wall elevation, while the Sign By-law, based on a Sign By-law exemption
granted by the previous Council of the Borough of East York on May 29, 1995, allows only two signs.
b) It would have an overall height of 1.3 metres which exceeds the permitted height of 1.0metre.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed sign is not likely to be objectionable to the neighbours, or create an adverse effect
on the signage of the area for the following reasons:
a) The wall on which this additional sign is proposed to be installed has a large area and it is set back from the street
(Curity Avenue) about 150 metres.
b) The area of the existing and proposed signs on this wall elevation would be not more than 20percent of the total area of
the wall.
c)The neighbouring area in general is predominantly industrial and the buildings on the opposite side of Home Depot are
also industrial.
Conclusion:
The requested variance is minor and would maintain the general intent of the by-law. Staff has no objection for the
variance to be granted.
Contact Name:
Iraklis (Eric) Tsotsos,
Manager of Plan Review,
at (416) 778-2239.
--------
Councillor Ootes, at the meeting of the East York Community Council on May 6, 1998, declared his interest in the
foregoing matter, in that a relative is employed by the Second Cup being a company which has business affiliations with
Cara Operations Ltd.
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Full Elevation
(Councillor Ootes, at the meeting of City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause,
in that a relative is employed by the Second Cup, being a company which has business affiliations with Cara Operations
Ltd.)
9
Request to Rename a Portion of William Morgan Drive
to Patriarch Bartholomew Way
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April23, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
Purpose:
To report to the May 6, 1998 East York Community Council on the request from Metropolitan Archbishop Sotirios of the
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto to rename a street in East York in honour of the visit to Toronto from His All
Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew on May30 and 31st, 1998.
Source of Funds:
Costs are estimated to be approximately $5,000.00, including advertising and registration fees. It is recommended that
these costs be included in the budget for the visit to Toronto by His All Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(i)a portion of William Morgan Drive east of the north/south portion of William Morgan Drive be renamed to Patriarch
Bartholomew Way;
(ii)Council authorize Staff to proceed with the necessary advertising to enact the recommended street name change as
required by the Municipal Act, Section 210, Chapter 105;
(iii)Council designate the June 24th East York Community Council meeting to hear any person who claims that he/she will
be adversely affected by the proposed street name change and who applies to be heard; and,
(iv)That Council authorize the appropriate by-law to give effect hereto.
Background:
The Mayor's Office received a request from Metropolitan Archbishop Sotirios of the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of
Toronto to rename Overlea Boulevard in honour of the upcoming visit of His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch
Bartholomew to Toronto on May 30 and May 31st, 1998. Archbishop Sotirios has requested that Toronto honour this visit
with a permanent memorial, on behalf of all Orthodox Christians in Canada. The Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto
has recently moved its offices to 86 Overlea Boulevard.
Discussion:
The renaming of Overlea Boulevard to Patriarch Bartholomew Boulevard would require a significant number of
businesses to change their addresses including the approximately 70 businesses in the East York Town Centre.
Furthermore, the Canadian head offices for Coca-Cola Ltd and the Salvation Army are also located on Overlea Boulevard.
A complete list of businesses which would be affected is included as Appendix "A". Given the significant impact of
changing the name of Overlea Boulevard, Councillor Prue has proposed that a small portion of William Morgan Drive be
renamed to Patriarch Bartholomew Way. The section proposed is the eastern most portion of William Morgan Drive
which provides vehicular access to #86 Overlea Boulevard. Renaming this portion of William Morgan Drive would
provide the opportunity for the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto to change their address to Patriarch Bartholomew
Way.
There are no businesses or residential addresses which front onto this section of William Morgan Drive. However, staff
recommend that notice of the proposed change be distributed to residents and businesses within 120 metres of William
Morgan Drive to determine public opinion on the proposed change.
Statutory Requirements
The Municipal Act outlines the procedures for changing the name of a road. Section 210, Chapter105 states that:
(A)A by-law changing the name of a highway has no effect until a copy of it, certified under the hand of the clerk and the
seal of the corporation, has been registered in the proper land registry office.
