TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

REPORT No. 10

1Process for Disposal of City Property

2Construction Noise By-law Violations

3Broadlands Community Centre - Parking Lot - Don Parkway

4Construction Noise - The Majestic Condominium - 20, 24, 26, 30 and 32 Empress Avenue and11, 15, 17 and 21 Kingsdale Avenue - Performance Bond - North York Centre

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 10

OF THE NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL

(from its meeting on September 16, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Milton Berger, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

1

Process for Disposal of City Property

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council to be held on November 25, 1998.)

(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, deferred this Clause until its next regular meeting to be held on October 28, 1998.)

________

(Clause 1 of Report No. 9 of the North York Community Council)

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(1)the "Processes for Declaring Properties Surplus" outlined in the following report (August 18, 1998), from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, be approved subject to Section (4)(a)(ii), being amended to read as follows:

"recommendations made by Property Management Committee for allocation, including resolution of conflicting interests, be forwarded to the appropriate Community Council for consideration and recommendation to the appropriate Standing Committee, and recommendation to City Council";

(2)real estate matters under $500,000.00 that are deemed by a Ward Councillor to be of special interest, be considered by the Corporate Services Committee and City Council at that Councillor's request;

(3)real estate matters under $500,000.00, of local significance, be considered by the Community Council and City Council at a Councillor's request;

(4)matters related to the potential sale of any property be reported to the respective Community Council for comment before being considered by the Corporate Services Committee; and

(5)the Council Procedure By-law be amended accordingly.

The North York Community Council submits the following report (August 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To provide all Community Councils with information as to the process for disposal of City Property as requested by the Budget Committee.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Budget Committee at its meeting of May 26, 1998 requested that the Chief Administrative Officer ensure that Community Councils are informed of the process with respect to the disposal of property.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The process approved by City Council at its meeting of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, in considering the report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, Acquisition and Disposal of Real Property dated May 11, 1998, is as set out below.

PROCESSES FOR DECLARING PROPERTIES SURPLUS

(1)notice be provided to the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate of a potentially surplus property, such as by means of:

(a)corporate asset reviews such as space rationalization;

(b)department reorganization, reduction in staffing or program change; and

(c)a new tax sale property.

(2)a review to be undertaken by the Facilities and Real Estate Division and respective councillors, consulting with other departments to determine applicable considerations, including the following:

(a)any utilities on the lands;

(b)development potential;

(c)economic development potentials;

(d)environmental issues;

(e)other potential cost and budget considerations, such as capital budget impacts; and

(f)achieving social objectives.

(3)a circulation to be undertaken to determine interest in potentially surplus properties:

(a)circulation by the Facilities and Real Estate Division to other divisions, departments and ABC's to determine any interest in the property to meet their needs;

(b)circulation to the Council Strategy Committee for Persons without Homes, and other such interests as Council may determine, from time to time; and that

(c)use by a non profit organization that supports a municipal purpose be considered as a potentially appropriate use at this time before the property is officially declared surplus.

(4)reports are prepared and submitted under the following categories, with recommendations regarding determination, as appropriate:

(a)allocation to a department expressing the interest:

(i)report is submitted by the Executive Director to Property Management Committee on submissions of interest, with information as to the expressed interests;

(ii)decision is made by Property Management Committee for allocation, including resolution of conflicting interests; and

(iii)if no resolution by Property Management Committee, the decision is made by the CAO.

(b)allocation if interest expressed under 3 (b) above (organization supporting a municipal program):

(i)report is submitted by the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate to the Property Management Committee on the proposed use; and

(ii)report is submitted by the Commissioner of Corporate Services to the Corporate Services Committee, on the recommendation of the Property Management Committee, recommending that the property be declared surplus and that the property be allocated to the organization requesting it.

