Scarborough Community Council
The full agenda, as filed
All 25 items in the clerk’s order. Each carries the city’s own words: the staff recommendation, what the body decided, and its status. Nothing below is written by us.
SC12.1adopted
Presentation - The Herb Carnegie Story
Bernice Carnegie is the descendant of one of the two black Canadian families who emigrated to Canada in 1912/1913 and settled in Toronto to find a better way of life. She touches on the lives of some of her families' compelling and 'historical' journey, outlining a few of the challenges and success of their West Indian and American slave and multicultural roots. Bernice is the co-founder of the Herbert H. Carnegie Future Aces Foundation established in 1987 and was its former Executive director for seventeen years. Bernice is the daughter of Canadian trailblazer Herb Carnegie, the creator of the Future ACES philosophy. His career choice as a black man in the sport of hockey dominated by white players in the 1940s and 1950s was the catalyst for changing countless lives. In this presentation, Bernice reveals what she learned from her families' ancestral and personal challenges. Their stories show how we can embrace our diverse culture, adapting to new experiences and encouraging an atmosphere of harmony in which we take responsibility building more caring communities.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Received this presentation for information.
Staff recommendation as filed
Councillor Karygiannis recommends that Scarborough Community Council: 1. Receive this presentation for information.
SC12.2amended
Request for Fence Exemption - 23 Copping Road
This staff report concerns a matter for which the Scarborough Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. The purpose of this report is to advise Community Council concerning an application by the owner(s) of 23 Copping Road for a site-specific Fence Exemption, pursuant to Section 447-2 of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447- Fences. The property owner(s) is seeking Community Council's permission to be exempt concerning a proposed rear yard fence which will not comply with restrictions contrary to Section 447-2 of the bylaw as detailed below in the following chart: The subject property 23 Copping Road is located in Ward 24, in a residential zone property. GENERAL LOCATION SPECIFIC LOCATION PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION & DEFICIENCY BY-LAW SECTION & REQUIREMENT Rear Yard Rear Yard (South Side) Proposed wood fence with lattice measuring 2.5 meters (8.3 feet) in height Section 447-2(B)(1), Table 1 Fence not in a front yard and not within 2.4 metres of a lot line abutting a public highway. Maximum Height 2.0 metres
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Granted the application for a proposed wooden fence with lattice measuring 2.5 meters in height at 23 Copping Road. Directed and required that the installation be maintained in good repair without alteration. Directed and required that at such time as replacement of the fence is required that such installation will comply with Municipal Code Chapter 447, or its successor by-law.
Staff recommendation as filed
Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that the Scarborough Community Council: 1. Refuse to grant the application for an exemption permit, by the owner(s) of 23 Copping Road, for a proposed wooden fence measuring 2.5 meters in height, for failing to comply with the provisions of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447, Fences. OR 2. Grant the application for a proposed wooden fence with lattice measuring 2.5 meters in height at 23 Copping Road. Direct and require that the installation be maintained in good repair without alteration. Direct and require that at such time as replacement of the fence is required that such installation will comply with Municipal Code Chapter 447, or its successor by-law.
SC12.3adopted
This report reviews and recommends approval of amendments to various former City of Scarborough Community and Employment Districts Zoning By-laws to clarify and implement the approved intentions of City Council and to rectify minor technical errors in the Zoning By-laws.
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council amend the Zoning By-laws for the affected Communities and Employment Districts substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law amendments attached as Attachment 1 to the report dated December 9, 2019 from the Director of Community Planning, Scarborough District. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Zoning By-law amendments as may be required.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. City Council amend the Zoning By-laws for the affected Communities and Employment Districts substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law amendments attached as Attachment 1 to the report dated December 9, 2019 from the Director of Community Planning, Scarborough District. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Zoning By-law amendments as may be required.
