the city of toronto clerk's department meeting no. 10 ... · dundas street east, abutting the...

THE CITY OF TORONTO

Clerk's Department

Minutes of the Toronto Community Council

Meeting No. 10

Thursday, September 27, 2000

The Toronto Community Council met on Thursday, September 27, 2000, in the CouncilChambers, City Hall, Toronto, commencing at 9:30 a.m.

10.1 Installation of Traffic Control Signals – Annette Street at Pacific Avenue (High Park)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 5, 2000) from theDirector, Transportation Services, District 1 respecting the installation of traffic controlsignals on Annette Street at Pacific Avenue and recommending that:

(1) traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of Annette Street and PacificAvenue coincident with the removal of the existing pedestrian crossover on AnnetteStreet at Medland Street; and

(2) the appropriate City Officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary togive effect thereto, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that arerequired.

The Toronto Community Council also had before it a communication (September 25, 2000)from Delbert Scace.

The Toronto Community Council recommended that:

On motion by Councillor Miller:

(1) the foregoing report (September 5, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 be adopted; and

On motion by Councillor Korwin-Kuczynski:

(2) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services expedite the installation of thetraffic control signals.

(Clause No. 20, Report No. 18)

10.2 Draft By-Law - Stop Up and Closing of Portions of Dundas Street East, Abutting TheNorth Limit of Premises No. 259 Victoria Street (Downtown)

- 2 -Toronto Community Council Minutes


The Toronto Community Council had before it Draft By-law to stop and close portions ofDundas Street East, abutting the north limit of No. 259 Victoria Street (Downtown), andClause 26 of its Report No. 11, titled, “Surplus Land Declaration and Proposed Stopping-Up,Closing, Sale and Leasing of Portions of the Dundas Street East Road Allowance, Abuttingthe North Limit – 259 Victoria Street – Yonge Dundas Redevelopment Project(Downtown)”, as adopted by City Council at its meeting held on July 4, 5 and 6, 2000.

Pursuant to the Municipal Act, notice with respect to the proposed enactment of the draft by-law was advertised in a daily newspaper on August 31, September 7, 14 and 21, 2000, andthe following addressed the Toronto Community Council:

- Ms. Elaine Newman, Toronto;- Mr. R. Keith Travis, PenEquity Management Corporation, Special Projects; and- Mr. Mark Franklin, Baldwin & Franklin, Architects.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended that a draftby-law in the form of the draft by-law be enacted.

The above recommendation carried unanimously as follows:

Yeas: Councillors McConnell, Adams, Bossons, Disero, Johnston, Korwin-Kuczynski,Miller, Palacio, Pantalone, Rae, Silva and Walker


10.3 Public Meeting Pursuant to The Planning Act Respecting Proposed Zoning By-LawAmendment for 259 Victoria Street, The South East Corner of Dundas and VictoriaStreets and The Adjacent Lands to The North (Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 11, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services, recommending approval of a draft by-law tointroduce Zoning By-law amendments to permit the proposal by Penex Dundas Square Ltd.for the construction of a commercial/retail building and a torch-shaped media tower at No.259 Victoria Street, at the south east corner of Dundas and Victoria Streets and the adjacentlands to the north.

The Toronto Community Council also had before it a further report (September 25, 2000)from the Commissioner of Urban Development Services recommending that:

(1) Recommendation 1(i) referring to the non-residential gross floor area of the buildingnot exceeding 3,952.0 square metres be further amended to state that “of which2550.0 square metres will be used only for restaurant and entertainment facility uses”;



(2) Recommendation 1(iv) referring to the need for the construction of the developmentto commence within one year of the date that the property is conveyed by the City bedeleted;

(3) The Commissioner of Urban Development Services report back to TorontoCommunity Council in November 2001, should construction of this development notbe underway, in order to recommend the review and possible repeal of this ZoningBy-law; and

(4) An agreement be authorized between the City and the owner to secure a cash-in-lieupayment for required parking, in consultation with the Toronto Parking Authority, ifnecessary.

The Toronto Community Council also had before it a communication (September 25, 2000)from Jules Kofman, Penwest Development Corporation Limited.

Notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act. The publicmeeting was held on September 27, 2000, and the following addressed the TorontoCommunity Council:

- Ms. Elaine Newman, Toronto;

- Mr. R. Keith Travis, PenEquity Management Corporation, Special Projects; and

- Mr. Mark Franklin, Baldwin & Franklin, Architects.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended the adoptionof the reports (September 11, 2000) and (September 25, 2000) from the Commissioner ofUrban Development Services.




10.4 Public Meeting Pursuant to The Municipal Act Respecting Amendment of Section 297,Signs, of The Former City of Toronto Municipal Code to Permit First and Third PartyAnimated Fascia Signs on The Façade of The Proposal for 259 Victoria Street(Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 7, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services respecting an amendment to Section 297,



Signs, to permit first and third party animated fascia signs on the facade of the proposal forNo. 259 Victoria Street and recommending that:

(1) Council permit signage on the proposed project, as set out in the draft by-law attachedas Appendix A to this report to amend Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City ofToronto Municipal Code;

(2) the applicant be required to provide a lighting study to the satisfaction of theCommissioner of Urban Development Services, at the time of building permitapplication; and

(3) the applicant be advised, upon approval of application No. 900064, of therequirement to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of UrbanDevelopment Services.

Notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Municipal Act. The publicmeeting was held on September 27, 2000, and the following addressed the TorontoCommunity Council:

- Ms. Elaine Newman, Toronto;

- Mr. R. Keith Travis, PenEquity Management Corporation, Special Projects; and

- Mr. Mark Franklin, Baldwin & Franklin, Architects.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended the adoptionof the foregoing report (September 7, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban DevelopmentServices.




10.5 Public Meeting Pursuant to The Planning Act Respecting Proposed Zoning By-LawAmendment for 135 Laughton Avenue (Davenport)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 11, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services, recommending approval of a Zoning By-lawAmendment to permit the construction of 78 semi-detached dwellings at 135 LaughtonAvenue.



The Toronto Community Council also had before it a communication (June 1, 2000) fromBob McElhinney and Nick Saul.

Notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act. The publicmeeting was held on September 27, 2000, and the following addressed the TorontoCommunity Council:

- Reverend R. McElhinney, Davenport Perth Community Ministry; and

- Mr. Murray Goldman, President, Stafford Homes Ltd.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report (September 11, 2000) from the Commissioner of UrbanDevelopment Services.


10.6 Public Meeting Pursuant to The Planning Act Respecting Proposed Zoning By-LawAmendment for 109 Chandos Avenue (Davenport)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (August 30, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services, recommending a Site Specific Zoning By-law amendment to permit the construction of two detached houses at 109 Chandos Avenue.

Notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act. The publicmeeting was held on September 27, 2000, and no one addressed the Toronto CommunityCouncil.

On motion by Councillor Palacio, the Toronto Community Council recommended that theforegoing report (August 30, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban Development Servicesbe amended by:

(1) deleting Recommendation No. 1(a) and replacing it as follows:

“(a) exempt the site from Section 2(1) “grade” ii and Section 9(1)(a)”;

(2) adding the words, “in a private garage” to the end of Recommendation No. 1(b)(vi);and

(3) adding a new Recommendation No. 1(c) to read:

“1(c) permit Sections 2(1) “grade” I, 6(3) PART II 8, 6(3) PART IX(1)(a), (b),(c)(ii) and (c)(iii) to apply to the site”

and that the report, as so amended, be adopted.




10.7 Public Meeting Pursuant to The Planning Act Respecting Proposed Zoning By-LawAmendment for 15 Trent Avenue (East Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 8, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services, recommending approval of a draft by-law tointroduce zoning amendments which would allow the construction of 4 single detached and 8semi-detached houses with frontage on a private driveway at No. 15 Trent Avenue.

Notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Planning Act. The publicmeeting was held on September 27, 2000, and no one addressed the Toronto CommunityCouncil.

