This report recommends that Council deny the request for the removal of two (2) privately-owned trees, and approve the request for removal of three (3) privately-owned trees.  Staff from Urban Forestry, Technical Services and Toronto Building have been working with the applicant’s arborist and engineer to determine if the site can be graded to allow for the preservation of five (5) privately-owned trees.

The grading plan for the site is being revised by the applicant to allow for the preservation of two (2) of the five (5) privately-owned trees. The remaining three (3) trees have been severely injured and require removal. Ninety-seven (97) trees are proposed for planting at the site.

Subsequent to submission of the Parks, Forestry and Recreation report dated September 14, 2009, there have been additional actions on site that impact the recommendations contained in the September 14^th report. The revised recommendation in this supplementary report is due to the fact that of the two trees to be protected, one has been removed and the other severely injured.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council enact the No Right Turn on Red Regulation as identified in Appendix 1 to the report (September 22, 2009) from the Acting Director, Transportation Services, Scarborough District.

2.         City Council pass or amend the appropriate by-law(s) accordingly.

This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council does not have delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to advise on the need to of a valid by-law prohibiting north /south “No Right Turn on Red’ for the proposed Traffic Control Signal.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council approve the installation of Traffic Control Signals at the intersection of Morningside Avenue at McNicoll Avenue/Oasis Boulevard.

2.         City Council amend the appropriate by-law(s) accordingly.

This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council does not have delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval for the installation of Traffic Control Signals on Morningside Avenue at McNicoll Avenue/Oasis Boulevard.  

Traffic studies have indicated that traffic control signals are warranted.  As a result, traffic control signals should be installed.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council not approve the installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of East Avenue and East Willow Gate/Mastwood Crescent.

2.         City Council not pass or amend the appropriate by-law(s) accordingly.

This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council does not have delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to advise on the feasibility of installing all-way top control at this intersection in Ward 44.

It is recommended that an all-way stop control not be installed at East Avenue and East Will Gate/Mastwood Crescent since the subject intersection failed to meet the warrant for installation which was adopted by Council for use in the City of Toronto.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council rescind Clause No. 17 of Scarborough Community Council Report No. 6, as adopted by City Council at its meeting held on July 22, 23 and 24, 2003.

2.         City Council permanently close the portion of Cherry Street shown as Part 1 on the attached Sketch No. PS-2009-076a (the “Highway”) to the report (September 23, 2009) from the Acting Director, Transportation Services, Scarborough District, subject to compliance with the requirements of City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 162, and subject to City Council approving the sale of the Highway to the abutting owner, Metrolinx.

3.         If City Council approves the sale of the Highway to Metrolinx, authorize Transportation Services staff to give notice to the public of a proposed by-law to close the Highway in accordance with the requirements of City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 162, with the Scarborough Community Council to hear any member of the public who wishes to speak to the matter during consideration of the proposed draft by-law.

4.         City Council authorize Transportation Services staff to advise the public of the proposed closure of the Highway prior to implementation, in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for Schedule “A+” activities, by posting notice of the proposed closure on the notices page of the City’s web site for at least five working days prior to the Scarborough Community Council meeting at which the proposed by-law to close the Highway will be considered.

This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council does not have delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

Transportation Services recommends that a portion of Cherry Street, east of Schooner Lane, be permanently closed.

As requested at its meeting of September 15, 2009, this report provides Scarborough Community Council with information respecting Section 37 funds.  Specifically, this report includes:

a.         a discussion of the policy framework for the implementation of Section 37 funds as set out in the Planning Act and the Toronto Official Plan;

b.         City Finance’s protocol respecting the allocation of Section 37 funds through the budget process;

c.         the legislative process to be followed for any re-allocation of the Section 37 funds originally contemplated under the Section 37 provisions ;

d.         a discussion of the motions respecting the re-allocation of the approximately $373,000 of Section 37 funds for park improvements, tree planting and playground equipment in Ward 38;

e.         a discussion of project opportunities and funding associated with the Scarborough Centre Civic Precinct Implementation Plan, a summary of available Section 37 and Civic Centre land sale funds, and other proposed projects in Ward 38, and

f.          information concerning current Section 37 account balances in each of the Scarborough wards.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council refuse the applications to permit a columbarium at 2451 Birchmount Road for the reasons outlined in the report (September 22, 2009) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District.

2.         City Council refuse the request for approval under Section 3(2) of the Cemeteries Act (Revised) to establish a cemetery.

3.         City Council direct the City Solicitor and appropriate staff to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing in opposition to the applications.

This application was made on or after January 1, 2007 and is subject to the new provisions of the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act, 2006.

The applicant proposes to construct a 4 storey (20.24 metre) building to be used as a columbarium containing approximately 12,600 niches and 25 parking spaces at 2451 Birchmount Road.

This applicant has appealed the zoning by-law amendment, site plan application and the request for approval under Section 3(2) of the Cemeteries Act (Revised) to establish a cemetery, to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) due City Council’s failure to make a decision. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s direction for an as yet unscheduled OMB hearing.

This report recommends that the proposed zoning amendment, site plan application and the request for approval under Section 3(2) of the Cemeteries Act (Revised) be opposed at the OMB for the reasons outlined in this report including:

a.         the applicant has not provided an adequate number of parking spaces on site to serve the proposal;

b.         the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated the proposal can be adequately serviced;

c.         the proposal constitutes overdevelopment of the site; and

d.         if a cemetery is established, and the operation fails the city will be financially responsible for the care and maintenance of the proposed facility.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council refuse the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application for the reasons outlined in the report (September 23, 2009) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District.

2.         Should the zoning by-law amendment application be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, the City Solicitor and City staff be authorized to attend the Ontario Municipal Board hearing in support of Council’s refusal.