SC12.4forwarded without recommendation
This application proposes to amend the Toronto Official Plan to add a Site and Area Specific Policy (SASP) for the lands known as the Eglinton Square lands (1-70 Eglinton Square, 1431 and 1437 Victoria Park Avenue, 14-26 and 19-23 Engelhart Crescent, and 64-68 Harris Park Drive) to permit a mixed use development. The SASP would provide for a mixed-use community to develop over time on the lands. The mixed-use development would include multiple tall buildings with a range of building heights and stacked townhouses with a total of 1,630 residential units and 26,004 m2 of new retail uses proposed to be developed in five (5) blocks. The Official Plan Amendment (OPA) application was submitted on October 4, 2016, and has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), now the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) citing City Council's failure to make a decision within the prescribed time frames set out in the Planning Act. The appeal was filed on November 10, 2017. A related Rental Housing Demolition and Conversion application (File No. 16 230698 ESC 35 RH) under Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act (Chapter 667 of the Municipal Code) was also submitted on October 4, 2016 to allow for the removal of 91 rental units in eight (8) existing apartment buildings, to be replaced elsewhere in the future redevelopment of the site. Review of this application is underway and a decision on this application will be deferred until such time as a decision has been made by the LPAT on the OPA application, and a decision has been made on the Zoning By-law Amendment (17 242390 ESC 35 OZ) application for these lands. On December 16, 2019, the City received a letter from the applicant's solicitor, being a "with prejudice" settlement offer and formal revision to the application ("Resubmission Letter"). The Resubmission Letter advised that the applicant has amended its application to include all of its lands inclusive of the existing shopping mall, and excepting the block containing existing rental dwelling units (known as Block E in the original application), including a proposed density of 4.9 times the area of its lands. The letter cites that the reason it is amending its application is because the City asked the applicant to resubmit to include all of its holdings. The City, as common in many applications, requests a block context plan to understand how the development proposal fits within the larger context including other sites. This is especially the case in an emerging development area that will be the subject of major redevelopment in the future. City Staff did not request or invite a resubmission to include the shopping mall block, but only to illustrate the development proposal in the larger context that happens to include lands within the same land holdings as the subject lands. The Resubmission Letter was not accompanied by any supporting reports or update letters from the original application, as acknowledged in the Resubmission Letter. City Staff are not in a position to adequately review, circulate and comment on the revised proposal given the timelines and lack of a complete submission package. It is unusual to receive a revised submission requesting additional density from an original submission and therefore the original supporting reports cannot be used to support the revised proposal. Without a circulation and review, City staff cannot support the revisions. Should the applicant intend to pursue a revision to its application, they should formally resubmit and provide the required documentation for City staff to review and after a reasonable circulation period, City staff will seek further direction. Until that time the City cannot establish a fulsome list of issues in opposition of the revised application at a hearing before the LPAT. Accordingly, the report largely addresses the original application, however also recommends that the City Solicitor oppose the revised application. The purpose of this report is to seek City Council's direction for the City Solicitor, together with appropriate City staff and/or external consultants, to attend the LPAT hearing to oppose the application in its current form. City staff have concerns with how the proposed Official Plan Amendment can be supported in the context of the GMSP consultants' reports and recommendations for the broader Golden Mile area and for the subject site. The GMSP consultants Transportation Master Plan ("TMP"), Community Infrastructure Strategy and the Master Servicing Plan ("MSP") provide comprehensively analyzed information to assist with the direction on how growth can be accommodated within the Golden Mile Area. These studies will also be used to inform the emerging policy direction in the proposed Golden Mile Secondary Plan, as presented in the report dated December 20, 2019, and being considered at the January 8, 2020 Scarborough Community Council meeting. The proposed Official Plan Amendment, in its current form, is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014), does not conform with the Growth Plan (2019), and does not conform to the City's Official Plan. This report also recommends that the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff be authorized to continue discussions with the applicant in an effort to address the issues outlined in this report.