(c)disposal of a significant property where no public use identified:

(i)report is submitted by the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate to the Property Management Committee on large, high profile properties; and

(ii)report is submitted by the Commissioner of Corporate Services to the Corporate Services Committee, on the recommendations of the Property Management Committee, to recommend that the property be declared surplus and be sold.

(d)disposal of other property where no public use identified:

(i)report is submitted by the Commissioner of Corporate Services to the Corporate Services Committee, on the recommendation of the Property Management Committee, to recommend that the property be declared surplus and be sold.

(e)disposal of non viable sites where no public use identified:

(i)report is submitted by the Commissioner of Corporate Services to the Corporate Services Committee, on the recommendation of the Property Management Committee, recommending that the property be declared surplus and sold to the abutting owner; and

(ii)if the owner is not interested, property is to be retained in the inventory for future consideration.

(f)retention for potential longer term need by the City:

(i)report is submitted by the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate to the Property Management Committee regarding the long term and interim use for the property, such as leasing; and

(ii)report is submitted by the Commissioner of Corporate Services to the Corporate Services Committee, on the recommendation of the Property Management Committee, if required, such as for a major corporate initiative.

(5)staff of the Facilities and Real Estate Division provide the ward councillor with:

(a)notification of all real estate requests in the ward and keep the councillor informed of all ongoing negotiations;

(b)information regarding details prior to the final conclusion of any transactions and before any reports are signed or the matter is considered by the Corporate Services Committee/Council; and

(c)a copy of the signed report that will be on the agenda of the Corporate Services Committee.

Contact Name:

Roly Mayr, AACI, Director, Real Estate Services, (416) 396-4930, fax (416) 396-4241, e-mail address: mayr@city.scarborough.on.ca

nyc98144

The North York Community Council also submits the following communication (June 8, 1998) from the City Clerk:

City Council, at its meeting held on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, had before it Clause No. 28 of Report No.7 of the Corporate Services Committee, headed "Proposed Sale of Lot 198 - Woburn Avenue Registered Plan M-108 (Ward 9 - North York Centre South)".

Council directed that the aforementioned Clause be struck out and referred back to the North York Community Council for further consideration.

In addition, Council adopted the following recommendations:

"It is recommended that:

(1)Ward Councillors be notified of all real estate related requests in their Wards and be kept informed of all ongoing negotiations;

(2)Ward Councillors be advised of the details prior to the final conclusion of any transactions and before any reports are signed or the matter is considered by the Corporate Services Committee/Council; and

(3)the following motion be referred to the next meeting of the Corporate Services Committee to be held on June 22, 1998, for consideration with the report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services on the processing of real estate transactions:

Moved by Councillor Flint:

'It is recommended that:

(a)real estate matters under $500,000.00, that are deemed by a Ward Councillor to be of special interest, be considered by the Corporate Services Committee and City Council at that Councillor's request;

(b)real estate matters under $500,000.00, of local significance, be considered by the Community Council and City Council at a Councillor's request;

(c)matters related to the potential sale of any property be reported to the respective Community Council for comment before being considered by the Corporate Services Committee; and

(d)the Council Procedure By-law be amended accordingly.'"

A recorded vote on the adoption of Recommendation No. 1 moved by Councillor Shiner, and Recommendations Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 moved by Councillor Flint, was as follows:

FOR:Councillors Mammoliti, Moscoe, Feldman, Berger, Flint, Gardner, Filion, Shiner, King

AGAINST:NIL

ABSENT:Sgro, Li Preti, Augimeri, Chong, Minnan-Wong

Carried

2

Construction Noise By-law Violations

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, deferred this Clause until its next regular meeting to be held on October 28, 1998.)

