Decisions
Licensing and Standards Committee
- Meeting No.:
- 11
- Contact:
- Kelly McCarthy, Committee Administrator
- Meeting Date:
- Wednesday, January 25, 2012
- Phone:
- 416-397-7796
- Start Time:
- 9:30 AM
- E-mail:
- lsc@toronto.ca
- Location:
- Committee Room 1, City Hall
- Chair:
- Councillor Cesar Palacio
LS11.1 - Clothing Drop Boxes
- Decision Type:
- ACTION
- Status:
- Referred
- Wards:
- All
Committee Decision
The Licensing and Standards Committee referred this item to the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards, to report to the September 21, 2012 meeting of the Licensing and Standards Committee on the feasibility of a revised Clothing Drop Box by-law that either bans all drop boxes, or allows drop boxes and includes the following conditions:
1. Is comprehensive in that it licenses all clothing drop boxes within the City of Toronto with no exemptions.
2. Requires each box to display a sticker which is affixed to the box, must be renewed periodically and which clearly indicates that the box is licensed by the City of Toronto and meets the following conditions:
a. Each box displays the municipal address of the property on which the box is located.
b. Each box has the written permission of the owner of the property to be located on that property.
c. A requirement that the box be emptied on a regular basis and be free of graffiti and otherwise maintained in an acceptable manner.
d. That the operator shall maintain the property in the immediate vicinity of the box in a clean and tidy manner, free of litter and debris.
e. Displays the name and phone number that people can call for complaints.
3. The license fee be priced on a full cost recovery basis.
4. The by-law include provision for impounding boxes that do not meet these requirements, including the possibility of recovering costs for removing them from the land owner’s property taxes.
5. The feasibility of having each property owner where a box is located provide a 'permission to remove' authorization to be used by the City at its discretion.
6. A plan to remove clothing boxes from municipal property, including the cost, and when and how they can be removed.
Origin
Summary
The purpose of this report is to update the Licensing and Standards Committee on the effectiveness of existing by-laws governing the licensing and maintenance of clothing drop boxes as well as the effectiveness of the City's enforcement practices.
On January 1, 2007 the City of Toronto enacted by-laws regarding the licensing of clothing drop box operators (Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 545), and the standards to which these clothing drop boxes and the surrounding area are to be maintained (Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 629).
Municipal Licensing and Standards (MLS) enforces the regulations surrounding clothing drop boxes used by both for-profit and non-profit organizations for the purpose of collecting clothing donated by the public on an on-going basis.
It is the intention of the Division to consider changes to the Clothing Drop Box By-law within the parameters of reviewing the Licensing By-law in 2012.
Background Information
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/ls/bgrd/backgroundfile-43490.pdf
Communications
(January 17, 2012) Letter from Marc Nanthakumar, President, DYN Exports Inc. (LS.Main.LS11.1.2)
(January 25, 2012) Submission from Howard Moscoe (LS.New.LS11.1.3)
Speakers
Marc Nanthakumar, President, DYN Exports (Submission Filed)
Howard Moscoe (Submission Filed)
Councillor Shelley Carroll
Councillor Mike Del Grande
LS11.2 - Investigating the Feasibility of Allowing Backyard Hens in Toronto
- Decision Type:
- ACTION
- Status:
- Deferred
- Wards:
- All
Committee Decision
The Licensing and Standards Committee deferred the item indefinitely.
Origin
Summary
City Council on November 29, 30 and December 1, 2011, referred Motion MM14.8 to the Licensing and Standards Committee.
In response to a growing local urban agriculture movement and desire by people to have greater control over their food supply, an increasing number of municipalities across North America have removed restrictions on the keeping of hens in urban areas. The cities which have modified their regulations include Vancouver, New York, Cleveland, Los Angeles and Kingston, Ontario.
The experiences of these cities have highlighted that residents can successfully keep a limited number of hens in their backyard in balance with the need to maintain the community’s quality of life by establishing appropriate regulations that govern potential issues such as noise, odour, separation distances, selling of eggs, and waste disposal.
In Toronto, there are a number of residents who wish to keep hens in their backyards for the purposes of producing eggs for personal consumption but existing by-laws prohibit the keeping of chickens in Toronto. Backyard hens can be kept in a safe and appropriate manner that limits the potential for nuisances and public health concerns and City Council should give consideration to allowing residents to legally keep hens.
Therefore we recommend that City Council direct staff to prepare a report outlining a strategy that will allow residents to keep backyard hens in a safe and appropriate manner.
