Agenda

The City Planning Division recommends that:

1.         City Council amend former City of North York  Zoning By-law No. 7625, for a portion of the lands formerly known as 2277-2295 Sheppard Avenue West and 100 Mainshep Road substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 5.

2.         City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as may be required.

This application proposes to amend the existing zoning regulations permitting a proposed retail shopping mall containing a grocery store on the northeast corner of the development site at 2277-2295 Sheppard Avenue West and 100 Mainshep Road (Block 150 on Plan 66M-2474).

This report reviews and recommends approval of the application to amend the Zoning By-law.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The City Planning Division recommends that:

1.         City Council amend former City of York Zoning By-law No. 1-83 for the lands at 55 Ypres Road substantially in accordance with the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 6.

2.         City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment as may be required.

3.         In accordance with the delegated approval under By-law 229-2000, as amended, City Council be advised that the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning intends to approve the Draft Plan of Subdivision as generally illustrated on Attachment 2 subject to:

a.         the conditions as generally listed in Attachment 7, which except as otherwise noted must be fulfilled prior to final approval and the release of the Plan of Subdivision for registration; and

b.         any such revisions to the proposed subdivision plan or any such additional modified conditions as the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning may deem to be appropriate to address matters arising from the on-going technical review of this development.

4.         Before introducing the necessary Bill amending former City of York Zoning By-law No. 1-83 substantially in accordance with the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 6, require the owner to revise and resubmit to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, a Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report.

These applications propose the creation of 7 residential detached lots and 36 residential semi-detached lots, an approximately 641 m2 public park and a 16.5 m wide public street connecting to Ypres Road and terminating in a cul-de-sac on the lands at 55 Ypres Road.

The proposal provides an opportunity to incorporate an underutilized site into the existing residential fabric of the surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed built form and relationship to the public streets are compatible with and add to the existing housing typology in the neighbourhood. The proposal, given the severe grading challenge presented by the existing site, is appropriate for the site and the area.

The report reviews and recommends approval of the application to amend the Zoning By-law and advises that the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, may approve the Draft Plan of Subdivision.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The purpose of this report is to seek City Council's instruction for an upcoming Ontario Municipal Board hearing which has been scheduled to commence on February 4, 2014.

The applicant has appealed its Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications, as well as the Site Plan Control application, to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) citing Council's failure to make a decision on the application within the time allotted by the Planning Act.  A pre-hearing conference was held on August 20, 2013 and a further pre-hearing conference is scheduled for December 16, 2013.  The full hearing will commence on February 4, 2014.

The applications before the OMB seek to permit the development of the lands, known municipally as 2183 Lake Shore Boulevard West, with two residential towers having heights of 46 and 66 storeys, rising from a six storey podium, containing a total of 1,285 residential units and 3,926 m2 of commercial uses.

This report reviews and recommends refusal of the application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, as well as the Site Plan Control application.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The City Planning Division recommends that City Council:

1.         Instruct the City Solicitor, the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and any other appropriate City staff to attend the OMB hearing and not to oppose the approval of the revised Zoning By-law Amendment for 1990 Bloor Street West and 26 Parkview Gardens as a settlement of the appeal, provided that it is in accordance with the revised proposal received by the City on October 16, 2013.

2.         Instruct the City Solicitor to advise the Ontario Municipal Board of City Council's position that the redevelopment of the lands must also include the full replacement of the 24 existing rental dwelling units and that a Tenant Relocation and Assistance Plan, including the right of tenants to return to the new rental units in accordance with the Official Plan, be provided to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.  Further, that the City Solicitor request the Board to withhold any order approving a Zoning By-law Amendment for the subject lands until such time as the City and the owner have presented to the Board a draft by-law that provides for securing the rental housing matters and the owner has executed a Section 37 and/or Section 111 Agreement(s) to give effect thereto.

3.         Instruct the City Solicitor to request the Ontario Municipal Board to withhold any order approving a Zoning By-law Amendment for the subject lands until a Natural Heritage Impact Study is completed by the applicant and a favourable peer review of the study is completed, at the sole expense of the applicant and to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning. 

The purpose of this report is to request direction for settlement of the appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) of the Zoning By-law Amendment application for the lands located at 1990 Bloor Street West and 26 Parkview Gardens.  The settlement is based on formal revisions to the proposed development received on October 16, 2013.