________

(Clause 2 of Report No. 9 of the North York Community Council)

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(1)on the issuance of every building permit, the builder/applicant/agent be issued an information sheet notifying the builder of the requirements of the Construction Noise By-law;

(2)the builder/applicant/agent be required to sign a release form indicating that they have received, read and understand the requirements of the Construction Noise By-law; and

(3)the following Resolution from Councillor Filion, North York Centre, be adopted:

"WHEREAS the maximum fines for construction related violations of the Construction Noise By-law are not adjusted to the value or cost of construction; and

WHEREAS the current fines do not provide sufficient disincentive for builders of high density dwellings;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT City Council request the Provincial Government to increase the fines for violations of the Construction Noise By-law related to construction of high density development."

The North York Community Council submits the following report (August 13, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

As directed, to report on available measures "...such as a bond which would be forfeited upon conviction for violation of a noise by-law, to discourage developers from blatantly ignoring city by-law."

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

N/A

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received as information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Report No. 6 of the North York Community Council Clause No. 28 (p).

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

A resolution adopted by North York Community Council directs me to report on measures, such as a bond which would be forfeited upon conviction for violation of a noise by-law, that are available to discourage developers from violating construction noise by-laws.

The violation of a by-law constitutes an offence that is punishable under the Provincial Offences Act. On conviction, the Court can impose a fine of up to five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) for each offence. The purpose of the fine, of course, is both to punish the offence and to discourage the offender or others from re-offending.

The Provincial Offences Act constitutes a complete code for a prosecution and punishment of offences to noise by-laws. There is no authority for the City to impose an additional penalty of the kind suggested or of any other kind.

There may, however, be one step the City could take to help City prosecutors obtain meaningful fines against first offenders. On the issuance of every building permit, the builder could be issued an information sheet notifying the builder of the requirements of the construction noise by-law. If that were done as a matter of practice, the Courts might be more inclined to impose a significant fine for a first offence.

Conclusions:

There is no authority for the City to impose additional penalties upon those convicted of by-law offences. There may, however, be opportunities to attempt to ensure that the penalties imposed by the Courts on offenders are sufficient to deter further offending.

Contact Name:

George M. Dixon; (tel. 392-7221); (fax 392-0005)

(e-mail gdixon@toronto.ca)

3

Broadlands Community Centre -

Parking Lot - Don Parkway

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, deferred this Clause until its next regular meeting to be held on October 28, 1998.)

________

(Clause 23 of Report No. 9 of the North York Community Council)

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(1)the following report (August 26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, be received;

(2)the previous decision of the Council of the former City of North York to purchase two residential properties to develop parking facilities for the Broadlands Community Centre, be re-affirmed; and that the two lots be retained to create open space;

(3)if there is no agreement with the Grace Memorial Church by October 30, 1998, for the use of its parking facility by patrons of the Broadlands Community Centre and park, appropriate staff be authorized to proceed with the creation of a parking lot at 23 and 25 Castlegrove Boulevard, through the site plan process;

(4)if there is an agreement reached with the Grace Memorial Church, appropriate staff be authorized to proceed with the creation of an 18 space parking area on the east side of Castlegrove Boulevard, alongside the existing artificial ice rink; and

(5)appropriate staff take into consideration the traffic concerns of the community;

The North York Community Council submits the following report (August 26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

Two residential properties were purchased in 1998 for the purpose of developing needed parking facilities at the Broadlands Community Centre. Reacting to concerns expressed by the local residents, Parks and Recreation staff embarked on a new community consultation process which resulted in recommendations for a different set of parking alternatives, and the opportunity to return the two purchased properties to the re-sale residential market.

Source of Funds:

The development of a modified parking area (Recommendation 3) will cost an estimated $95,000.00 with funding coming from designated current and capital budgets. The sale of the two residential properties originally purchased at a cost of $547,020.00 will result in comparable funds returning to the City's Parkland Acquisition Reserve Fund.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)plans be abandoned for the demolition of the acquired properties at 23 and 25 Castlegrove Boulevard, for a parking lot;

(2)the two subject properties be offered for re-sale, with the proceeds credited to the Parkland Acquisition Reserve Account;

(3)an eighteen space parking area be created on the east side of Castlegrove Boulevard, along side the existing artificial ice rink;