This application was made on or after January 1, 2007 and is subject to the new provisions of the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act, 2006.

The applicant has filed a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a place of worship in the existing vacant industrial building at 181 Nugget Avenue. The land use proposed does not provide adequate on-site parking, poses health and safety risks, and generates land use compatibility concerns with the existing heavy industrial businesses in the area. 

This report reviews and recommends refusal of the application to amend the zoning by-law.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council amend Zoning By-law No. 10327 substantially in accordance with the draft zoning by-law amendment attached as Attachment 5 to the report (September 10, 2009) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District.

2.         City Council enact a site plan control by-law pursuant to Section 114 of the City of Toronto Act to designate 4111 and 4113 Lawrence Avenue East as an area subject to site plan control, substantially in accordance with the draft site plan control by-law in Attachment 6 to the report (September 10, 2009) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District.

3.         City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to draft zoning by-law amendment and site plan control by-law as may be required.

4.         Before introducing the necessary zoning by-law amendment Bill for enactment, City Council require the applicant to:

i.          submit and have approved a site plan control application under Section 41(16) of the Planning Act and Section 114 of the City of Toronto Act;

ii.          submit a Site Servicing Review to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Technical Services Division, and any necessary infrastructure improvements identified, secured to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Technical Services and the City Solicitor; and

iii.         submit a Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Study for Lawrence Avenue and Andover Crescent, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Technical Services Division, and any pedestrian crossing protection identified, be secured to the satisfaction of the Executive Director of Technical Services and the City Solicitor.

The Scarborough Community Council held a statutory public meeting on October 13, 2009, and notice was given in accordance with the Planning Act.

This application was made on or after January 1, 2007 and is subject to the new provisions of the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act, 2006.

This application proposes to rezone the lands at 4111 and 4113 Lawrence Avenue East to permit the construction of a 10-storey mixed use development, consisting of 70 residential dwelling units and 274 square metres (2,949 square feet) of ground floor commercial space.

The proposal represents an appropriate form of intensification for this site which is well served by public transit.  The built form, height and massing will be compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood context and provides an appropriate transition to the lower scale townhouses to the south.  This proposal represents investment in one of the City’s Priority Neighbourhoods.

This report reviews and recommends approval of the application to amend the zoning by-law.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council enact a part lot control exemption by-law with respect to the subject lands as generally illustrated on Attachment 1 to the report (September 23, 2009) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, to be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

2.         City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce any necessary Bills in Council for a part lot control exemption by-law to expire (2) years from the date of enactment.

3.         City Council require the owner to provide proof of payment of all current property taxes for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, prior to enactment of the part lot control exemption by-law.

4.         City Council authorize and direct the City Solicitor to register the part lot control exemption by-law on title.

This application was made after January 1, 2007 and is subject to the new provisions of the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act, 2006.

This application proposes to lift part lot control on Lots 19 to 26, on registered plan 66M-2464, in order to enable the separate conveyances of 16 semi-detached homes to be known municipally as 85-97 (odd numbers only) and 167-179 (odd numbers only) Hainford Street.  This report recommends that a part lot control exemption by-law be enacted for a period of two years.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1.         City Council direct the City Solicitor to attend the Ontario Municipal Board in opposition to the applicant’s submitted proposal.

2.         City Council authorize the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Director of Community Planning, Scarborough District, to settle the appeal if a revised development proposal, consistent with the Official Plan’s criteria for infill development and City Council’s policy regarding new development complying with the Development Infrastructure Policy and Standards (DIPS), and addressing the design objectives of the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Townhouses is put forward. 

3.         City Council authorize the City Solicitor and any other City staff to take any necessary steps to implement the foregoing.

These applications were made on or after January 1, 2007 and are subject to the new provisions of the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act, 2006.

The purpose of this report is to seek direction for the City Solicitor for an upcoming Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearing due to City Council’s failure to make a decision within the prescribed timeframe on the rezoning application and associated site plan control application at 38 Tideswell Boulevard.  The OMB hearing is scheduled to commence on November 2, 2009.

The applications propose a 15-unit infill residential townhouse development on lands currently occupied by a single-family dwelling.  The applicant’s proposal is not consistent with the Official Plan policy to require public streets within new developments nor does it implement City Council’s adopted criteria for being an exception to being on a public street.  The applicant’s proposal also is not consistent with the Official Plan’s criteria for infill development.

This report recommends that the City attend the OMB in opposition to the application in its current form.  However, City Planning would support an alternative townhouse development concept that is in keeping with Council’s policy for new development that can be considered an exception to requiring a new public street and, that provides for compatible development with the existing physical character of the established neighbourhood.  City Planning seeks direction to attend the OMB in support of an alternative concept at the OMB hearing.

The owners of Nadi's Family Restaurant Bar and Pool Lounge (the "Licensees") have made an application to the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (the "AGCO") for additional licensed facilities of the indoor area of their establishment, expanding the capacity from 28 to 88 persons.

AGCO has received a formal objection from the Councillor's office, as well as a resident living in the vicinity of Nadi's Family Restaurant Bar and Pool Lounge.  This establishment has prompted a number of complaints to the local Councillor from neighbouring residents and from the local community association.  The issues include, but are not limited to, excessive noise, loitering, rowdiness and allegations of criminal activity.  The Municipal Licensing and Standards division received a complaint relating to loud music and noise at the establishment in September 2008.

There is a great deal of concern amongst the residents that an expansion to the existing license would accentuate these existing problems and add significantly to noise disturbances caused by the establishment.  There is also concern that the Licensee does not have effective control of the premises, but still wishes to increase the capacity of its liquor licence where potential impacts on the residents will be magnified.

There is urgency to this matter, because the advertising for the liquor licence application was completed on July 12, 2009.