The Scarborough Community Council submits the item to City Council without recommendations.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. City Council direct the City Solicitor, together with appropriate staff, and/or external consultants, as may be appropriate, to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) hearing to oppose the applicant's appeal respecting the Official Plan Amendment application (File No. 16 230579 ESC 35 OZ), and the with prejudice settlement offer dated December 16, 2019, in its current form, for the lands at 1-70 Eglinton Square, 1431 and 1437 Victoria Park Avenue, 14-26 and 19-23 Engelhart Crescent and 64-68 Harris Park Drive (the "Lands") for the reasons contained in the report dated December 20, 2019 from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor, and appropriate City Staff to continue discussions with the applicant and resolve outstanding issues detailed in the report dated December 20, 2019 from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, and generally to support a revised proposal that is generally consistent with the Golden Mile Secondary Plan ("GMSP") Study direction for the Lands, and report back to City Council on the outcome of discussions, if necessary. 3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") allows the appeal in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the LPAT to withhold the issuance of any Orders on the Official Plan Amendment appeal for the subject lands until such time as the LPAT has been advised by the City Solicitor that the proposed Official Plan Amendment is in a form and with content satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor.
SC12.5adopted
This application proposes to amend the Official Plan to add a Site and Area Specific Policy ("SASP") for the lands at 1966-2050 Eglinton Avenue East and 50 Thermos Road (RioCan lands) to permit a mixed-use development with new streets and parkland. The SASP would provide for a mixed-use community that would include a range of building heights, approximately 3,000 residential units (242,000 square metres of residential uses) and 58,000 square metres of non-residential uses, with a gross Floor Space Index ("FSI") of up to 2.8 times the area of the site, for a total of 300,000 square metres of gross floor area. Attachments 6 and 7 provides for conceptual 3D models that render densities that range from 2.8 to 3.3 times the area of the site. The subject lands are located within the Golden Mile Secondary Plan study area. The Official Plan Amendment application was submitted on November 30, 2015, and has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board ("OMB"), now the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") citing City Council's failure to make a decision within the prescribed time frames set out in the Planning Act. The appeal was filed on November 24, 2017. The purpose of this report is to seek City Council's direction for the City Solicitor, together with appropriate City staff and/or external consultants, to attend the LPAT hearing to support the application up to a maximum gross FSI of 3.0 times the area of the site. While the proposed SASP only requests 2.8 times FSI, City staff can support a higher density of up to 3.0 FSI on the site, subject to resolving issues related to land use, site organization, built form, and the overall structure of the proposed SASP. The revised density would be more aligned with the direction and vision of the proposed Golden Mile Secondary Plan, including the GMSP consultant's reports. City staff will utilize the GMSP consultants' recommendations for the broader Golden Mile area when reviewing the outstanding concerns for the subject site. The GMSP consultants Transportation Master Plan ("TMP"), Community Infrastructure Strategy and the Master Servicing Plan ("MSP") provide information to assist with the direction on how growth can be accommodated within the Golden Mile Area. These studies will also be used to inform the emerging policy direction in the proposed Golden Mile Secondary Plan, as presented in the report dated December 20, 2019, and being considered at the January 8, 2020 Scarborough Community Council meeting. Absent resolving the key structuring elements to create a complete community, the proposed Official Plan Amendment is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014), do not conform with the Growth Plan (2019), and do not conform to the City's Official Plan. This report also recommends that the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff be authorized to continue discussions with the applicant in an effort to address the issues outlined in this report.