(Submitted to City Council on November 29, 30 and December 1, 2011 as MM14.8)
Background Information
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/ls/bgrd/backgroundfile-44346.pdf
Communications
(November 30, 2011) E-mail from Josie Erent (LS.Main.LS11.2.2)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Mary-Jill Blackman (LS.New.LS11.2.3)
(January 24, 2012) Petition from Animal Alliance and AAEV Party of Canada with 45 signatures (LS.New.LS11.2.4)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Charmaine Cartier (LS.New.LS11.2.5)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Deborah Chalmers (LS.New.LS11.2.6)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Lea Shayuk (LS.New.LS11.2.7)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Lia Laskaris (LS.New.LS11.2.8)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Barbi Lazarus (LS.New.LS11.2.9)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Erika Ritter (LS.New.LS11.2.10)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Kate Hawkins (LS.New.LS11.2.11)
(January 24, 2012) Letter from Liz White, Animal Alliance/Environment Voters (LS.New.LS11.2.12)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Irene Dolik and John Dolik (LS.New.LS11.2.13)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Peter E Davenport (LS.New.LS11.2.14)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Jonathan Choi (LS.New.LS11.2.15)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Trish O’Reilly-Brennan (LS.New.LS11.2.16)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Christine Grimmond (LS.New.LS11.2.17)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Brigitte Vander Knaap (LS.New.LS11.2.18)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Brenda MacDougall (LS.New.LS11.2.19)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from Hilary Dempsey and Domenic Montagano (LS.New.LS11.2.20)
(January 24, 2012) E-mail from James Brazier (LS.New.LS11.2.21)
(January 25, 2012) E-mail from Mark Windsor (LS.New.LS11.2.22)
(January 25, 2012) E-mail from Amy Simon (LS.New.LS11.2.23)
(January 25, 2012) E-mail from Audrey Duff (LS.New.LS11.2.24)
(January 25, 2012) E-mail from Dianne Griffith (LS.New.LS11.2.25)
Speakers
Darlene Litman
Catherine Mah, Assistant Professor, University of Toronto
Matthew Patel
Andrew Patel
Liz White, Animal Alliance/Environment Voters (Submission Filed)
Stephanie Brown, Canadian Coalition for Farm Animals
Kevin Hewitt
Jack Hewitt
Lily Hewitt
Georgia Hewitt
Councillor Joe Mihevc
Councillor Mary-Margaret McMahon
Councillor Sarah Doucette
LS11.3 - Amendments to Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 693, Article III, Temporary Signs and Chapter 441, Fees and Charges
- Decision Type:
- ACTION
- Status:
- Adopted
- Wards:
- All
Public Notice Given
Committee Recommendations
The Licensing and Standards Committee recommends that:
1. City Council amend Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 693, Article III, Temporary Signs, substantially in accordance with the draft by-law in Appendix 'A', attached to the report (January 11, 2012) from the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards.
2. City Council amend Appendix C, Schedule 12 of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 441, Fees and Charges, substantially in accordance with the draft by-law in Appendix 'A', attached to the report (January 11, 2012) from the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards.
3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to prepare the necessary Bills for introduction in Council to implement the above recommendations, subject to such stylistic and technical changes to the draft bills as may be required.
Origin
Summary
The purpose of this report, as directed by City Council, is to review and make recommendations to the Licensing and Standards Committee on various amendments to Chapter 693, Article III, Temporary Signs, concerning temporary signs utilized in relation to the marketing, promotion or advertising of the construction, development, sale, rent or lease of premises or property in order to prevent potential conflicts with any regulations in Chapter 694, Signs, General, respecting such signs.
Municipal Licensing and Standards (MLS) was also directed to consider strategies for incorporating the provision of temporary public art that excludes third-party advertising of any kind, such as murals on construction hoarding, where appropriate, as an ameliorative measure in the public realm.
MLS also took this opportunity to recommend further amendments to Chapter 693 with the intent of adding clarity to the Temporary Signs Article.
Toronto Building Sign By-law Unit, Transportation Services, and Legal Services were consulted in the preparation of this report.
Background Information
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/ls/bgrd/backgroundfile-44347.pdf
LS11.4 - Report Request on Amending Chapter 629-38, Property Standards, Heating and Air Conditioning
- Decision Type:
- ACTION
- Status:
- Deferred
- Wards:
- All
Committee Decision
The Licensing and Standards Committee deferred the item indefinitely.