On motion by Councillor Bussin, the Toronto Community Council recommended that theforegoing report (September 8, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban DevelopmentServices be amended by:

(1) deleting Recommendation No. (4);

(2) adding a new Recommendation No. 9(q) to read as follows:

“9(q) submit to, and have approved by, the Commissioner of Works and EmergencyServices, a Noise Impact Statement in accordance with City Council’srequirements,”

(3) renumbering Recommendation Nos. (5) – (10) accordingly;

and that the report, as so amended, be adopted.


10.8 Draft By-Law - Stop Up and Closing of a Portion of The Public Lane, South ofDanforth Avenue, Extending Between Trent Avenue and Kelvin Avenue, AbuttingPremises No. 15 Trent Avenue (East Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council had before it Draft By-law to stop and close a portion ofthe public lane south of Danforth Avenue, extending between Trent Avenue and KelvinAvenue, abutting premises No. 15 Trent Avenue (East Toronto), and Clause 63 of its ReportNo. 13, titled, “Surplus Land Declaration and Proposed Closing and Conveyancing of aPortion of the Public Lane, South of Danforth Avenue, Extending between Trent Avenue andKelvin Avenue, Abutting 15 Trent Avenue (East Toronto)” as adopted by City Council at itsmeeting held on August 1, 2, 3 and 4, 2000.



Pursuant to the Municipal Act, notice with respect to the proposed enactment of the draft by-law was advertised in a daily newspaper on September 5, 12, 19 and 26, 2000, and no oneaddressed the Toronto Community Council.

On motion by Councillor Bussin, the Toronto Community Council recommended that a by-law in the form of the draft by-law be enacted.


10.9 Draft By-Law - Stop Up and Closing of A Below-Grade Portion of The Public HighwayHayden Street, at The Rear of Premises No. 175 Bloor Street East (Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it Draft By-law to stop and close the belowgrade portion of the public highway Hayden Street, at the rear of premises No. 175 BloorStreet East (Downtown), and Clause 68 of its Report No. 13, titled, “Surplus LandDeclaration and Proposed Closing and Conveyancing of a Below-Grade Portion of theHayden Street Road Allowance – 175 Bloor Street East (Downtown)” as adopted by CityCouncil at its meeting held on August 1, 2, 3 and 4, 2000.


On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended that a by-lawin the form of the draft by-law be enacted.


10.10 Draft By-Law - Stop Up and Closing of Below-Grade Portions of The Public Lane Westof Jarvis Street, Extending Between Richmond Street East and Lombard Street(Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it Draft By-law to stop and close the belowgrade portions of the public lane west of Jarvis Street, extending between Richmond StreetEast and Lombard Street (Downtown), and Clause 61 of its Report No. 11, titled, “SurplusLand Declaration and Proposed Closing and Conveyancing of the Below-Grade Portions ofthe Public Lane West of Jarvis Street, extending between Richmond Street East and LombardStreet (Downtown)” as adopted by City Council at its meeting held on July 4, 5 and 6, 2000.




On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended that a by-lawin the form of the draft by-law be enacted.


10.11 Public Meeting Pursuant to The Municipal Act Respecting Amendment of Section 297,Signs, of The Former City of Toronto Municipal Code to Permit Eighteen CanopiesAnd Ten Fascia Signs at 176 Yonge Street (The Bay)(Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 1, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services respecting an amendment to Section 297,Signs, to permit eighteen canopies and ten fascia signs at No. 176 Yonge Street (The Bay)and recommending that:

(1) the City Solicitor be requested to introduce Bills in Council to amend Chapter 297,Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, and By-law No. 118 of theformer Metro Toronto respecting Signs over Metropolitan Roads to permit signage onThe Bay Store substantially as set out in the draft by-law of Appendix A of thisreport;

(2) the applicant be advised, upon approval of this application, of the requirement toobtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Development Services;

(3) the applicant be advised, upon approval of the application, of the requirement to enterinto any encroachment agreements with the City deemed necessary by theCommissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(4) that prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant receive the approval ofthe Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism (HeritagePreservation Services) with respect to the construction details of the signage andcanopies.

Notice of the public meeting was given in accordance with the Municipal Act. The publicmeeting was held on September 27, 2000, and Mr. Bruce Hall, Planning Partnership, onbehalf of the Bay Department Store, addressed the Toronto Community Council.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended the adoptionof the foregoing report (September 1, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban DevelopmentServices.




10.12 Refusal Report on Application No. 400025 For Draft Approval of a Plan Of Subdivisionto Permit the Construction of 15 New Houses and the Retention of 1 Existing House,Each on Its Own Lot, at 130 and 134 Edgewood Avenue (East Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 11, 2000) from theDirector, Community Planning, South District, recommending that Application No. 400025for 130 and 134 Edgewood Avenue for Draft Approval for a Plan of Subdivision be refused.

On motion by Councillor Jakobek, the Toronto Community Council recommended thatApplication No. 400025 for 130 and 134 Edgewood Avenue for Draft Approval for a Plan ofSubdivision be refused.


10.13 Report On Applications Nos. 100009 and 100010 to amend the Official Plan and ZoningBy-Law for Properties at 1 Mount Pleasant Road and 575 and 577 Jarvis Street -Rogers (Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 11, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services recommending approval-in-principle andseeking instruction regarding the appeal by Rogers Wireless Inc. to the Ontario MunicipalBoard of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application Nos. 100009 and 100010for additions to the Rogers headquarters at 1 Mount Pleasant Road and 575 and 577 JarvisStreet.

The Toronto Community Council also had before it the following communications:

- (September 5, 2000) from Ms. Brenda Morris; and

- (September 19, 2000) from Property Manager, Rosedale Glen.

Mr. Frank Lewinberg, Urban Strategies Inc., on behalf of the owner, appeared before theToronto Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended the adoptionof the foregoing report.


10.14 Auto-Related Land Uses In King-Parliament (Don River)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 7, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services respecting auto-related land uses in King-Parliament and recommending that:



(1) The former City of Toronto Zoning By-law, By-law 438-86, as amended, be furtheramended substantially as set out below to:

(i) delete open storage yards and private commercial garages as permitted uses inany zoning district within the King-Parliament Part II Official Plan area;

(ii) require that any principal building erected or used in conjunction with anautomobile service and repair shop, an automobile service station, a carwashing establishment, a motor vehicle repair shop - class A, a motor vehiclerepair shop - class B, a sales or hire garage, a bus station, a cartage, express ortruck transport yard or terminal, a courier service or a shipping, trans-shipping or distributing depot located within the King Parliament Part IIOfficial Plan Area be subject to the following standards:

- the principal building is located within 3 metres of any frontage;

- with the exception of a car washing establishment, the principalentrance to the principal building is located in an exterior wall of thebuilding directly accessible by pedestrians along a route not more than3 metres from the frontage of the lot and such entrance is locatedwithin 0.2 metres of the level of the public sidewalk directly oppositethe entrance;

- the width of the principal building, excluding the width of anyvehicular access required by By-law 438-86, as amended, is at least 90percent of the frontage of the lot abutting the public street other than apublic lane; and

- any exterior wall of the principal building within 3 metres of a publicstreet, other than a public lane, contains at least 30 percent of itssurface area as windows.

(2) City Council adopt the design guidelines for auto-related uses attached as AppendixA of this report, to be implemented in conjunction with applications for Site PlanApproval.

(3) The King-Parliament Community Improvement Plan be amended to add aLandscaping Grant Program for existing auto-related uses as described in Section 3 c)of this report.

(4) Notice for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act be given in accordance with theregulations under the Planning Act.

(5) The Commissioner of Urban Development Services consult with local communitygroups such as the Citizens for the Old Town and the Corktown Business and



Residents Association about the regulations proposed, prior to the giving of a Noticeof Public Meeting under the Planning Act.

(6) The Commissioner of Urban Development Services report back on the applicabilityof the proposed planning policies to the King-Spadina Part II Official Plan.


- (September 26, 2000) from Rick F. Coburn, Borden Ladner Gervais; and

- (September 27, 2000) from Cynthia Wilkey, Vice-President, Corktown Residents &Business Association Inc.