(B)Before passing a by-law for changing the name of a highway,
(i)notice of the proposed by-law shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper having
general circulation in the municipality, and
(ii)the council shall hear any person who claims that he will be adversely affected by the by-law and who applies to be
heard.
Funding Implications
A notice of street name change must be advertised in the Toronto Star for 4 consecutive weeks at a cost of between
$3,000.00 and $5,000.00. Additionally, there is a charge of $200.00 to register the street name. These funds are typically
borne by the applicant.
Schedule
The following is the proposed schedule of Community Council meetings, Council meetings and other important events
which are required to enact the proposed name change:
DateEvent
May 6, 1998Report to East York Community Council recommending name change.
May 13,14,15, 1998Report to Toronto Council.
May 19, 1998Advertising begins.
May 30,31, 1998Visit to Toronto by Patriarch Bartholomew.
June 16, 1998Advertising ends.
June 24, 1998East York Community Council - mandatory public hearing to hear any person who claims to be adversely
affected.
July 8,9,10, 1998Toronto Council, final approval.
Since the Patriarch's visit occurs during the approval process, staff will install temporary signs in the area advising of the
proposed name change. A special custom street name sign could also be made available as a gift to the Patriarch.
Conclusions:
The proposal by the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto to rename Overlea Boulevard to rename Patriarch
Bartholomew Way would have a significant impact to the businesses which have Overlea Boulevard addresses. Councillor
Prue, in consultation with Archbishop Sotirios, has reviewed streets in the vicinity of Overlea Boulevard in an effort to
find an alternate street suitable for renaming. Based on this review, it is recommended, as an alternative, that a section of
William Morgan Drive be renamed to Patriarch Bartholomew Way. No businesses or residents currently have an address
on this section of William Morgan Drive, therefore, the overall impact should be minimal. The Municipal Act requires
that the proposed street name change would need to be advertised once a week for 4 weeks in a Toronto Daily newspaper
prior to a public meeting to hear any person who feels that they would be adversely affected by the proposed street name
change. The estimated cost for advertising and registering the new street name would be approximately $5,000.00.
Contact Name:
Peter Bartos, P.Eng., Transportation Engineer
East York District 778-2225
APPENDIX A
Business Addresses on Overlea Boulevard
AddressName
16Claremont Camera
28Beallor & Partners
36Chesapeake Ltd.
42Coca-Cola Beverages Ltd.
42Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd.
4588 Jewellery & Watches Company
45A Touch of Art
45Alpha Laboratories Inc.
45Bank of Montreal
45Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream
45Bata Shoe Stores
45Bi-Way Stores Ltd.
45Bijou Accessories
45Black Photo Corporation
45Bowlerama Thorncliffe
45Brewers Retail Inc.
45Chu, Dr. Michael W.
45Cohen, Dr. Milton
45Coles - The Book People
45Cotton Collectibles Inc.
45Dahl's Portrait Studio
45Dominion Save-A-Centre
45Dunkin Donuts
45East York Chiropractic Clinic
45East York Diagnostic Ultrasound
45East York Hearing Aid Centre
45East York Medical Health Centre
45East York Sewing Centre
45Easy T's
45Five Star Printers
45Flora, Dr. F.Q.
45Gisela's Skin Care
45Hallmark Cards Shop
45Hutchinson, Dr. Viven & Dr. Tony Lorch
45Japan Camera Centre
45Key King
45Kozerawsky, Dr. W. J.
45Krystal Fashions
45Laura Secord Ltd.
45Leo & Maria's Deli
45Mail & Stuff
45Matta, Dr. Roberto B.
45Movies for You
45National Trust Company
45Ninja Japan
45Norman Simpson Shoes
45Nutra Foods
45Open Window Bakery Ltd.
45Optical Factory
45Panorama Industries Inc.
45Parker's Cleaners
45Pizza Pizza
45Precision Time
45Radio Shack
45Reitman's
45Runner's Line Ltd.
45Scott's Hospitality Inc.