Origin
Summary
The dates for mandatory heating and cooling requirements as outlined in Chapter 629 of the Municipal Code, were selected based on long-term climate trends (i.e. last 30 years) as opposed to recent trends. This was done to mitigate the impact of short-term variability that is often seen in our weather patterns.
That being said, there is growing evidence showing that global warming is affecting our long-term climate.
Constituents in Ward 21, who rent apartments, have noted that the current requirements lead to unnecessary discomfort. Changing the current requirements to better reflect more recent climate trends could lead to more comfortable home environments as well as reduced energy consumption.
Background Information
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/ls/bgrd/backgroundfile-44348.pdf
Speakers
LS11.5 - Natural Garden Exemptions - Request for Report
- Decision Type:
- ACTION
- Status:
- Referred
- Wards:
- All
Committee Decision
The Licensing and Standards Committee referred the item to the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards, with the request to report to the May 25, 2012 meeting on:
1. The feasibility of providing notification to area residents when a request for a Natural Garden Exemption is to be considered by Community Council and criteria as to who should be notified.
2. Revising the fees for Natural Gardens to include a re-inspection fee for the costs incurred by the City as a result of these re-inspections, in consultation with the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation.
3. The feasibility of amendments to existing bylaws to stipulate that Natural Garden Exemptions are only effective until such time that the property with the exemption changes ownership.
Origin
Summary
At the January 10, 2012 meeting of Etobicoke York Community Council, in considering Natural Garden Exemption requests, there was discussion around changes to existing bylaws and practices that may be appropriate to better inform the public of these types of requests, ensure full cost recovery to the City for inspections related to Natural Gardens and clarify when these exemptions are no longer applicable.
Currently, when one requests an exemption to Chapter 489, Grass and Weeds, on the basis that the lands in question form a Natural Garden, a report is submitted to the appropriate Community Council, with only the complainant notified of the request for an exemption. This means that a neighbour, who may have issue with the current state of the lands but was not the one to formally report this to the City would not be aware of the exemption request and consequently would not have an opportunity to submit comments to the Community Council for consideration. Changes should be made to this practice so that at a minimum, the immediately surrounding neighbours are notified when there is a request for a Natural Garden Exemption.
At Etobicoke York Community Council we learned that when it is contended by the owner of a property that the growth on their lands forms a Natural Garden, a referral is made by Municipal Licensing and Standards (MLS) to Parks, Forestry and Recreation (PFR) for inspection of the property to see if it qualifies as a Natural Garden. Staff may have to attend the property numerous times for re-inspection; however, unlike re-inspections conducted by MLS wherein re-inspection fees can be charged to recover costs, there are no bylaws in place to allow for re-inspection fees to be charged when PFR staff must re-inspect Natural Gardens. Provisions should be made so that the City can recover the costs incurred for these re-inspections.
Finally, there is currently no definitive timeframe as to when a Natural Garden Exemption expires. If a property owner applies for this type of exemption, it may be beneficial to stipulate that this type of exemption is only effective until such time that the property changes ownership.
Background Information
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/ls/bgrd/backgroundfile-44663.pdf
Meeting Sessions
Session Date | Session Type | Start Time | End Time | Public or Closed Session |
---|---|---|---|---|
2012-01-25 | Morning | 9:38 AM | 11:15 AM | Public |
2012-01-25 | Morning | 11:20 AM | 12:30 PM | Public |
2012-01-25 | Afternoon | 1:41 PM | 3:00 PM | Public |
Attendance
Date and Time | Quorum | Members |
---|---|---|
2012-01-25 9:38 AM - 11:15 AM (Public Session) |
Present |
Present: Glenn De Baeremaeker, Chin Lee, Gloria Lindsay Luby, Frances Nunziata, Cesar Palacio (Chair) Not Present: Anthony Perruzza Also present (non-members): Shelley Carroll, Sarah Doucette, Mike Del Grande, Mary-Margaret McMahon |
2012-01-25 11:20 AM - 12:30 PM (Public Session) |
Present |
Present: Glenn De Baeremaeker, Chin Lee, Gloria Lindsay Luby, Frances Nunziata, Cesar Palacio (Chair) Not Present: Anthony Perruzza Also present (non-members): Sarah Doucette, Mary-Margaret McMahon, Joe Mihevc |
2012-01-25 1:41 PM - 3:00 PM (Public Session) |
Present |
Present: Glenn De Baeremaeker, Chin Lee, Gloria Lindsay Luby, Frances Nunziata, Cesar Palacio (Chair) Not Present: Anthony Perruzza Also present (non-members): Sarah Doucette, Mary-Margaret McMahon, Joe Mihevc |