Mr. Frank Sperduti, Borden Ladner Gervais, on behalf of 271 Front Inc., appeared before theToronto Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

On motion by Councillor McConnell, with Councillor Korwin-Kuczynski in the Chair, theToronto Community Council recommended that:

(1) the foregoing report (September 7, 2000) from the Commissioner of UrbanDevelopment Services be adopted; and

(2) auto-related businesses form part of the consultation process.


10.15 Request for an Exemption From Chapter 400 of the Former City of Toronto MunicipalCode to Permit the Existing Paving to Remain in Connection With Front Yard Parkingat 2043 Davenport Road (Davenport)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 13, 2000) from theManager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services, District 1, recommendingthat:

1(a) City Council deny the request to maintain the existing paving in connection with frontyard parking at 2043 Davenport Road and that the applicant be required to remove ormodify the existing paving and replace it with permeable material such as ecostone orapproved equivalent permeable paving treatment acceptable to the Commissioner ofWorks and Emergency Services; and

1(b) the owner pay all applicable fees and comply with all other criteria set out in Chapter400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

OR



(2) City Council approve the request to maintain the existing paving in connection withfront yard parking at 2043 Davenport Road, subject to the owner paying all applicablefees and complying with all other criteria set out in Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking,of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council recommended that CityCouncil approve the request to maintain the existing paving in connection with front yardparking at 2043 Davenport Road, subject to the owner paying all applicable fees andcomplying with all other criteria set out in Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the formerCity of Toronto Municipal Code.


10.16 Request for an Exemption Form Chapter 400 of the Former City of Toronto MunicipalCode to Permit Front Yard Parking for Two Vehicles at 165 Prescott Avenue(Davenport)


(1) City Council deny the application for front yard parking for two vehicles at 165Prescott Avenue;

OR

(2) City Council approve the application for front yard parking for two vehicles at 165Prescott Avenue subject to:

(a) the parking area for each space not exceeding 2.6 m by 5.9 m in dimension;

(b) the owner installing a 1.5m paved buffer zone to retain the existing gravelsurface or paving the parking area with a semi-permeable paving material, i.e.,ecostone pavers or approved equivalent permeable paving treatmentacceptable to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;

(c) the owner paying for the additional ramping to provide access to the secondspace; and

(d) the owner paying all applicable fees and complying with all other criteria setout in Municipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City ofToronto Municipal Code.



On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council recommended that CityCouncil approve the application for front yard parking for two vehicles at 165 PrescottAvenue subject to:

(a) the parking area for each space not exceeding 2.6 m by 5.9 m in dimension;

(b) the owner installing a 1.5m paved buffer zone to retain the existing gravel surface orpaving the parking area with a semi-permeable paving material, i.e., ecostone paversor approved equivalent permeable paving treatment acceptable to the Commissionerof Works and Emergency Services;

(c) the owner paying for the additional ramping to provide access to the second space;and

(d) the owner paying all applicable fees and complying with all other criteria set out inMunicipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City of TorontoMunicipal Code.


10.17 Request for an Exemption from Chapter 400 of the Former City of Toronto MunicipalCode to Permit Front Yard Parking at 280 Keele Street (High Park)


(1) City Council deny the application for front yard parking at 280 Keele Street; OR

(2) City Council approve the application for front yard parking at 280 Keele Street,notwithstanding the negative poll result, subject to:

(a) the existing paving being removed or modified and the parking area beingpaved with semi-permeable paving materials, i.e., ecostone pavers orapproved equivalent paving treatment acceptable to the Commissioner ofWorks and Emergency Services;

(b) the parking area not exceeding 2.6 m by 5.9 m in dimension; and

(c) the applicant paying all applicable fees and complying with all other criteriaset out in Municipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the formerCity of Toronto Municipal Code; OR



(3) City Council approve the application for front yard parking at 280 Keele Street,notwithstanding the tied poll result and that the existing paving does not meet theCity’s paving specifications, subject to:

(a) the parking area not exceeding 2.6 m by 5.9 m in dimension; and

(b) the applicant paying all applicable fees and complying with all other criteriaset out in Municipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the formerCity of Toronto Municipal Code.

Mr. Wendell Ramlogan, applicant, appeared before the Toronto Community Council inconnection with the foregoing matter.

On motion by Councillor Korwin-Kuczynski, the Toronto Community Councilrecommended that City Council approve the application for front yard parking at 280 KeeleStreet, notwithstanding the tied poll result and that the existing paving does not meet theCity’s paving specifications, subject to:

(a) the parking area not exceeding 2.6 m by 5.9 m in dimension; and

(b) the applicant paying all applicable fees and complying with all other criteria set out inMunicipal Code Chapter 400, Traffic and Parking, of the former City of TorontoMunicipal Code.


10.18 Request for an Exemption from Chapter 400 of the Former City of Toronto MunicipalCode to Permit Front Yard Parking at 6 Duggan Avenue (Midtown)


(1) City Council deny the request for front yard parking at 6 Duggan Avenue; OR

(2) City Council approve the application to permit angled front yard parking at 6 DugganAvenue, notwithstanding that the existing paving does not meet City specifications,subject to:

(a) the applicant paying for the relocation of the hydro pole situated within theproposed ramp area;

(b) the applicant obtaining a letter of consent from the owner of 140 LawtonBoulevard, agreeing to the use of the existing ramp abutting their property tofacilitate access to the proposed front yard parking space;



(c) a formal poll being conducted and that such poll have a favourable result; and

(d) the applicant paying all applicable fees and complying with all otherrequirements set out in Municipal Code Chapter 400, of the former City ofToronto Municipal Code; OR

(3) City Council approve the application to permit front yard parking at 6 DugganAvenue, notwithstanding that the existing paving does not meet City specifications,subject to:

(a) the applicant modifying the existing steps and landscaping to facilitate aparking space perpendicular to the City sidewalk;

(b) the applicant paying for the relocation of the hydro pole situated within theproposed ramp area;

(c) the applicant obtaining a letter of consent from the owner of 140 LawtonBoulevard, agreeing to the use of the existing ramp abutting their property tofacilitate access to the proposed front yard parking space;

(d) a formal poll being conducted and that such poll have a favourable result; and

(e) the applicant paying all applicable fees and complying with all otherrequirements set out in Municipal Code Chapter 400, of the former City ofToronto Municipal Code.

Mr. Peter Ballon, applicant, appeared before the Toronto Community Council in connectionwith the foregoing matter.

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommended that CityCouncil approve the application to permit angled front yard parking at 6 Duggan Avenue,notwithstanding that the existing paving does not meet City specifications, subject to:

(a) the applicant paying for the relocation of the hydro pole situated within the proposedramp area;

(b) the applicant obtaining a letter of consent from the owner of 140 Lawton Boulevard,agreeing to the use of the existing ramp abutting their property to facilitate access tothe proposed front yard parking space;

(c) a formal poll being conducted and that such poll have a favourable result; and

(d) the applicant paying all applicable fees and complying with all other requirements setout in Municipal Code Chapter 400, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.




10.19 Maintenance of a Fence, Concrete Pillars, Spotlights and Electric Card Access Pole - 65Binscarth Road (Midtown)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (August 29, 2000) from the Manager,Right of Way Management, Transportation Services, District 1, recommending that CityCouncil approve the maintenance of the 2.15 m high wrought iron fence with two 2.2 m highconcrete pillars, two spotlights and an electric card access pole fronting 65 Binscarth Road,subject to the property owner:

(a) providing an Ontario Hydro certificate for the spotlights and electrical card accesspole;

(b) modifying the fence to eliminate the spike tops; and

(c) entering into an encroachment agreement with the City of Toronto, as prescribedunder the provisions of Chapter 313 of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code.

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.20 Hounslow Heath Road, Spring Grove Avenue and Laughton Avenue – TrafficManagement Measures (Davenport)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (June 27, 2000) from the Director,Transportation Services, District 1 respecting traffic management measures for HounslowHeath Road, Spring Grove Avenue and Laughton Avenue and recommending that the reportbe received for information.