45Shopper's Drug Mart
45St. Clair Paint and Paper
45Style Barber Shop
45The Becker Milk Company
45The Flower Emporium
45The Toronto-Dominion Bank
45Thorncliffe Banquet Centre
45Thorncliffe Custom Tailor
45Thorncliffe Dental Care
45Thorncliffe Neighbourhood Office
45Thorncliffe News Stand
45Thorncliffe Park Shoe Repair
45Thorncliffe Physio Therapy
45Ticket & Info Shop
45Treats Muffins and Cookies
45Veronese
45Weinryb, Dr. Calvin
45Zellers Inc.
50Calefaction Systems Ltd.
50National Access Controls
50O'Hara Systems Inc.
50Oriole Business Systems Ltd.
50Sudata Consulting
56A Buck or Two
60East York Meals on Wheels
60Royal Bank of Canada
61Mr. Lube
65C Pas Systems Inc.
65Carriers Travel International
65Commemorative Services of Ontario
65Goldlist Development Corporation
65Insurex Canada Inc.
65Multi-Health Systems Inc.
65Overlea Cafe
65The Communication Group Inc.
65Throncliffe Overlea Dental Centre
65Thorncliffe Pharmacy
65Word and image Design Studio Inc.
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Location Map
10
Commemoration of Visit by Patriarch Bartholomew
of the Orthodox Church to Toronto in May 1998
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (May4, 1998) from the
Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations, East York:
Purpose:
To obtain approval from the East York Community Council to dedicate a reserve in E.T. Seton Park with a
commemorative stone and plaque to honour the May 1998 visit to Toronto of His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch
Bartholomew I.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
At the time this report was prepared, no detailed cost data was available for the stone or plaque, however, based on past
initiatives, it is anticipated to cost less than $1,000.00. The costs will be dependent on the inscription approved for the
plaque. Funds are available within the Parks and Recreation Department's budget.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the East York Community Council commemorate the May 1998 visit of Patriarch Bartholomew to Toronto through
dedication of a natural garden and a decorative stone with an anchored plaque in the area to the east and north of William
Morgan Drive in E.T. Seton Park; and
(2)the plaque be inscribed with the following:
"The natural garden area behind the nearby stream is dedicated to the Toronto visit of His All Holiness Ecumenical
Patriarch Bartholomew I. His lead among all religious leaders in protecting the natural environment throughout the world
serves as an inspiration to us all."
Council Reference/Background/History:
His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I is the spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians worldwide.
Since his ascending the Ecumenical Throne on November 2, 1991, he has taken the lead among all religious leaders in
promoting protection of the environment. He has initiated seminars and dialogues to discuss the need for the mobilization
of moral and spiritual forces to achieve harmony between humanity and nature.
Patriarch Bartholomew will be visiting the Toronto area in late May, 1998. The Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto
has approached staff to commemorate the Patriarch's visit by dedicating a natural garden area near their new church
property at the east end of William Morgan Drive. In appreciation for the dedication, the church agency will promote and
support projects designed to protect and enhance this natural area.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The area intended for the dedication contains a steep slope and natural forest located on the west side of a stream. The
forest cover includes a rare stand of shagbark hickory which is particularly worthy of preservation because this tree
species is a component of the Carolinian Forest, which reaches its most northerly limit in Toronto. The proposed
dedication area is north of the Overlea bridge, extending from the east end of William Morgan Drive around the back of
Central Park Lodge (see appendix for map).
The dedication will be commemorated with an inscribed metal plaque mounted on a large, decorative stone (see example
photo in appendix). The stone will be positioned between two existing trees and the pathway within easy view of path
users (site photo in appendix). The nearest access route to the site for vehicles and people is off Thorncliffe Park Drive,
south of Overlea Blvd. Parking is available just south of the Overlea bridge and the pathway leads north from the parking
area.
The following inscription is proposed for the plaque:
"The natural garden area behind the nearby stream is dedicated to the Toronto visit of His All Holiness Ecumenical
Patriarch Bartholomew I. His lead among all religious leaders in protecting the natural environment throughout the world
serves as an inspiration to us all."
Conclusions:
The proposed parkland dedication in E.T. Seton Park to commemorate the Patriarch Bartholomew's visit would be
regarded favourably by the Orthodox Christian community in Toronto and would attract support of the Greek Orthodox
Metropolis of Toronto for environmental protection and enhancement projects in the area.