This application was the subject of a Request for Direction Report dated March 20, 2013, which referred to the original proposal, followed by a Supplemental Request for Direction Report dated April 29, 2013, related to modifications made to the original proposal.

On May 7, 2013, City Council adopted the recommendations of the April 29, 2013 Planning report, which included a recommendation that staff appear at the OMB hearing to oppose the application.

An OMB Pre-Hearing Conference was held on May 28, 2013, to establish the parties and participants for a nine day hearing scheduled to commence on December 2, 2013. 

Since the May 28, 2013 Pre-Hearing Conference, several meetings have been held between City staff, the proponent and area residents and their representatives.  These meetings resulted in the proponent making further changes to the proposed development, to address outstanding concerns noted in the two Request for Direction Reports.  These further revisions are illustrated in revised plans submitted to the City on October 16, 2013 as a settlement offer.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The City Planning Division recommends that Council:

1.         Endorse the preliminary terms of reference, included as Attachment 2 to this report, as the basis for preparing and issuing a formal terms of reference for the City-initiated Sherway Area Study.

At its meeting of October 17, 2013 Etobicoke York Community Council approved the recommendations of a staff report dated August 23, 2013 to undertake a review and update of the existing planning policy framework for the Sherway Area.  In addition, Etobicoke York Community Council requested the Director, Community Planning, Etobicoke York District, to report to the November 19, 2013 meeting of the Community Council with a preliminary terms of reference for this study.

This report responds to the request of Etobicoke York Community Council and provides a preliminary terms of reference for the Sherway Area Study.  This area is bounded by a CP rail corridor to the north, Highway 427 to the east, the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) to the south and the Etobicoke Creek to the west.

The Sherway Area Study provides an opportunity to revisit the existing planning policy framework enabling the City to update the Site and Area Specific Policies, Urban Design Guidelines, proposed road network and block plan, and identify any streetscape improvements or other requirements to support a complete community as envisioned by the Official Plan.

The August 23, 2013 staff report indicated that funds from City Planning's 2013 Operating Budget, estimated at $35,000, would be used for the first phase of the study, which was to be initially comprised of a community engagement process.  As these funds were only available until the end of 2013 the funding for the entire study will be allocated from City Planning's 2014 Requested Capital Budget, estimated to be approximately $350,000.

The City Planning Division recommends that:

1.         Notice for the December 12, 2013 community consultation meeting be given to landowners and residents within 120 m of the site.

2.         Notice for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act be given according to the regulations of the Planning Act.

This application proposes to amend the former City of Etobicoke Zoning Code to permit the redevelopment of the lands at 26 and 30 Fieldway Road with a six block, 4-storey stacked townhouse development containing 150 units.  The proposed development would have a 171 space underground parking garage and a Floor Space Index of 1.7 times the area of the lot.

This report provides preliminary information on the above-noted application and seeks Community Council's direction on further processing of the application and on the community consultation process.

A community consultation meeting has been scheduled in consultation with the Ward Councillor for Thursday, December 12, 2013, to allow the applicant to present the project and receive comment from the public.

A Final Report under the Planning Act to consider this application is targeted for the third quarter of 2014 provided all required information is submitted by the applicant in a timely manner.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

The City Planning Division recommends that:

1.         Staff be directed to schedule a community consultation meeting for the lands at 3526 Lake Shore Boulevard West together with the Ward Councillor.

2.         Notice for the community consultation meeting be given to landowners and residents within 120 metres of the site.

3.         Notice for the public meeting under the Planning Act be given according to the regulations of the Planning Act.

These applications propose to amend the Official Plan and former City of Etobicoke Zoning Code for the northern portion of 3526 Lake Shore Boulevard West to permit the construction of 87 townhouses and 2 semi-detached dwellings organized around a proposed public street network and a new public park.  The Draft Plan of Subdivision would create the public street, development blocks and two open space blocks.  The existing car dealership use and zoning permissions along the Lake Shore Boulevard West frontage would remain with portions of the existing building proposed to be demolished.

This report provides preliminary information on the above-noted applications and seeks Community Council's directions on further processing of the applications and on the community consultation process.

It is intended that a community consultation meeting be scheduled in consultation with the Ward Councillor to allow the applicant to present the project and to receive comment from the public. A Final Report and Public Meeting under the Planning Act to consider the applications is targeted for the third quarter of 2014 provided all required information is submitted by the applicant in a timely manner.