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council direct the City Solicitor, together with appropriate staff and/or external consultants as may be appropriate, to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") hearing to support the applicant's appeal respecting the Official Plan Amendment application (Application No. 15 258686 ESC 37 OZ), for the lands at 1966 - 2050 Eglinton Avenue East and 50 Thermos Road up to a maximum gross Floor Space Index ("FSI") of 3.0 times the area of the site, subject to the resolution of the matters contained in the report (December 20, 2019), from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, including the identification of: new public streets; accommodating the required widening along Eglinton Avenue East; providing the required parkland dedication; improving the site organization and built form, providing office uses, providing a minimum 20 per cent of affordable housing required by policy 3.2.1.9, and providing of a minimum of one community facility on site. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City Staff to continue discussions with the applicant and resolve outstanding issues detailed in the report (December 20, 2019) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District regarding 1966-2050 Eglinton Avenue East and 50 Thermos Road, and report back to City Council on the outcome of discussions, if necessary. 3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") allows the appeal in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the LPAT to withhold the issuance of any Orders on the Official Plan Amendment appeal for the subject lands until such time as: the LPAT has been advised by the City Solicitor that the proposed Official Plan Amendment is in a form and with content satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. City Council direct the City Solicitor, together with appropriate staff and/or external consultants as may be appropriate, to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") hearing to support the applicant's appeal respecting the Official Plan Amendment application (Application No. 15 258686 ESC 37 OZ), for the lands at 1966 - 2050 Eglinton Avenue East and 50 Thermos Road up to a maximum gross Floor Space Index ("FSI") of 3.0 times the area of the site, subject to the resolution of the matters contained in the report (December 20, 2019), from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, including the identification of: new public streets; accommodating the required widening along Eglinton Avenue East; providing the required parkland dedication; improving the site organization and built form, providing office uses, providing a minimum 20 per cent of affordable housing required by policy 3.2.1.9, and providing of a minimum of one community facility on site. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City Staff to continue discussions with the applicant and resolve outstanding issues detailed in the report (December 20, 2019) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District regarding 1966-2050 Eglinton Avenue East and 50 Thermos Road, and report back to City Council on the outcome of discussions, if necessary. 3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") allows the appeal in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the LPAT to withhold the issuance of any Orders on the Official Plan Amendment appeal for the subject lands until such time as: the LPAT has been advised by the City Solicitor that the proposed Official Plan Amendment is in a form and with content satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor.
SC12.6forwarded without recommendation
This application originally submitted on December 22, 2016, proposes to amend the Official Plan to add a Site and Area Specific Policy ("SASP") for the lands at 1880-1890 Eglinton Avenue East and 1523-1545 Victoria Park Avenue (Choice lands) to permit a mixed-use development with new streets and parkland. The SASP would provide for a mixed-use community that would include a range of building heights from one-storey to 39-storeys, 2,614 residential units (242,799 square metres of residential uses) and 30,629 square metres of non-residential uses, with a proposed gross Floor Space Index ("FSI") of 3.5 times the area of the site, for a total gross floor area of 273,428 square metres. The subject lands are located within the Golden Mile Secondary Plan study area. The Official Plan Amendment application was submitted on December 22, 2016, and has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board ("OMB"), now the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") citing City Council's failure to make a decision within the prescribed time frames set out in the Planning Act. The appeal was filed on March 5, 2018. On November 8, 2019, the City received a letter from the applicant's solicitor, being a "with prejudice" settlement offer and formal revision to the application ("Resubmission Letter"). The Resubmission Letter advised that the applicant has amended its application, including an increase in proposed density to 4.28 times the area of the lands, comprising of approximately 3,291 residential units (303,215 square metres of residential uses) and 31,173 square metres of non-residential uses, for a proposed total gross floor area of 334,928 square metres. The Resubmission Letter also provided an updated OPA by-law, which provides for upwards of 340,000 square metres of gross floor area, which is a significant increase of approximately 61,500 to 66,572 square metres of gross floor area. The Resubmission Letter was not accompanied by any supporting reports or update letters from the original application, as acknowledged in the Resubmission Letter. City Staff are not in a position