Contact Name:
Don Boyle
Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations
Phone: (416) 778-2180 Fax: (416) 466-4170
E-mail: dboyle@borough.eastyork.on.ca
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Ernest Thompson Seaton Park
11
1998 Membership Ontario Traffic Conference
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends that:
(1)Councillor C. Ootes and Councillor M. Prue be appointed as the representatives from the East York
Community Council to the Ontario Traffic Conference; and
(2)that the Ontario Traffic Conference be appropriately advised of the appointments:
The East York Community Council reports, for the information of the City Council, having had before it a communication
(April 21, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the UrbanEnvironment and Development Committee on April 20,
1998, requested the East York Community Council to select up to two representatives from the East York Community
Council for the Ontario Traffic Conference and recommending that the selections be reported to the Administrative
Assistant of the Ontario Traffic Conference.
12
Proposed Turn Restriction from Millwood Road
to MacNaughton Road: Traffic Poll Results
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The East York Community Council recommends that:
(1)By-law No. 92-93 entitled "To regulate traffic on roads in the Borough of East York" be amended to implement
a Right Turn Restriction from westbound Millwood Road onto northbound MacNaughton Road from 7:00 a.m. to
9:00 a.m. for a trial period of six months;
(2)the Interim Functional Lead for Transportation be requested to report in December 1998 on the impact of the
implementation of this right turn restriction;
(3)appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto; and
(4)the following report (April 28, 1998) from the City Clerk, be received.
Purpose:
To report the results of a traffic poll conducted on MacNaughton Road and Cameron Crescent between Millwood Road
and Parkhurst Boulevard with respect to the implementation of a "Right Turn Restriction from westbound Millwood Road
onto northbound MacNaughton Road from 7:00a.m. to 9:00 a.m.".
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
The proposed changes can be accommodated from within the existing Operating Budget.
Recommendation:
That the report of the City Clerk be received for information.
Council Reference/Background/History:
The East York Community Council at its meeting held on February 18 and 19, 1998, requested the City Clerk to poll the
residents on MacNaughton Road and Cameron Crescent between MillwoodRoad and Parkhurst Boulevard with respect to
the implementation of a "Right Turn Restriction from westbound Millwood Road onto northbound MacNaughton Road
from 7:00a.m. to 9:00 a.m..
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The results of the poll are as follows:
Number of residents polled 89
Number of responses68
Spoiled0
Number in favour54
Number opposed10
No opinion4
Comments returned with the poll have been provided to the Councillors representing East York, Ward One.
Conclusions:
The East York Community Council be requested to consider the poll results in determination of the proposal to implement
a "Right Turn Restriction from westbound Millwood Road onto northbound MacNaughton Road from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00
a.m.".
Contact Name:
Janette McCusker, East York Office, Clerk's Department
778-2003
13
Other Items Considered by the Community Council
(City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)
(a)Appeal of a Committee of Adjustment Decision
Regarding 215 Gowan Avenue.
The East York Community Council reports having received the following report:
(April 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising of the status of the appeal to the
Ontario Municipal Board regarding a decision of the East York Committee of Adjustment to refuse an application for
minor variance at 215Gowan Avenue and recommending that the report be received for information.
(b)Three-Hour Parking Enforcement
in the East York Community.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1)requested Interim Functional Lead for Transportation to report to the East York Community Council, as
necessary, on parking and enforcement issues in the East York community; and
(2)received the following report and communication:
(April 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising on the current three hour parking
enforcement procedures in the East York community and various options for providing future enforcement of the three
hour parking by-law and recommending that this report be received for information; and
(May 1, 1998) from the Staff Sergeant, Toronto Police Service, submitting information with respect to three-hour parking
enforcement procedures in the EastYork community and the position of the Toronto Police Service on the issue of
three-hour parking enforcement.
--------
Mr. Vern Martyn, Area Supervisor, Toronto Police Service, appeared before the East York Community Council in
connection with the foregoing.