The recommendations in this report have no financial impact.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council:

1.         Refuse the application for an exemption submitted by McMillan Lawyers acting on behalf of the property owners of 267 Riverside Drive, to maintain an existing hedge, 3.66 metres (12 feet) in height, located at the front yard of the subject property, on the basis that a section of this fence does not comply with the provisions of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences.

This Staff report is in regard to a matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by McMillan Lawyers acting on behalf of the property owners of 267 Riverside Drive for a Fence Exemption to maintain an existing hedge, 3.66 metres (12 feet) in height, located at the front yard of the subject property.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this Staff Report.

This staff report is in regard to a matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by the property owner of 559 Delaware Avenue North for a Fence Exemption to maintain two existing board on board wood fences with a lattice top at the rear yard, including a 2.16 metres high fence and a 2.44 metres high gate at the north side, and a 2.08 metres high fence at the south side of the property.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council refuse this request for exemption submitted by the property owner of 153 Lake Promenade for a Fence Exemption to maintain a section of an existing board on board wood fence with a lattice top located on a slope at the far end of the property on the west side towards the lake that has an average height of 2.15 metres, as this section of the fence is in excess of the maximum height of 2.0 metres under Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences, Section 447-2 B, Table 1.

This staff report is in regard to a matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by the property owner of 153 Lake Promenade for a Fence Exemption to maintain a section of an existing board on board wood fence with a lattice top located on a slope at the far end of the property on the west side towards the lake that has an average height of 2.15 metres.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council refuse this application submitted by the owner of 882 Weston Road to maintain a 1.8 metres (6 feet) high closed board wood fence located at the front yard of the property, as the proposal does not comply with provisions of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences, Section 447-2 B, Table 1.

This is a matter in which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

This staff report is in response to an application submitted by the owner of 882 Weston Road to maintain 1.8 metres (6 feet) high closed board wood fence located at the front yard of the property.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.

This staff report is in response to an application submitted by the owner of 882 Weston Road to maintain 1.8 metres (6 feet) high closed board wood fence located at the front yard of the property.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council refuse the application submitted by the property owner of 28 Bernice Avenue for a Fence Exemption to maintain at his rear yard: a newly constructed 2.44 metres high aluminium framed tempered glass fence for an ice skating/hockey rink, and an existing pool enclosure that comprises of a 1.83 metres vinyl fence, a partly enclosed bench structure that is 0.91 metres away from the edge of the pool, and a 1.71 metres high metal picket fence with vertical supports spaced at 4.0 metres apart, as the fence does not comply with the provisions of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences.

This Staff report is in regard to a matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by the property owner of 28 Bernice Avenue for a Fence Exemption to maintain a newly constructed 2.44 metres (8 feet) high aluminium framed tempered glass fence for an ice skating/hockey rink and an existing pool enclosure that comprises of a 1.83 metres (6 feet) vinyl fence, a partly enclosed bench structure that is 0.91 metres (3 feet) away from the edge of the pool, and a 1.71 metres (5 feet 7½ inches) high metal picket fence with vertical supports spaced at 4.0 metres (13 feet) apart. The fences are in violation of the height restriction and pool enclosure requirements for the rear yard as set out in Chapter 447 of the City of Toronto Municipal Code.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this Staff Report.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council refuse the request for an exemption submitted by the property owner of 35 Elma Street to maintain an existing hedge, 3.35 metres (11 feet) in height and 15.24 metres (50 feet) in length, located at the rear yard of the subject property on the east side adjacent to 31 Elma Street, on basis that this hedge, being also defined as a fence, is in excess of the permitted height of a fence under the provisions of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences. 

This Staff report is in regard to a matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by the property owner of 35 Elma Street for a Fence Exemption to maintain an existing hedge, 3.35 metres (11 feet) in height and 15.24 metres (50 feet) in length, located at the rear yard of the subject property on the east side adjacent to 31 Elma Street.  The existing fence (hedge) is in violation of the height restrictions set out in Chapter 447 of the City of Toronto Municipal Code.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this Staff Report.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council refuse the application submitted by InterArch Inc. on behalf of the property owner of 145 Judson Street for a Fence Exemption to maintain an existing corrugated metal fence, ranging from 3.05 metres (10 feet) to 4.27 metres (14 feet) in height, installed along the perimeter of the subject property, as the fence does not comply with the provisions of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences. 