to adequately review, circulate and comment on the changes to the application given the lack of a complete submission package. It is unusual to receive a revised submission requesting additional density from an original submission accompanied without supporting documentation and therefore the original supporting reports cannot be used to support the revised submission. Should the applicant intend to pursue a revision to its application, it should formally provide the required documentation for City staff to review and to determine how to proceed with the revised submission. Until that time, city staff cannot provide fulsome, comprehensive analysis of the revised submission to provide recommendations to City Council for consideration. Accordingly, the report largely addresses the original application, however it also recommends that the City Solicitor oppose the revised application. The purpose of this report is to seek City Council's direction for the City Solicitor, together with appropriate City staff and/or external consultants, to attend the LPAT hearing to oppose the original application and the with prejudice settlement offer dated November 8, 2019, in its current form. City staff have concerns with how the proposed Official Plan Amendment can be supported in the context of the GMSP consultants' reports and recommendations for the broader Golden Mile area and for the subject site. The GMSP consultants Transportation Master Plan ("TMP"), Community Infrastructure Strategy and the Master Servicing Plan ("MSP") provide comprehensively analyzed information to assist with the direction on how growth can be accommodated within the Golden Mile Area. These studies will also be used to inform the emerging policy direction in the proposed Golden Mile Secondary Plan, as presented in the report dated December 20, 2019, and being considered at the January 8, 2020 Scarborough Community Council meeting. The proposed Official Plan Amendment, in its current form and the November 8, 2019, settlement offer are not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014), do not conform with the Growth Plan (2019), and does not conform to the City's Official Plan. This report also recommends that the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff be authorized to continue discussions with the applicant in an effort to address the issues outlined in this report.
The Scarborough Community Council submits the item to City Council without recommendations.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. City Council direct the City Solicitor, together with appropriate staff and/or external consultants as may be appropriate, to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") hearing to oppose the applicant's appeal respecting the Official Plan Amendment application (Application No. 16 269853 ESC 37 OZ), and the with prejudice settlement offer dated November 8, 2019, in its current form, for the lands at 1880-1890 Eglinton Avenue East and 1523-1545 Victoria Park Avenue, for the reasons contained in the report (December 20, 2019), from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District. 2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff to continue discussions with the applicant to resolve the outstanding issues detailed in the report (December 20, 2019) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, and to support a revised proposal that is generally consistent with the Golden Mile Secondary Plan ("GMSP") Study direction for the lands at 1880-1890 Eglinton Avenue East and 1523-1545 Victoria Park Avenue, and report back to City Council on the outcome of discussions, if necessary. 3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") allows the appeal in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the LPAT to withhold the issuance of any Orders on the Official Plan Amendment appeal for the subject lands until such time as the LPAT has been advised by the City Solicitor that the proposed Official Plan Amendment is in a form and with content satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor.
SC12.7adopted
25 Borough Drive - Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment Applications - Preliminary Report
This report provides information and identifies a preliminary set of issues regarding the application located at 25 Borough Drive. Staff are currently reviewing the application. It has been circulated to all appropriate agencies and City divisions for comment. Staff will proceed to schedule a community consultation meeting for the application with the Ward Councillor.
Scarborough Community Council directed that: 1. Staff process this application concurrently and within the context of the Scarborough Centre Focused Review Study. 2. Staff schedule a community consultation meeting for the application located at 25 Borough Drive together with the Ward Councillor. 3. Notice for the community consultation meeting be given to landowners and residents within 120 metres of the application site, and to additional residents, institutions and owners to be determined in consultation with the Ward Councillor, with any additional mailing costs to be borne by the applicant.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. Staff process this application concurrently and within the context of the Scarborough Centre Focused Review Study. 2. Staff schedule a community consultation meeting for the application located at 25 Borough Drive together with the Ward Councillor. 3. Notice for the community consultation meeting be given to landowners and residents within 120 metres of the application site, and to additional residents, institutions and owners to be determined in consultation with the Ward Councillor, with any additional mailing costs to be borne by the applicant.