(c)East York Parking Contract with
APCOA Parking Development
and Management Ltd.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1)referred the following report (April 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, and
the following communications (May 1, 1998 and May 4, 1998) from the President, APCOA Parking Development
and Management Ltd. to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for consideration with respect to
the recommended parking operation efficiencies available through technological advancements and the
involvement of private parking management services to deliver parking operations in the City of Toronto; and
(2)received the following report (March 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
(April 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, responding to a request from Councillor
Case Ootes regarding the relative costs of using existing municipal staff rather than extending the current agreement with
APCOA Parking & Management Ltd. which expires on May 31, 1998 and recommending that the report be received for
information;
(March 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising on the process the Development
Services staff will undertake in the transition of the East York district's parking operations after the contract between
APCOA Parking Development and Management Ltd. and East York expires May 31, 1998, and recommending that the
report be received for information;
(May 4, 1998) from Mr. Mickey Narun, APCOA Parking Development and Management Ltd., North York, advising of
APCOA's city wide operations and identifying efficiencies within the Parking Authority of Toronto and recommending
that this communication be received for information; and
(May 1, 1998) from Mr. Mickey Narun, APCOA Parking Development and Management Ltd., North York, advising of
APCOA's willingness to continue to provide parking management services for the City of Toronto, East York Community
and recommending that this communication be received for information.
--------
Mr. Mickey Narun, APCOA Parking Development & Management Ltd., North York, appeared before the East York
Community Council in connection with the foregoing.
(d)Safety Issues at the Intersection of
Broadway Avenue and Rumsey Road.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1)requested the Interim Functional Lead for Transportation to report on the following communication (May 5,
1998) from Mrs. Lillian Robus, East York; and
(2)received the following report (April 22, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
(May 5, 1998) from Mrs. Lillian Robus, East York, expressing concern with respect to safety issues at the intersection of
Broadway Avenue and Rumsey Road.
(April 22, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising that the Transportation Division
was in receipt of a letter from Ms. Lillian Robus, East York, dated October 6, 1997, requesting an investigation into the
need for crosswalks and crossing guards on Broadway Avenue and recommends that this report be received for
information;
(e)Auditor's Report for the Hydro-Electric Commission
of the Borough of East York, as at December 31, 1997.
The East York Community Council reports having received the following communication (April 17, 1998) from the
Director of Finance, Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission, East York Office:
(April 17, 1998) from the Director of Finance, Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission, EastYork Office, submitting the
Auditor's Report and the Financial Statements for the year ended December31, 1997, with respect to the Hydro-Electric
Commission of the BoroughofEastYork and recommending that the Auditor's Report and FinancialStatements be received
for information.
(f)Community Festival Zoning By-law.
The East York Community Council reports having concurred with the recommendation contained in the following
report (April 21, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
(April 21, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising of the status of temporary use
by-laws to permit community festivals in industrially zoned lands in the East York planning area and recommending that
a statutory public meeting be held in the daytime on June 24, 1998, to consider zoning by-law amendments to permit
community festivals in the industrial areas of the East York planning area.
(g)Request to Permit Parking in the
Off-Peak Periods on Bayview Avenue from
Balliol Street to Soudan Avenue/Parkhurst Boulevard.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1)recommended to the Urban Environment and Development Committee that parking on the west side of Bayview
Avenue between Balliol Street to Soudan Avenue from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. be implemented for a trial period of 6
months or less;
(2)requested the Interim Functional Lead for Transportation to report on the impact along Bayview Avenue as a
result of the implementation of parking during this time period; and
(3)received the following communication(April 21, 1998) from the City Clerk:
(April 21, 1998) from the City Clerk requesting comments from the East York Community Council to the Urban
Environment and Development Committee regarding a request from merchants on Bayview Avenue, between Balliol
Street and Soudan Avenue/Parkhurst Boulevard to permit parking in the "off-peak" direction during the morning and
afternoon peak periods due to a shortage of available on-street and off-street parking facilities.
--------
Mr. Harvey Albert, East York, on behalf of the South Bayview Business Association, appeared before the East York
Community Council in connection with the foregoing.