This Staff report is in regard to a matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by InterArch Inc. on behalf of the property owner of 145 Judson Street for a Fence Exemption to maintain an existing corrugated metal fence, ranging from 3.05 metres (10 feet) to 4.27 metres (14 feet) in height, installed along the perimeter of the subject property.  The fence is in violation of City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447 - Fences.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this Staff Report.

Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council refuse the application for an exemption submitted by the property owner of 735 Renforth Drive, as the proposal does not comply with provisions of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences.

This Staff report is in regard to matter for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to consider an application submitted by the property owner of 735 Renforth Drive for a Fence Exemption to erect a 2.5 (~ 8 feet) metre high concrete fence, adjacent to but more than one metre away from an existing retaining wall between a proposed residential development and five existing properties.  The proposed fence will be in violation of the height restrictions for rear yards as set out in Chapter 447 of the Municipal Code.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this Staff report.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council:

1.         deny the request for front yard parking at 161 Ascot Avenue; and

2.         request that the owner remove the existing asphalt paving and restore the area to soft landscaping, as indicated in Appendix 'E', attached to the report dated October 29, 2013, from the Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services, Toronto and East York District.

This staff report is about a matter which Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

Transportation Services has assessed an appeal from the owner of 161 Ascot Avenue for front yard parking.  We do not recommend approval for front yard parking at this location because it does not meet the requirements of the City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 918.  The owner will be given an opportunity to make a deputation before Community Council.

There is no financial impact to the City as a result of this report.

Transportation Services recommends that City Council approve:

1.         The removal of the pedestrian crossover on Scarlett Road north of Raymore Drive as this location fails the pedestrian crossover safety audit.

2.         The installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Scarlett Road and Hill Garden Road.

Although the warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not met, a safety audit of the existing pedestrian crossover on Scarlett Road between Hill Garden Road and Raymore Drive revealed that this location is no longer environmentally suitable for a pedestrian crossover given the operating speed of vehicular traffic on Scarlett Road. Based on the results of the pedestrian crossover audit, staff is recommending that the pedestrian crossover be replaced with traffic control signals.

Since the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates a transit service on Scarlett Road, City Council approval of this report is required. TTC staff has been consulted on the matter and have not objected to the proposal.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Installing all-way stop controls at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Riverside Trail.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to recommend the installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Riverside Trail.

The all-way stop control will enhance traffic safety given the restricted sight lines created by the curved roadway geometry and both the foliage (bushes and trees) and the corner of the house located on the property on east side of Riverside Drive, opposite Riverside Trail.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to describe the results of an investigation into a request for speed humps on Shaver Avenue South and Wilmar Road. A staff assessment concludes that the criteria for installing speed humps are met on Shaver Avenue South and Wilmar Road, between Dundas Street West and Bloor Street West. The adjacent streets of Acorn Avenue and Poplar Avenue were also assessed and deemed to be possibly negatively impacted by the physical traffic calming of Shaver Avenue South and Wilmar Road. Therefore, it is proposed the installation of speed humps on Acorn Avenue and Poplar Avenue also be considered at this time.

There are no financial implications related to the adoption of this report.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Rescinding the “No Heavy Vehicles, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m." regulation on Judson Street between Royal York Road and Horner Avenue.

2.         Enacting a “No Heavy Vehicles, 7:00 p.m. of one day to 7:00 a.m. of the next following day” regulation on Judson Street between Royal York Road and Harold Street.

3.         Enacting a "No Heavy Vehicles, Anytime" regulation on Judson Street between Harold Street and Islington Avenue.

4.         Enacting a “No Heavy Vehicles, 7:00 p.m. of one day to 7:00 a.m. of the next following day” regulation on Judson Street between Islington Avenue and Horner Avenue.