The Toronto Community Council also had before it a communication (July 25, 2000) fromthe City Clerk forwarding the actions of the Toronto Community Council at its meeting heldon July 18, 2000.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council received the foregoingreport for information.

(Letter sent to: Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services; c.: Jacqueline White,Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1 – October 5, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(b), Report No. 18)



10.21 Provision Of Litter Bins With Advertising (Midtown).

The Toronto Community Council had before it a communication (July 19, 2000) from theCity Clerk forwarding the motion adopted by City Council respecting the amendment to thecontract with OMG for the provision of litter bins with advertising, to include the entireMidtown Ward.

The Toronto Community Council also had before it the following:

- Clause 57 of Toronto Community Council Report No. 8, titled, “Provision of LitterBins with Advertising”, which was amended and adopted by City Council at itsmeeting held on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999;

- Clause 4 of the Works Committee Report No. 2, titled, “Request for Proposals forLitter Bins with Advertising”, which was adopted by City Council at its meeting heldon July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999; and

- communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillor Bossons.

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommended that thecontract with OMG be amended to include the entire Midtown Ward, excluding the Bloor-Yorkville Business Improvement Area, and those locations set out in the foregoingcommunication (September 27, 2000) from Councillor Bossons.


10.22 Refusal Report: 164 Cheritan Avenue - Application No. 199012 for Official Plan andZoning By-Law Amendments and Application No. 300051 for Site Plan Approval, toPermit a Five Building, 436 Dwelling Unit Development. (North Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (August 25, 2000) from theCommissioner of Urban Development Services recommending that:

(1) The applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments and for Site PlanApproval for 164 Cheritan Avenue be refused in their current forms.

(2) City Council instruct the City Solicitor, the Commissioner of Urban DevelopmentServices, and other appropriate staff to attend the Ontario Municipal Board Hearingcommencing January 8, 2001, to oppose the appeals of the applications based on theissues raised in this report, and any other matters which may arise during the OntarioMunicipal Board Hearing.

(3) City Council request the City Solicitor, the Commissioner of Urban DevelopmentServices, and any other appropriate staff to oppose the Ontario Municipal Board



appeal, if made, by the applicant of the application for Site Plan Approval(Application No. 300051) in its current form.

(4) Should the applicant agree to revise the applications to the satisfaction of theCommissioner of Urban Development Services, substantially in accordance with thedirections contained in this report, including entering into an agreement and agreeingto by-laws to provide for the replacement of rental housing and the provision ofaffordable rental housing while obtaining increases in height and density as setforward in this report and pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act and inaccordance with the Official Plan of the former City of Toronto, in a form and with acontent satisfactory to the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Commissioner ofUrban Development Services, that City Council instruct the City Solicitor andCommissioner of Urban Development Services to attend the Ontario Municipal Boardhearing commencing January 8, 2001, to settle the appeals before the OntarioMunicipal Board including:

(i) submitting to the Board draft by-laws to give effect to amendments to theOfficial Plan and the Zoning By-law (438-86, as amended) respecting thelands known in the year 2000 as 164 Cheritan Avenue which, in the opinionof the City Solicitor and the Commissioner of Urban Development Services,satisfactorily address the issues set forth in this report substantially inaccordance with the directions contained in this report;

(ii) requesting that the Board require, as a condition of approval, that the Ownerenter into a Development Agreement under Section 41 of the Planning Act;and

(iii) requesting that the Board hold its Order until such time as the Owner and theCity have entered into and registered on title to the property as a first charge,an agreement satisfactory to the Commissioner of Urban DevelopmentServices and the City Solicitor pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act, tosecure the required replacement rental housing, affordable rents and tenantassistance and relocation provisions.


- (August 18, 2000) from the City Clerk, forwarding a motion which was referred tothe Toronto Community Council by City Council at its meeting held on August 1, 2,3 and 4, 2000,

- (September 5, 2000) from Mr. Elliott Cowan;

- (September 17, 2000) from H. and E. Simmons;

- (September 18, 2000) from Pat Brodie;



- (undated) from Virginia Brooks;

- (September 23, 2000) from Jo Ann Foster;

- (September 26, 2000) from Kenneth Jarvis;

- (September 25, 2000) from Rhoda A. Sion;

- (September 20, 2000) from John Warren;

- (September 27, 2000) from Cynthia A. MacDougall, McCarthy Tetrault;

- (September 16, 2000) from Guyton H. Martyr;

- (September 27, 2000) from James M. Jackson; and

- submission from M. Bergman.

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

- Ms. Jennifer McEwen, Building Representative, Rosewell Court Tenants’Association;

- Mr. Guyton H. Martyr, Toronto;

- Mr. Bob Michener, President, Lytton Park Residents’ Organization;

- Mr. Salvatore Rocco, Director, Lytton Park Residents’ Organization;

- Mrs. Marilyn Bergman, Director, Lytton Park Residents’ Organization;

- Mr. William Phillips, Toronto;

- Mr. Bill Kernohan, Havergal College;

- Mr. Don Cross, Toronto; and

- Ms. Susan Stark, Rosewell Court Tenants’ Association.

- Councillor Berger, Ward 9, North York Centre South


On motion by Councillor Johnston:



(1) the report (August 25, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban Development Servicesbe adopted, subject to the following amendments to Recommendation No. (4):

(a) that Building A on Lawrence Avenue be no higher that six storeys; and

(b) that the maximum density be capped at 1.5 times coverage with no furtherbonuses or adjustments;

(2) the City Solicitor, the Commissioner of Urban Development Services and any otherappropriate officials work with the Lytton Park Residents’ Organization, RosewellCourt tenants and the local councillor(s) regarding any settlement proposal;

(3) the City Solicitor be authorized to retain independent planning advice, if necessary;

On motion by Councillor Miller:

(4) the Commissioner of Urban Development Services report to the appropriateCommunity Council on whether a Part II Plan is advisable, and if so, what theboundaries should be;

On motion by Councillor Walker:

(5) City Council ensure that the Rosewell Court Tenants’ Association has legalrepresentation at the upcoming Ontario Municipal Board hearing by approving agrant to the Rosewell Court Tenants’ Association for the retention of legalrepresentation at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing, such grant to be in the amountof $15,000.00, such funds to be allocated from the Tenant Defence Fund.

The above recommendations carried unanimously as follows:

Yeas: Councillors McConne ll, Bossons, Bussin, Chow, Disero, Jakobek, Johnston, Korwin-Kuczynski, Layton, Miller, Pantalone, Rae and Walker – 13

On a further motion by Councillor Johnston, the Toronto Community Council requested theCity Clerk to forward all communications received to City Council for consideration withthis matter.


10.23 Redway Road/Brentcliffe Road Extensions – Feasibility Study Results (East York)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a communication (September 13, 2000) fromthe City Clerk forwarding the feasibility study results for the Redway Road/Brentcliffe Roadextensions and advising that the Works Committee on September 13, 2000:



(1) recommended to Council:

(i) the adoption of the report dated August 23, 2000, from the Commissioner ofWorks and Emergency Services; and

(ii) that the Environmental Assessment process be expanded to include theRosedale Valley Road and Park Road/Aylmer Avenue intersection in thestudy area; and

(2) directed that such report be forwarded to the Toronto Community Council forconsideration at its meeting scheduled to be held on September 27, 2000, andcomment directly to Council for its meeting on October 3, 2000.


- (September18, 2000) from Mr. Gregor G. Beck, Federation of Ontario Naturalists;

- (September 26, 2000) from Budd Sugarman, President, Budd Sugarman InteriorDesign Ltd.;

- (September 27, 2000) from Councillor Pitfield;

- (September 26, 2000) from Agnes Vermes, President, Leaside Property Owners’Association Incorporated;

- (September 26, 2000) from Geoffrey Norris;

- (September 26, 2000) from Steve Lazaridis;

- (September 26, 2000) from Christine and John Furedy;

- (September 27, 2000) from Joan S. Currie; and

- (September 27, 2000) from Andrew F. McCrodan.