(4)negotiations be undertaken regarding a possible agreement with officials of the neighbouring Grace Memorial Church for the use of their parking area by patrons of Broadlands Community Centre and Park; and

(5)the appropriate City officials take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Typical of facilities built in the 1950's and 1960's, Broadlands Artificial Ice Rink and Community Centre were intended for use by local residents who could walk to their neighbourhood facility. Parking facilities were frequently not provided at these types of public recreation facilities. When the Broadlands facility was upgraded and expanded in 1993, funds were limited, and the parking lot was eliminated from the re-construction plan.

Users and usage, however, have changed over the years, resulting in a critical lack of parking for a very heavily used year round recreation facility. Predominant regular users of Broadlands include senior adults, preschoolers, children with their families, and persons who have physical challenges or disabilities.

In the fall of 1997, funds were made available through the Parkland Acquisition Fund in the former City of North York, to purchase residential properties to the north of Broadlands Community Centre, for the purpose of developing the required parking facilities. This plan was approved by City Council and the purchase of two properties at a cost of $547,020.00 was concluded early in 1998, through the services of an independent agent.

Following the purchase of the properties, some local residents expressed their dissatisfaction with the plan, citing concerns about the demise of the character of their neighbourhood through the destruction of homes and the general economy of the plan. A public meeting of the Broadlands Community Centre Advisory Council followed on April 29, 1998 during which residents were provided with detailed plans for the parking lot development and were asked to express their views on the subject. Consultation also took place with the Ward Councillor.

Following the April 29 meeting, a moratorium was placed on the development, to allow an ad hoc task group through the Advisory Council to receive and consider information regarding parking alternatives and general standards and practices for provision of parking amenities in the City of Toronto. The recommendations of the ad hoc task group and the Advisory Council were conveyed to the Parks and Recreation Division on July 2, 1998. The resulting recommendations now before the North York Community Council were shared with the Broadlands community in a public open house on July 28, 1998.

The recommended plan proposes to develop eighteen parking spots on existing City property. It further proposes to negotiate with a local church situated south of the community centre, to share the church parking lot with community centre users. The plan also recommends returning the two residential properties to the public market, with proceeds from the re-sale of the homes going to the Parkland Acquisition Fund.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

About fifty residents attended the July 28 information sharing event hosted by the Parks and Recreation Division. Comment cards were distributed to all in attendance and thirty-three cards were returned to the Division. Twenty-three of these respondents strongly agreed with the proposed action plan to develop a small parking lot along the side of the rink on the east side of Castlegrove Boulevard. An additional seven respondents agreed but expressed concerns regarding traffic and pedestrian safety. (These concerns will be discussed with officials of the Transportation Division of the Works and Emergency Services Department). Three disagreed with the proposal.

The cost of $95,000.00 to develop the recommended site is equivalent to the cost of the originally proposed northern site. However, there is no cost to purchase land as the site is already part of the existing complex. In addition, the re-sale of the two residential properties will re-imburse the Parkland Acquisition Reserve Fund from which the original purchase was made. Some residents expressed their belief that this plan is more fiscally responsible.

Conclusions:

The recommended plan provides much needed parking amenities at the Broadlands Community Centre, while still preserving the private homes and the character of the neighbourhood.

Contact Name:

Gary W. Stoner, District Lead - North

Parks and Recreation

Telephone:395-6190

Fax:395-0105

E-mail:gwstoner@north-york.on.ca

________

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

-Mr. John Murphy;

-Ms. Camille Serrao, on behalf of Broadlands Community Centre; and

-Mr. Ernie Magee.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following communications:

(a)(October 27, 1998) addressed to Councillor Gordon Chong, Don Parkway, from Mr. John Murphy, requesting Councillor Chong to recommend to Council that the two subject homes in this matter be sold by the City as single family homes and the proceeds be returned to North York's Parkland Acquisition Reserve Fund, and that a decision on any parking lot at Broadlands Community Centre be deferred until March 1999;