5.         Enacting a "No Left Turn, Anytime" regulation at the intersection of Judson Street and the driveway access at 29 Judson Street, approximately 180 metres west of Royal York Road, for northbound traffic.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

Transportation Services is seeking authority to change the "No Heavy Vehicles, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m." regulation on Judson Street, between Royal York Road and Islington Avenue, to "No Heavy Vehicles, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m." on Judson Street between Royal York Road and Harold Street; and, "No Heavy Vehicles Anytime" between Harold Street and Islington Avenue. In addition, staff is seeking authority to introduce a "No Left Turn Anytime" regulation at the intersection of Judson Street and the driveway access at 29 Judson Street, for northbound traffic exiting the driveway access.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Enacting a 30 km/h speed limit on Quebec Avenue between Dundas Street West and Annette Street.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to reduce the speed limit on Quebec Avenue between Dundas Street West and Annette Street from 40 km/h to 30 km/h.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Enacting a 40 km/h speed limit on Snaresbrook Drive between Kipling Avenue and Clearbrooke Circle.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to reduce the speed limit on Snaresbrook Drive between Kipling Avenue and Clearbrooke Circle from 50 km/h to 40 km/h.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Enacting a "No Parking Anytime" regulation on the east and north sides of Franson Crescent from a point 72 metres south of St. Lucie Drive (west intersection) to a point 20 metres further southeast.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to implement a "No Parking Anytime" regulation on the east and north side of Franson Crescent between a point 72 metres south of St. Lucie Drive (west intersection) and a point 20 metres further southeast. Prohibiting parking, within the curve, will prevent parked vehicles from blocking access to 56 Franson Crescent as well as improve safety and traffic flow when manoeuvring within the curve.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council:

1.         Approve the amendments to parking regulations on Geary Avenue, as outlined in Appendix “A” and Appendix “B” attached to the report dated October 23, 2013 from the Director, Transportation Services - Etobicoke York District.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to amend the existing "No Parking Anytime" and "No Standing Anytime" regulations on Geary Avenue, between Dufferin Street and the west limit of the road.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Enacting a "No Parking, 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., Wednesday and Friday" regulation on the west side of Jamestown Crescent (west intersection), between a point 58 metres north of John Garland Boulevard and a point 20 metres further north.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to implement a "No Parking, 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., Wednesday and Friday" regulation on the west side of Jamestown Crescent (west intersection), between a point 58 metres north of John Garland Boulevard and a point 20 metres further north. Prohibiting parking will allow the Toronto Community Housing - Jamestown Hub, Community Support Services to receive deliveries during the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. on Wednesdays and Fridays.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Enacting a "No Standing Anytime" regulation on the north and south sides of Mackay Avenue, between Via Italia and a point 15 metres further east.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to prohibit standing at anytime on both sides of Mackay Avenue, for a distance of 15 metres east of Via Italia, in order to improve the flow of traffic and by improving turning movements, with the elimination of vehicles parked too close to the intersection. This recommendation has been discussed with the area Councillor.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Rescinding a "No Parking Anytime" regulation on the north side of Queen's Drive from a point opposite the easterly limit of Upwood Avenue to the westerly limit of Culford Road.

2.         Enacting a "No Parking Anytime" regulation on the north side of Queen's Drive, from a point opposite the easterly limit of Upwood Avenue to a point 61 metres east of Venice Drive and from a point 222 metres east of Venice Drive to Culford Road.

3.         Enacting a "15 Minute Permitted Parking from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., and 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday to Friday" regulation on the north side of Queen's Drive from 61 metres east of Venice Drive to a point 161 metres further east.

4.         Enacting a "No Parking from 9:01 a.m. to 1:59 p.m. and 3:31 p.m. to 7:59 a.m., Monday to Friday and Anytime Saturday and Sunday" regulations on the north side of Queen's Drive from a point 61 metres east of Venice Drive to a point 161 metres further east.

5.         Enacting a "No Parking Anytime" regulation on the south side of Queen's Drive between Upwood Avenue and the easterly limit of Black Creek Drive.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to amend the current parking regulations on Queen's Drive to improve parking and traffic operations as a result of pick-up/drop-off activities associated to Chaminade College School.

The proposed parking amendments will address concerns related to large increase in the number of parents picking up/dropping off at subject school due to robberies and assaults incidents on students walking home.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council approve:

1.         Rescinding the one hour maximum parking restriction from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., on the east side of Union Street, between a point 9 metres south of Turnberry Avenue and a point 211 metres further south.

This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision.

The purpose of this report is to enable longer term parking by vehicles of persons visiting Union Street, by rescinding the existing one hour maximum parking restriction from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., daily. This recommendation has been discussed with the area Councillor.