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

- Mr. Dalton C. Shipway, Task Force to Bring Back the Don;- Ms. Tanny Wells, Chair, Task Force to Bring Back the Don;- Mr. John Wilson, Pollution Probe, Manager of Annual Giving;- Councillor Pitfield, Ward 1, East York;- Mr. William Phillips, Secretary, South Rosedale Ratepayers’ Association;- Mr. Bill Dunphy, Toronto;- Mr. Don McLean, Executive Director, Friends of the Don East;- Mr. Robert Lyng, Toronto;



- Mr. P. Geoff A. Shaw, Director, North Rosedale Ratepayers’ Association;- Mr. Don Ladkin, Director, Leaside Property Owners’ Association; and- Mr. E. B. Freeman, Toronto.

The Toronto Community Council recommended to City Council that:

On motion by Councillor Bossons, seconded by Councillor McConnell:

(1) the following motion be adopted:

“WHEREAS the proposal to extend Redway Road at a minimum cost of $14M toprovide a connection between Millwood Road and Bayview Avenue will facilitate theflow of even more cars to and through the area, particularly by downtown commuters;and

WHEREAS the City’s current planning “Directions” report and the recent report ofthe Environmental Task Force emphasize the need to promote transit and other non-auto means of travel to reduce congestion, energy consumption and air pollution; and

WHEREAS the Task Force to Bring Back the Don has pointed to the irreparabledamage that the proposed Redway Road extension will cause to the natural features,plants and wildlife of the valley, particularly the destruction of Crother’s Woods, adesignated Environmentally Sensitive Area; and

WHEREAS the 14M cost of the proposed Redway Road Extension cannot bejustified in local traffic management terms; and

WHEREAS the proposed Redway Road Extension is even less desirable whenviewed in the broader context of a possible first stage in the eventual construction ofthe even more damaging Leslie Street Extension proposal;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Commissioner of Works andEmergency Services not be authorized to prepare a Class Environmental Assessmentfor an extension of Redway Road between Millwood Road and Bayview Avenue andthat the Commissioner’s report on this subject dated August 23, 2000 be received.”

On motion by Councillor Chow:

(2) the Commissioner of Urban Development Services submit a comprehensive report tothe appropriate Community Councils and the Planning and Transportation Committeeon:

(a) various City plans on road widenings and extensions;

(b) the cost of these projects; and



(c) a priority list of the projects;

and that the report be submitted prior to starting any Class Environmental Assessmentprocess of the Redway Road Extension; and

On further motion by Councillor Bossons:

(3) in the event the Class Environmental Assessment takes place, the EnvironmentalAssessment process be expanded to include the Rosedale Valley Road and ParkRoad/Aylmer Avenue intersection in the study area.

Recommendation No. (1) carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas: Councillors McConnell, Bossons, Bussin, Chow, Korwin-Kuczynski, Layton, Miller,Pantalone, Rae and Walker – 10

Nays: Councillors Disero and Jakobek - 2

The Toronto Community Council also requested:

On further motion by Councillor Chow:

(1) the Commissioner of Urban Development Services to report directly to Council on:

(a) the Redway Road Extension proposal;

(b) a list of all City plans on road widenings and extensions;

(c) the cost of the entire extension (both east and west) of Redway Road and theBayview extension;

(2) Ontario Hydro to report directly to Council on the costs associated with the relocationand/or redesign of potentially impacted hydro facilities at the Leaside substation thatcould be associated with an easterly extension of Redway Road; and

On motion by Councillor Pantalone:

(3) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to report directlyto Council on:

(a) the impact of the project on the fauna of the area and the Don River System;and

(b) the number and species of flora that will be directly or indirectly impacted in anegative manner.



The following motion by Councillor Disero was placed but not voted on:

“That the recommendations of the Works Committee be endorsed, subject to furtherconsideration of the Redway Road Extension not including a westbound to northbound rightturn provision from Redway Road to Bayview Avenue.”

(Letter sent to: Mr. Rick Parnell, Group Leader – Cables, c/o Hydro One Networks Inc.,Leaside TS, 1080 Millwood Road, Toronto, Ontario M4H 1A2; Commissioner of Works andEmergency Services; Commissioner of Urban Development Services; Commissioner ofEconomic Development, Culture and Tourism; c.: Works Committee; General Manager,Transportation Services – September 29, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(a), Report No. 18)

10.24 1540 Bloor Street West, Application No. 900069: Request for Approval of a MinorVariance from Chapter 297, Signs, of the Former City of Toronto Municipal Code.(Davenport)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 8, 2000) from theDirector, Community Planning, South District, recommending that City Council refuseApplication No. 900069 for minor variances from Chapter 297, Signs, for No. 1540 BloorStreet West.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council recommended that CityCouncil approve Application No. 900069 for minor variances from Chapter 297, Signs, ofthe former City of Toronto Municipal Code, for the replacement of three existing single faceroof signs with one back to back illuminated roof sign for third party advertising purposes.


10.25 100 Old Orchard Grove, Application No. 900075: Request for Approval of MinorVariances From Chapter 297, Signs, of The Former City of Toronto Municipal Code(North Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 8, 2000) from theDirector, Community Planning, South District, recommending that:

(1) City Council approve Application No. 900075 for minor variances from Chapter 297,Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code for a non-illuminated groundsign, for identification purposes, at 100 Old Orchard Grove.

(2) The applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 900075, of therequirement to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of UrbanDevelopment Services.



On motion by Councillor Johnston, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.26 King Street West Railway Underpass (West Of Sudbury Avenue) (Trinity-Niagara)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a communication (September 19, 2000) fromthe Councillor Pantalone respecting the King Street West Railway Underpass.

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council requested theCommissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report to the January 2001 CommunityCouncil on the King Street West Railway Underpass and on how its negative impact can bereduced.

(Letter sent to: Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services; c.: Mr. Brian Jackson, IBIGroup – October 5, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(c), Report No. 18)

10.27 Requests For Endorsement of Events for Liquor Licensing Purposes.

The Toronto Community Council had before it a communication (September 19, 2000) fromthe Director, Project 360 Investment Limited, o/a Turbo Niteclub.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended that Councilendorse its action, since the event takes place prior to Council’s meeting, in having advisedthe Alcohol and Gaming Commission, for liquor licensing purposes, that it is aware of theconcert to be held by Renegades Promotions at Turbo Niteclub at 360 Adelaide Street Westin the Basement North Section on September 29, 2000 from 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., and hasno objection to its taking place.


10.28 Delaware Avenue North – Introduction of A Two-Way Traffic Operation From GearyAvenue to The First Public Lane North Thereof. (Davenport)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a report (September 18, 2000) from theDirector, Transportation Services District 1, recommending that:

(1) the one-way northbound operation on Delaware Avenue North between GearyAvenue and Davenport Road be adjusted to operate one-way northbound between the



public lane first north of Geary Avenue and Davenport Road, generally as shown onthe attached print of Drawing No. 421F-5828, dated September 2000;

(2) parking be prohibited at all times on the west side of Delaware Avenue North fromGeary Avenue to the public lane first north thereof;

(3) the one hour parking regulation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., on the west side ofDelaware Avenue North between Geary Avenue and Davenport Road, be adjusted toapply from the public lane first north of Geary Avenue to Davenport Road;

(4) the permit parking regulation be adjusted to be in effect on the west side of DelawareAvenue North from the public lane first north of Geary Avenue to Davenport Road;and

(5) the appropriate City Officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary togive effect to the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills thatmay be required.

On motion by Councillor Palacio, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.29 First Lane North of Lyall Avenue, Extending From Kimberley Avenue to OsborneAvenue – Prohibition of Vehicles Over 2.0 Metres In Width From Travelling In TheLane (East Toronto)


(1) vehicles over 2.0 metres in width be prohibited from travelling in the first lane northof Lyall Avenue extending from Kimberley Avenue to Osborne Avenue; and

(2) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary actionto implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that arerequired.