(b)(October 28, 1998) from Mr. Erich Wabin, Chairman, Broadlands Older Adults, advising that the Broadlands Older Adults, which represents over 400 residents, passed a motion at their General Meeting recognizing the need for additional parking at the Broadlands Community Centre and supporting the construction of the parking lot at 23 and 25Castlegrove Boulevard; and

(c)(October 28, 1998) from Mr. Larry March opposing the demolition of the two homes for the purpose of constructing a parking lot; submitting arguments in support of his position; and attaching various correspondence respecting this matter.)

4

Construction Noise - The Majestic Condominium -

20, 24, 26, 30 and 32 Empress Avenue and

11, 15, 17 and 21 Kingsdale Avenue -

Performance Bond - North York Centre

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, deferred this Clause until its next regular meeting to be held on October 28, 1998.)

________

(Clause 32 of Report No. 9 of the North York Community Council)

The North York Community Council recommends that:

(1)the City By-law and Building Inspectors be directed to monitor the Majestic Condominium site for offences to the Noise By-law, as well as other by-law and building code infractions; to lay a separate charge each time a violation is observed; to report back to North York Community Council when there are violations;

(2)the building permit not be issued and that the applicant be requested to meet with Councillor Filion and Councillor Gardner to work out a solution to the noise problem; and that staff defend the City's position in the event that legal action is taken on this recommendation; and

(3)the By-law Review Committee, when considering amendments to the Noise By-law, take into consideration all possible measures to strengthen the by-law in order to make it easier for charges to be laid.

The North York Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having deferred sine die, the following Resolution by Councillor John Filion, North York Centre:

WHEREAS in March 1997, the Council of the City of North York approved the development of a 23-storey, 269 unit residential development at 20, 24, 26, 30 and 32 Empress Avenue and 11, 15, 17 and 21 Kingsdale Avenue (The Majestic Condominium) and enacted By-law No. 32948; and

WHEREAS a Development and Site Plan Approval Agreement was executed between the owner and the City of North York, which included conditions of Site Plan Approval to be satisfied prior to building permit issuance; and

WHEREAS one of the conditions of Site Plan Approval requires the owner to submit final drawings incorporating revised details to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Planning, in consultation with the Ward Councillor; and

WHEREAS a community meeting was held on June 29, 1998 with the participation of planning staff, representatives of the community, and the applicant, during which community representatives expressed their concerns regarding construction safety, traffic, and noise after 7:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m.; and

WHEREAS the applicant has already greatly upset area residents with illegal construction noise at this site prior to the issuance of a building permit; and

WHEREAS the applicant has a history of disregarding the City's Noise By-law and existing deterrents have been unsuccessful in changing this behaviour;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT in order to address community concerns regarding potential Noise By-law infractions during the construction of the building, the North York Community Council requests the applicant to post a Performance Bond with the City of Toronto in the amount of $50,000.00 as a condition of the issuance of the building permit, and that the bond only be drawn upon for each conviction of Noise By-law infraction during construction, in increments of $10,000.00; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the letter of credit be returned to the applicant following construction if no notices of violation or court dates are pending.

________

The North York Community Council also reports having had before it a communication (September2, 1998) from Mr. John M. Alati, Davies, Howe, Partners, Barristers and Solicitors, Solicitors on behalf of Grape Arbour Construction Ltd., the owners of the subject lands, advising of his client's concerns and intention to address the North York Community Council when this matter is dealt with.

Mr. John M. Alati, Davies, Howe, Partners, Barristers and Solicitors, Solicitors on behalf of Grape Arbour Construction Ltd., the owners of the subject lands, appeared before the North York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

Respectfully submitted,

MILTON BERGER,

Chair

Toronto, September 16, 1998

(Report No. 10 of The North York Community Council, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998.)