Transportation Services recommends:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council authorize the amendment to Schedule B of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 925, Permit Parking, to incorporate a revised map of permit parking area "1B", as attached in Appendix "A" of the report (October 29, 2013) from the Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services,  Toronto and East York District.

Transportation Services is requesting authority from City Council to amend the boundary of Permit Parking Area 1B.

Transportation Services has assessed the realignment of Permit Parking Area 1B to exclude the property located at 1830 Bloor Street West, 6-14 Oakmount Road and 7-19 Pacific Avenue as requested by Etobicoke York Community Council.  We are recommending approval of the realignment as it will not impact negatively on the Permit Parking Area.

There is no financial impact associated with this report.

Transportation Services recommends:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council authorize the amendment to Schedule B of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 925, Permit Parking, to incorporate a revised map of permit parking area "1B", as attached in Appendix "A" of the report (October 29, 2013) from the Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services,  Toronto and East York District.

Transportation Services is requesting authority from City Council to amend the boundary of Permit Parking Area 1B.

Transportation Services has assessed the realignment of Permit Parking Area 1B to exclude the property located at 200 Keele as requested by Etobicoke York Community Council.  We are recommending approval of the realignment as it will not impact negatively on the Permit Parking Area.

There is no financial impact associated with this report.

Transportation Services recommends:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council authorize the amendment to Schedule B of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 925, Permit Parking, to incorporate a revised map of permit parking area "1E", as attached in Appendix "A" of the report (October 29, 2013) from the Manager, Right of Way Management, Transportation Services,  Toronto and East York District.

Transportation Services is requesting authority from City Council to amend the boundary of Permit Parking Area 1E.

Transportation Services has assessed the realignment of Permit Parking Area 1E to exclude the property located at 588 Annette Street as requested by Etobicoke York Community Council.  We are recommending approval of the realignment as it will not impact negatively on the Permit Parking Area.

There is no financial impact associated with this report.

Transportation Services recommends that Etobicoke York Community Council:

1.         Approve the installation/removal of  on-street accessible parking spaces at the locations identified in Appendix A attached to the report dated October 24, 2013, from the Director, Transportation Services, Etobicoke York District.

This staff report concerns a matter for which the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. The purpose is to obtain approval for the installation/removal of a number of on-street accessible parking spaces.

Funds in the amount of $1,200.00 are available within the Transportation Services Division’s 2013 Operating Budget.

Residents of 146 to 166 Osler Street and 9 to 37 Miller Street, south of Lindner Street, submitted a petition to my office requesting the conversion of the private laneway at the rear of their homes into a public laneway.  The property owners are willing to convey their interest to the City, similar to what was done in other parts of Ward 17. 

The northern part of the laneway, north of Lindner Street, between Osler Street and Miller Street, was converted from a private laneway into a public laneway a few years ago.  The first laneway south of St. Clair Avenue West, west of Spring Grove Avenue, which is narrower, was recently converted into a public laneway and upgraded.

The costs of assembling the public laneway can be recovered through the benefitting assessment of properties adjacent to the laneway.

Toronto Fire Services recommends that:

1.         City Council designate part or those parts of the private road or roads shown on the site plan filed with the Fire Chief in respect of the municipal addresses set out below, as a fire route pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 880 – Fire Routes:

165 & 175 Galaxy Boulevard

34 & 50 Leading Road

70 Birmingham Street

137 Queens Plate Drive

120 Twenty Fourth Street; and

2.         City Council authorize the Fire Chief and City Solicitor to take the appropriate action to make a designated Fire Route.

To obtain Council approval for the amendment of the Fire Route By-law to designate certain locations as fire routes within the meaning of City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 880, as amended.

Fire Services uses designated fire routes as a key mechanism in regulating fire prevention, including the prevention of spreading of fires and the delivery of fire protection services.

There are no financial implications associated with this report.

This staff report is regarding matter for which Community Council has been delegated authority from City Council to make a final Decision.

On October 29, 2012, Toronto Building received a demolition permit application from John DeFilippis, acting as both the owner and authorized agent, submitting an application for the demolition of a two-storey single family detached dwelling located at 2968 Islington Avenue.  Toronto Building has not received a building permit application to replace the building to be demolished as of this date.