On motion by Councillor Bussin, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.30 Geary Avenue from Dovercourt Road to Ossington Avenue – Relocating Parking fromThe North Side to The South Side of The Street. (Davenport)




(1) the “No Standing Anytime” prohibition on the south side of Geary Avenue betweenOssington Avenue and Delaware Avenue North be rescinded;

(2) the “No Parking Anytime” prohibition on the south side of Geary Avenue betweenDelaware Avenue North and Dovercourt Road be rescinded;

(3) parking be allowed on the south side of Geary Avenue between Ossington Avenueand Dovercourt Road for a maximum period of one hour from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.,Monday to Saturday;

(4) the one hour parking regulation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Saturday onthe north side of Geary Avenue between Ossington Avenue and Dufferin Street beadjusted to apply from Dovercourt Road to Dufferin Street;

(5) parking be prohibited at all times on the north side of Geary Avenue betweenOssington Avenue and Dovercourt Road;

(6) the permit parking regulation be adjusted to be in effect on the south side of GearyAvenue between Ossington Avenue and Dovercourt Road; and

(7) the appropriate City Officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary togive effect to the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills thatmay be required.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report (September 18, 2000) from the Director, TransportationServices, District 1.

On further motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council also requested theCommissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report directly to Council on thefeasibility of relocating parking from the north side to the south side of Geary Avenue fromSalem Avenue to Dovercourt Road.

(Letter sent to: Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services; c.: Joe Gallippi, SeniorTraffic Investigator – September 29, 2000)


10.31 Installation of New Metered Parking and/or Pay and Display Parking Spaces andAssociated Parking Regulation Amendments (East Toronto, Don River, Downtown,Trinity Niagara, Davenport, Midtown).




(1) new metered parking and/or pay and display parking spaces as proposed by the Boardof the Toronto Parking Authority be installed at locations identified in Appendix 1 tothis report;

(2) the appropriate parking by-laws be amended to give effect thereto, and

(3) the appropriate City Officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary togive effect to the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that arerequired, and that Appendix 1 to this report and such Bills be amended as necessaryin the event that Council amends any of the recommendations in a report (August 29,2000) of the President, Toronto Parking Authority, pertaining to hours of meteroperation.


On motion by Councillor Bussin:

(1) the foregoing report (September 1, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 be adopted, subject to the deletion of Queen Street East from HerbertAvenue to Neville Park Boulevard;

On motion by Councillor Jakobek:

(2) the rates quoted for Queen Street East be identical to those of Kingston Road;

On motion by Councillor McConnell, with Councillor Rae in the Chair:

(3) the City Clerk be directed to conduct a formal poll of the residents of St. LawrenceStreet, between Eastern Avenue and King Street East, to determine support for theimplementation of overnight on-street permit parking;

On further motion by Councillor Bussin:

(4) Councillors be notified of all meetings of the Toronto Parking Authority and beforwarded a copy of all agendas; and

(5) the appropriate city officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action togive effect thereto, including the introduction of all necessary bills.

The Toronto Community Council also:

On motion by Councillor Bussin:



(1) deferred consideration of the installation of new metered parking and/or Pay andDisplay parking spaces and associated parking regulation amendments for QueenStreet East from Herbert Avenue to Neville Park Boulevard until its meeting to beheld in January, 2001, to permit community consultation; and

On motion by Councillor Jakobek:

(2) requested the President, Toronto Parking Authority to report directly to Council onensuring that a modest percentage of the revenue generated be used for joint venturesmarketing and/or streetscape improvements.

The action of the Toronto Community Council, to defer consideration of Queen Street Eastfrom Herbert Avenue to Neville Park Boulevard, carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas: Councillors McConnell, Bussin, Chow, Layton, Miller, Pantalone and Walker – 7Nays: Councillors Bossons, Disero, Jakobek, Korwin-Kuczynski and Rae - 5

Councillor Jakobek requested that he be recorded as having voted in the negative withrespect to all recommendations and actions of the Toronto Community Council.

(Letter sent to: Mr. Maurice Anderson, President, Toronto Parking Authority, 33 QueenStreet East, Toronto, Ontario M5C 1R5; c.: Peter Bartos, Manager, Traffic Operations,District 1 – East – September 29, 2000)


10.32 (In Camera Matter) Potential Acquisition of No. 1947 – 1997 Bloor Street West (HighPark)

The Toronto Community Council had before it a confidential joint report (September 11,2000) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services and Commissioner of EconomicDevelopment, Culture and Tourism having regard that the subject deals with a matter thesubject of which deals with a proposed or pending acquisition of land for municipal or localboard purposes.

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council adjourned its publicsession to meet in camera, in accordance with the Municipal Act, to discuss the confidentialjoint report (September 11, 2000) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services andCommissioner of Economic Development Culture and Tourism, having regard that thesubject deals with a matter the subject of which deals with a proposed or pending acquisitionof land for municipal or local board purposes.

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council recommended that, inaccordance with the Municipal Act, discussions pertaining to the confidential joint report(September 11, 2000) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services and Commissioner of



Economic Development Culture and Tourism, be held in camera, having regard that thesubject deals with a matter the subject of which deals with a proposed or pending acquisitionof land for municipal or local board purposes.

The Toronto Community Council submitted this matter to Council without recommendation,since all motions pertaining to this matter failed.

The following motion by Councillor Rae lost on the following tied vote:

“That consideration of this matter be deferred until after the Ontario Municipal BoardHearing respecting this site.”

Yeas: Councillors McConnell, Bossons, Chow, Jakobek, Layton and Rae – 6Nays: Councillors Bussin, Disero, Korwin-Kuczynski, Miller, Pantalone and Walker - 6

The following motion by Councillor Miller lost on the following tied vote:

“(1) That authority be granted to initiate the expropriation process for the propertyinterests municipally known as 1947-1997 Bloor Street West;

(2) That authority be granted to serve and publish Notices of Application for Approval toExpropriate 1947-1997 Bloor Street West, to forward to the Chief Inquiry Officer anyrequests for hearings that are received and to report the Inquiry Officer’srecommendations to Council for its consideration, subject to a further report from theCommissioner of Corporate Services, through the Administration Committee,confirming the source of funding referred to in the confidential report (September 11,2000 ) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services and Commissioner of EconomicDevelopment, Culture and Tourism; and

(3) That the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessaryaction to give effect thereto.”

Yeas: Councillors Bussin, Disero, Korwin-Kuczynski, Miller, Pantalone and Walker - 6Nays: Councillors McConnell, Bossons, Chow, Jakobek, Layton and Rae – 6


10.33 2685 Yonge Street, Application No. 900063: Request For Approval of Minor VariancesFrom Chapter 297, Signs, of The Former City of Toronto Municipal Code (NorthToronto)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 15, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban Development Servicesrespecting the request for approval of minor variances from Chapter 297, Signs, for 2685Yonge Street.



On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.34 145 Richmond Street West, Application No. 900072: Request for Approval of MinorVariances from Chapter 297, Signs, of the Former City of Toronto Municipal Code(Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 18, 2000) from the Commissioner of Urban Development Servicesrespecting the request for approval of minor variances from Chapter 297, Signs, for 145Richmond Street West.



10.35 Bloor Street West, Between Dufferin Street and Lansdowne Avenue – ProposedRescission of Parking Prohibition (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the proposed rescission of parking prohibition on Bloor Street West betweenDufferin Street and Lansdowne Avenue.

On motion by Councillor Silva, the Toronto Community Council recommended that:

(1) the foregoing report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1, be adopted;

(2) the No Parking from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on the south side ofBloor Street West from Russett Avenue to Lansdowne Avenue be rescinded; and

(3) the parking meter hours of operation on the south side of Bloor Street West beadjusted to operate from 9:00 am. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday for a maximumperiod of 2 hours and from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. for a maximum period of 3 hours;and that the regulations for Saturday and Sunday remain unchanged.




10.36 Beaconsfield Avenue, From Dundas Street West to Afton Avenue – Request for SpeedHumps (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 21, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the request for speed humps on Beaconsfield Avenue from Dundas Street West toAfton Avenue.