(h)Request to Purchase Property Abutting
169 Hopedale Avenue.
The East York Community Council reports having deferred consideration of the following report (February 2,
1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations, East York, to the May 27, 1998 meeting
of the East York Community Council to allow the Interim Functional Lead for Parks and Recreation the
opportunity to advise local residents of the proposal to sell the lands abutting 169 Hopedale Avenue by posting a
notice on the property and to allow interested parties to bring forward their comments to the May 27, 1998,
Community Council meeting:
(February 2, 1998) from the Acting Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Operations, East York, requesting input on a
real estate matter concerning lands abutting 169 Hopedale Avenue and recommending to the Corporate Services
Committee.
--------
Mr. Alfred E. Lamprecht, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the
foregoing,
(i)Overnight Permit Parking on Airdrie Road.
The East York Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (April 22, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Development Services, East York:
(April 22, 1998) from the Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advising that the Transportation Division
was in receipt of a letter from a resident at 31Airdrie Road, requesting authorization to park on the street and be exempted
from enforcement action under the three-hour parking regulations and recommending that:
(1)the City Clerk conduct a poll of the residents of Airdrie Road, between Heather Road and Bessborough Drive, to
determine support for the implementation of overnight permit parking, and;
(2)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
(j)Political Structure in East York.
The East York Community Council reports having received the communication (April21, 1998) from the City
Clerk:
(April 21, 1998) from the City Clerk, advising the East York Community Council that City Council, at its meeting held on
April16, 1998, reopened and reconsidered its previous decision and gave further consideration to Clause No. 1 of Report
No. 3 of The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, headed "Political Structure
for East York".
(k)Parkland Ravine Clean Up in the
East YorkCommunity throughout the
Don River System.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1)referred the following communication (April 28, 1998) from Mr. Chris Salmond, East York, to the Interim
Functional Lead for Parks and Recreation for appropriate action;
(2)requested the Interim Functional Lead for Parks and Recreation to report on the legal obligations of retail
stores to accept abandoned shopping carts found in ravine/park areas and any possible solutions available to the
municipality to remedy this issue; and
(3)extended its appreciation to Mr. Salmond and his volunteer group on their community participation and ravine
clean up efforts:
(April 28, 1998) from Mr. Chris Salmond, East York, advising the East York Community Council of the park and ravine
clean-up projects conducted by members of EYGRES; Mimico Correctional Centre; and the general public and requesting
funding to provide refreshments to the volunteers; Councillor Ootes and Councillor Prue to send thank-you letters to
various stores; the use of a pick-up truck for returning shopping carts to stores and appropriate continued municipal
support.
--------
Mr. Chris Salmond, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.
(l)Skateboarding on Local Streets.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1)requested the Interim Functional Lead for Parks and Recreation to ensure the Youth Outreach Worker, East
York Community, is more accessible to the community in order to respond to their needs and specifically with
respect to the issue of skateboarding on local streets;
(2)requested the Interim Functional Lead for Parks and Recreation to report on
potential locations and the feasibility of creating a skateboarding facility within the East York community; and
(3)received the deputation of Mr. Dimitrios Kiriakis, East York.
--------
Mr. Dimitros Kiriakis, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing.
(m)City of North York
Neighbourhood Watch Program.
The East York Community Council reports having:
(1) advised the North York Community Council that the East York Community Council endorses Neighbourhood
Watch as a model for establishing community safety and crime prevention;
(2)requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to include appropriate funding in the 1999 budget for the
East York community to undertake such a program; and
(3)received the following communication (April 27, 1998) from the City Clerk:
(April 27, 1998) from the City Clerk, submitting a resolution of the North York Community Council with respect to the
Neighbourhood Watch Program.
(n)Appointment of Director of Municipal Standards.
The East York Community Council reports having congratulated Mr. Harold Bratten, on his appointment as
Director of Municipal Standards for the City of Toronto.
The Commissioner of Development Services, East York, advised the East York Community Council of Mr. Bratten's
recent appointment.
Respectfully submitted,
MICHAEL PRUE,
Chair
Toronto, May 6, 1998
(Report No. 7 of The East York Community Council, including an addition thereto, was adopted, without amendment, by
City Council on May 13 and 14, 1998.)
|