In accordance with the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 363, Article 11, "Demolition Control" Subsection D (1), the above noted demolition permit application is submitted to the Etobicoke York Community Council for consideration and decision due to the fact that a building permit application has not been submitted to replace the building, and whether to refuse or grant the demolition permit application, including conditions if any, to be attached to the permit.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.

In its meeting on January 22, 2013, Etobicoke York Community Council requested the District Manager, Municipal Licensing and Standards, Etobicoke York District, to attend and inspect the property at 2968 Islington Avenue to determine if any Notice of Violation is warranted, such inspection to include an opinion on the roof and mould conditions, and report back to Etobicoke York Community Council on April 9, 2013, on the outcome of the inspection.

1.         That Community Council receive this report for information.

2.         That Confidential Attachment 1 to this report remain confidential.

The City Planning Division recommends that:

1.         City Council appoint the candidate listed in the confidential Attachment No. 1 to the Etobicoke York Community Preservation Panel, effective November 2013, for a term that extends to the end of the 2014-2018 Council session, or until their successors are appointed; and

2.         City Council authorize the release of the confidential Attachment No. 1 once it has dealt with this staff report. 

The individual recommended in Attachment No. 1 has relevant professional skills and interests that apply to heritage preservation and satisfy Municipal Code direction that "panel members possess special interests or knowledge that will assist the panel in fulfilling its responsibilities".

This report recommends that the Etobicoke York Community Council nominate the individual listed in Confidential Attachment No. 1 to the Etobicoke York Community Preservation Panel (EYCPP) for appointment by City Council.

Due to a clerical error this candidate was not listed on the Confidential Attachment to the original report entitled, Recommended Candidates for the Etobicoke York Community Preservation Panel, from the Acting Director, Urban Design, City Planning Division, dated August 16, 2013 and adopted by the Etobicoke York Community Council on September 10, 2013.

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.EY26.40

The candidate successfully completed the application process.

The Acting Director, Business Services, Economic Development and Culture, recommends that:

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council approve the additions and deletions to Baby Point Gates, Lakeshore Village and the Regal Heights Business Improvement Area (BIA) Boards of Management as described in the body and in Attachment No. 1 of this report dated October  28, 2013 from the Acting Director Business Services, Economic Development and Culture;

2.         Etobicoke York  Community Council confirm that under City Council's Public Appointments Policy, Board members are appointed at the pleasure of Community Council, and Community Council retains the right to replace any appointed member at any time and for any reason; and

3.         Etobicoke York Community Council direct that Schedule A of the Municipal Code Chapter 19, Business Improvement Areas, be amended to reflect the change in the number of members for the Baby Point Gates, Lakeshore Village and the Regal Heights Village Business Improvement Area (BIA) Boards of Management.

The purpose of this report is to recommend Etobicoke York Community Council approve the additions and deletions to Baby Point Gates, Lakeshore Village and Regal Heights Village BIA Boards of Management.  The Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority to make final decisions regarding Business Improvement Area (BIA) appointments.

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.

Seeking endorsement of various events for liquor licensing purposes.

That Etobicoke York Community Council:

1.         Re-open Item EY26.11, headed "Preliminary Report - 289 and 291 The Kingsway and 1 to 7 St. Stevens Court - Zoning By-law Amendment and Rental Housing Demolition and Conversion Applications", adopted, as amended, by Etobicoke York Community Council on September 10, 2013, only as it pertains to Recommendation 3.

2.         Delete Recommendation 3 in its entirety, and insert the following instead:

             "3.       To identify context of application, no community consultation meetings go forward for the lands at 289 and 291 The Kingsway and 1 to 7 St. Stevens Court or any other new application until the City Council directed Humbertown Secondary Plan Area review is complete."

1.         Etobicoke York Community Council request the Medical Officer of Health to work with staff from Municipal Licensing and Standards and the Ministry of the Environment, on issues related to 29 and 145 Judson Street, and report back to the Community Council for its meeting on January 15, 2014.

2.         Etobicoke York Community Council support the redesignation of the lands known as "The Mimico Triangle" and Judson Street portion to a regeneration area through the City's Municipal Comprehensive Review, and direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to commence due process towards a regeneration designation.

3.         Etobicoke York Community Council direct that a copy of this Item be forwarded to the Planning and Growth Management Committee, and to Deputy City Manager Livey, for information.