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council recommended that:

(1) approval be given to alter sections of the roadway on Beaconsfield Avenue, fromAfton Avenue to Dundas Street West, for traffic calming purposes as describedbelow, with implementation subject to the favourable results of polling of the affectedresidents pursuant to the policy related to speed hump installation as adopted by theformer City of Toronto Council:

“The construction of speed humps on BEACONSFIELDAVENUE, from Afton Avenue to Dundas Street West”.;

(2) a speed limit of thirty kilometres per hour be introduced on Beaconsfield Avenue,from Afton Avenue to Dundas Street West, coincident with the implementation ofspeed humps and as legislation permits; and

(3) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action isnecessary to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of anyBills that might be required, subject to review in the 2001 budget process.


10.37 Grace Street, Opposite Premises No. 65 (Grace Street Public School) – ParkingRegulations (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 22, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting amendments to the parking regulations on Grace Street, opposite premises No. 65(Grace Street Public School).


(1) the parking prohibition on the west side of Grace Street, from Mansfield Avenue to apoint 158.5 metres south thereof, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday toFriday, be rescinded; and



(2) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action isnecessary to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of anyBills that might be required.


10.38 Maintenance of Concrete Steps and Installation of Outward Swinging DoorsCantilevered Landing and Raised Entrance Way together with a Metal Canopy – 22Mowat Avenue (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 25, 2000) from the Manager, Right of Way Management,Transportation Services, District 1 respecting the maintenance of concrete steps, theinstallation of outward swinging doors and raised entranceway together with a metal canopyat 22 Mowat Avenue.

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report (September 25, 2000) from the Manager, Right of WayManagement, Transportation Services, District 1, subject to the submission of a landscapeplan which would include the planting of three additional silver maple trees.


10.39 Elizabeth Street, Both Sides, and Chestnut Street, East Side, between Dundas StreetWest and Elizabeth Street – Prohibition of Standing at Anytime (Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the prohibition of standing at anytime on both sides of Elizabeth Street and theeast side of Chestnut Street, between Dundas Street West and Elizabeth Street.



10.40 Millwood Road, from Acacia Road to Mount Pleasant Road – Installation of SpeedHumps (North Toronto)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 22, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the installation of speed humps on Millwood Road from Acacia Road to MountPleasant Avenue.





10.41 Mount Pleasant Road and Glengowan Road – Proposed Installation of Traffic ControlSignals (North Toronto)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 22, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the proposed installation of traffic control signals on Mount Pleasant Road andGlengowan Road.



10.42 MCROBERTS AVENUE, WEST SIDE, BETWEEN INNES AVENUE AND THEFIRST LANE SOUTH – RESCIND THE “NO PARKING 8:30 A.M. TO 5:30 P.M.,MONDAY TO FRIDAY,” REGULATION (Davenport)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the rescindment of the No Parking regulation on the west side of McRobertsAvenue between Innes Avenue and the first lane south thereof.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.43 Fairford Avenue, South Side, East of Hiawatha Road – Adjustment of the 10-MinuteMaximum Parking Regulation (East Toronto)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 21, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1respecting the adjustment of the parking regulation on the south side of Fairford Avenue, eastof Hiawatha Road.





10.44 Boulevard Marketing Privileges Fronting 1251and 1253 St. Clair Avenue West(Davenport)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a communication (September 25, 2000) from Councillor Disero respecting boulevardmarketing privileges fronting Nos. 1251 and 1253 St. Clair Avenue West.

On motion by Councillor Disero, the Toronto Community Council deferred consideration ofthis matter until its meeting to be held in January, 2001, for deputations, and requested theCity Clerk to provide notice to all interested parties.

(Letter sent to: All Interested Persons; c.: City Clerk – October 5, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(d), Report No. 18)

10.45 Feasibility of Public Crosswalk on College Street at Margueretta Street (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a communication (September 25, 2000) from Councillor Silva respecting College Street atMargueretta Street.

On motion by Councillor Silva, the Toronto Community Council requested theCommissioner of Works and Emergency Services to conduct a study to determine thefeasibility of placing a public crosswalk on College Street at Margueretta Street.

(Letter sent to: Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services – October 5, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(e), Report No. 18)

10.46 Feasibility of Public Crosswalk on Dundas Street West at St. Clarens Avenue (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a communication (September 25, 2000) from Councillor Silva respecting the feasibility ofa public crosswalk on Dundas Street West at St. Clarens Avenue.

On motion by Councillor Silva, the Toronto Community Council requested theCommissioner of Works and Emergency Services to conduct a study to determine thefeasibility of placing a public crosswalk on Dundas Street West at St. Clarens Avenue.



(Letter sent to: Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services – October 5, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(f), Report No. 18)

10.47 Introduction of Permit Parking in the Proposed Parking Facility on The North Side ofMarlborough Avneue, 291 m West of Yonge Street (Midtown)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a report (September 26, 2000) from the Manager, Right of Way Management,Transportation Services, District 1 respecting the introduction of permit parking in theproposed parking facility on the north side of Marlborough Avenue, 291m west of YongeStreet.

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.48 Supplementary Report on Application No. 199015 For an Official Plan Amendmentand Rezoning To Permit The Construction of an Office Building and OtherConstruction Work on a Portion of The Block Including The Lands Known as TheRichmond Adelaide Centre (Nos. 100, 120 And 130 Adelaide Street West, 85 And 111Richmond Street West, 12 And 22 Sheppard Street (Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a supplementary report (September 26, 2000) from the Commissioner of UrbanDevelopment Services on Application No. 199015 for an Official Plan Amendment andRezoning to permit the construction of an office building and other construction work on aportion of the block including lands known as the Richmond-Adelaide Centre (Nos. 100, 120and 130 Adelaide Street West, 85 and 111 Richmond Street West, 12 and 22 Sheppard Street.

On motion by Councillor Chow, the Toronto Community Council recommended the adoptionof the foregoing report.


10.49 Use of Nathan Phillips Square: Canadian German Chamber of Industry andCommerce, Inc. for The Toronto Christmas Market, December 1-17, 2000

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 25, 2000) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services



respecting the use of Nathan Phillips Square by the Canadian German Chamber of Industryand Commerce Inc., for the Toronto Christmas Market on December 1-17, 2000.


Councillor McConnell voted in the negative with respect to the above recommendation.


10.50 173-187 Yonge Street, 2-20 Queen Street East and 142-146 Victoria Street, (Olympia &York Commercial Office Building) – Authority to Enter Into Amended Agreements toSecure Matters Recommended to be Imposed By The Committee of Adjustment AsConditions of Approval for Minor Variances (Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 25, 2000) from the Commissioner of Corporate Servicesrespecting the Olympia & York Commercial Office Building at Nos. 173-187 Yonge Street,2-20 Queen Street East and 142-146 Victoria Street.



10.51 Avenue Road at Davenport Road and at Bloor Street West – Results of the TrialRecission of Southbound Left-Turn Prohibitions (Midtown And Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 26, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 respecting the results of the trial recession of southbound left-turn prohibitions onAvenue Road at Davenport Road and at Bloor Street West.

On motion by Councillor Rae, the Toronto Community Council recommended that Councilreceive the foregoing report.


10.52 Lake Shore Boulevard East, South Side, East of Ashbridges Bay Park Road – Provisionof a Passenger Pick-Up/Drop-Off Area for Motorcoaches (East Toronto)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,



District 1 respecting the provision of a passenger pick-up/drop-off area for motorcoaches onthe south side of Lake Shore Boulevard East, east of Ashbridges Bay Park Road.



10.53 Mavety Street Between Dundas Street West and Annette Street – Proposed AngleParking Plan (High Park)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 26, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 respecting the proposed angle parking plan for Mavety Street between DundasStreet West and Annette Street.

On motion by Councillor Miller, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.54 Sale of The City’s Residual Fee Simple Interests In Portions of 385 and 401 QueensQuay West (Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 26, 2000) from the Commissioner of Corporate Servicesrespecting the sale of the City’s residual fee simple interests in portions of Nos. 385 and 401Queens Quay West.

On motion by Councillor Chow, the Toronto Community Council recommended the adoptionof the foregoing reports.


10.55 Shannon Street, Between Dovercourt Road And Ossington Avenue – Request ForSpeed Humps (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 26, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 respecting the request for speed humps on Shannon Street between DovercourtRoad and Ossington Avenue.




(1) approval be given to alter sections of the roadway on Shannon Street, fromDovercourt Road to Ossington Avenue, for traffic calming purposes as describedbelow, with implementation subject to the favourable results of polling of the affectedresidents pursuant to the policy related to speed hump installation as adopted by theformer City of Toronto Council:

“The construction of speed humps on SHANNON STREET,from Dovercourt Road to Ossington Avenue”.;

(2) a speed limit of thirty kilometres per hour be introduced on Beaconsfield Avenue,from Afton Avenue to Dundas Street West, coincident with the implementation ofspeed humps and as legislation permits; and

(3) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action isnecessary to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of anyBills that might be required, subject to review in the 2001 budget process.


10.56 2 Queen Street East (O&Y Properties Office Tower) – Establishment of ConstructionStaging Areas (Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 respecting the establishment of construction staging areas at No. 2 Queen StreetEast (O&Y Properties Office Tower).



10.57 Wembley Road, North Side, in the Vicinity of Forest Hill Montessori School (PremisesNo. 2 Wembley Road) – Introduction of a “10 Minute Student Pick-Up and Drop-OffZone” (North Toronto)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 26, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 respecting the introduction of a “10 minute student pick-up and drop-off zone” onthe north side of Wembley Road, in the vicinity of Forest Hill Montessori School.

On motion by Councillor Johnston, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.




10.58 Cowan Avenue Between King Street West and Springhurst Avenue – Installation of anAdditional Speed Hump (High Park)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a report (September 25, 2000) from the Director, Transportation Services,District 1 respecting the installation of an additional speed hump on Cowan Avenue betweenKing Street West and Springhurst Avenue.

On motion by Councillor Miller, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the foregoing report.


10.59 Grace Street, Between Bloor Street West and Harbord Street – Request for SpeedHumps (Trinity-Niagara)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a communication (September 26, 2000) from Councillor Pantalone respectingthe request for speed humps on Grace Street between Bloor Street West and Harbord Street.

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council recommended that aformal poll of residents to install speed humps on Grace Street, between Bloor Street Westand Harbord Street, as set out in the communication (September 26, 2000) from the Managerof Traffic Operations, District 1, addressed to Councillors Pantalone and Silva, be conducted.


10.60 Moose at the Corner of St. George and Harbord (Downtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillor Chow respecting theinstallation of a metal moose silhouette sculpture at the corner of St. George and HarbordStreets.

On motion by Councillor Chow, the Toronto Community Council requested appropriateofficials to report to the Toronto Community Council, at its meeting to be held in January,2001, on the steps involved to grant approval for the installation of a metal moose silhouettesculpture by Charles Pachter at the south west corner of St. George and Harbord Streets, andhaving directed that the Harbord Village Residents Association, the University of Toronto



Liaison Committee and Student Administrative Council of the University of Toronto alongwith the Ward Councillor be consulted to identify any issues that may arise.

(Letter sent to: Director, Special Events; Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services;Commissioner of Urban Development Services; Commissioner of Corporate Services –October 5, 2000)

(Clause No. 59(g), Report No. 18)

10.61 289 and 299 Blythwood Avenue – Ontario Municipal Board Hearing (North Toronto)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillor Walker respectingrepresentation by the City at the Ontario Municipal Board hearings for Nos. 289 and 299Blythwood Avenue.

On motion by Councillor Walker, the Toronto Community Council recommended that theCity Solicitor and appropriate staff be directed to attend the Ontario Municipal Board insupport of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment of July 11, 2000 to refuse anapplication for consent to sever and an application for variances for 289 and 299 BlythwoodRoad.


10.62 Permit Parking on Woodland Heights

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a joint communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillors Miller andKorwin-Kuczynski respecting permit parking on Woodland Heights.

On motion by Councillor Miller, the Toronto Community Council recommended theadoption of the following motion from Councillor Miller, seconded by Councillor Korwin-Kuczynski:

“WHEREAS the residents of Woodland Heights in the City of Toronto have requestedpermit parking be initiated as soon as possible during the hours of midnight to 7:00 a.m.; and

WHEREAS all of the residents, except one who is away on holidays, have signed a petitionin favour of such permit parking;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Commissioner of Works andEmergency Services be instructed to implement permit parking on Woodland Heights duringthe hours from midnight to 7:00 a.m., as soon as possible, subject to a favourable poll beingconducted.”




10.63 39 Deer Park Crescent – Ontario Municipal Board Hearing (Midtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a joint communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillors Bossons andAdams respecting the City’s representation at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing for No.39 Deer Park Crescent.

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommended that theCity Solicitor be directed to retain outside planning consultants to oppose the appeal of theCommittee of Adjustment Decision at the Ontario Municipal Board respecting 39 Deer ParkCrescent.


10.64 20 Strathearn Boulevard – Ontario Municipal Board Hearing (Midtown)

On motion by Councillor Pantalone, the Toronto Community Council allowed theintroduction of a joint communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillors Bossons andAdams respecting the City’s representation at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing for No.20 Strathearn Boulevard.

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommended that theCity Solicitor and Commissioner of Urban Development Services be instructed to attend theOntario Municipal Board Hearing to defend the Committee of Adjustment decisionrespecting 20 Strathearn Boulevard.


10.65 146 Amelia Street (William Parton House) – Inclusion on the City of Toronto Inventoryof Heritage Properties (Don River)

On motion by Councillor McConnell, with Councillor Rae in the Chair, the TorontoCommunity Council allowed the introduction of a report (September 26, 2000) from theCommissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism respecting the inclusion ofNo. 146 Amelia Street (William Parton House) on the City of Toronto Inventory of HeritageProperties.

Ms. Katharine Farrell, Cabbagetown Preservation Association, addressed the TorontoCommunity Council in connection with the foregoing matter.



On further motion by Councillor McConnell, with Councillor Rae in the Chair, the TorontoCommunity Council recommended that 146 Amelia Street (William Parton House) beincluded on the City of Toronto Inventory of Heritage Properties.


10.66 35 Woodlawn Avenue West – Ontario Municipal Board Hearing

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a joint communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillors Bossons and Walkerrespecting the City’s representation at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing for No. 35Woodlawn Avenue West.

On further motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommendedthat the City Solicitor be instructed to attend the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing to opposethe decision of the Committee of Adjustment respecting 33 to 35 Woodlawn Avenue West,and that he be authorized to retain outside planning consultants, as necessary.

The above recommendation carried on the following division of votes:

Yeas: Councillors Bossons, Bussin, Jakobek, Korwin-Kuczynski, Miller and Walker – 6Nays: Councillors McConnell, Layton, Pantalone and Rae – 4


10.67 Permit Parking on Gardiner Road (North Toronto and Midtown)

On motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council allowed the introductionof a communication (September 27, 2000) from Councillor Walker respecting permit parkingon Gardiner Road.

On further motion by Councillor Bossons, the Toronto Community Council recommendedthat:

(1) permit parking be introduced on the east side of Gardiner Road, between EglintonAvenue West and Chadwick Avenue, on a street name basis, to operate during thehours of 2:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., 7 days a week;

(2) Part DD of Schedule XXVI (Permit Parking) of Municipal Code Chapter 400, Trafficand Parking, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, be amended toincorporate the east side of Gardiner Road, between Eglinton Avenue West andChadwick Avenue; and



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


The Committee adjourned its meeting at 4:40 p.m.

_______________________________________ Chair.



Attendance

September 27, 2000 9:30 a.m. -12:45p.m.

2:00 p.m. -4:40 p.m

McConnell (Chair) X X

Adams X -

Bossons X X

Bussin X X

Chow X X

Disero X X

Jakobek X X

Johnston X X

Korwin-Kuczynski X X

Layton X X

Miller X XPalacio X X

Rae X X

Silva X X

Walker X X

Mayor Lastman - -

* Members were present for some or all of the time indicated.

the city of toronto clerk's department meeting no. 10 ... · dundas street east, abutting the...

Documents