SC12.8adopted
3250 Markham Road and 568 Passmore Avenue - Zoning Amendment Application - Preliminary Report
This report provides information and identifies a preliminary set of issues regarding the application located at 3250 Markham Road and 568 Passmore Avenue. It has been circulated to all appropriate agencies and City divisions for comment. Staff will proceed to schedule a community consultation meeting for the application with the Ward Councillor.
Scarborough Community Council directed that: 1. Staff schedule a community consultation meeting for the application located at 3250 Markham Road and 568 Passmore Avenue in consultation with the Ward Councillor. 2. Notice for the community consultation meeting be given to landowners and residents within 120 metres of the application site, and to additional residents, institutions and owners to be determined in consultation with the Ward Councillor, with any additional mailing costs to be borne by the applicant.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. Staff schedule a community consultation meeting for the application located at 3250 Markham Road and 568 Passmore Avenue in consultation with the Ward Councillor. 2. Notice for the community consultation meeting be given to landowners and residents within 120 metres of the application site, and to additional residents, institutions and owners to be determined in consultation with the Ward Councillor, with any additional mailing costs to be borne by the applicant.
SC12.9adopted
10, 12, 16, 18, 20 and 22 Bluebird Place - Part Lot Control Exemption Application - Final Report
This application requests exemption from Part Lot Control for 10, 12, 16, 18, 20 and 22 Bluebird Place (lands formerly known as 67 Kirkdene Drive) to create six (6) conveyable lots with a semi-detached dwelling unit on each lot. The subject lands were part of a subdivision application that was approved for 6 semi-detached dwellings fronting onto a new public road. The plan of subdivision was registered on August 30, 2017 as Plan 66M-2540. A previous application for Part Lot Control Exemption for the lots legally described as Lots 1-3 (all inclusive) on Plan 66M-2540 was approved by Council on April 24, 2018, and enacted through By-law 1073-2018 on July 27, 2018. The Part Lot Control By-law subsequently expired on July 27, 2019, however Lots 1 and 2 have yet to be sold and conveyed to their future purchasers, and the whole of Lot 3 was incorrectly conveyed to a single purchaser. As a result, a new Part Lot Control Exemption application is required for all the original lots (1-3) on Plan 66M-2540, to permit the creation of conveyable lots. This report reviews and recommends approval of the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law. The proposal complies with the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) and conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019). The lifting of the Part Lot Control for a period of one year is considered appropriate for the orderly development of the lands.
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council enact a Part Lot Control Exemption By-law with respect to the subject lands at 10, 12, 16, 18, 20 and 22 Bluebird Place (Lots 1, 2 and 3 on Plan 66M-2540) as generally illustrated on Attachment 2 to the report dated November 27, 2019, from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, to be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and to expire one year following enactment by City Council. 2. City Council require the owner to provide proof of payment of all current property taxes for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, prior to the enactment of the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law. 3. Prior to the introduction of the Part Lot Control Exemption Bill, City Council require the owner to register, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, a Section 118 Restriction under the Land Titles Act, with priority, agreeing not to transfer or charge any part of the lands subject to the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law without the written consent of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning or their designate. 4. City Council authorize and direct the City Solicitor to register the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law on title. 5. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Part Lot Control Exemption By-law as may be required. 6. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to release, or partially release, the Section 118 Restriction from title to all or a portion of the lands in her sole discretion after consulting with the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. City Council enact a Part Lot Control Exemption By-law with respect to the subject lands at 10, 12, 16, 18, 20 and 22 Bluebird Place (Lots 1, 2 and 3 on Plan 66M-2540) as generally illustrated on Attachment 2 to the report dated November 27, 2019, from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, to be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and to expire one year following enactment by City Council. 2. City Council require the owner to provide proof of payment of all current property taxes for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, prior to the enactment of the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law. 3. Prior to the introduction of the Part Lot Control Exemption Bill, City Council require the owner to register, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, a Section 118 Restriction under the Land Titles Act, with priority, agreeing not to transfer or charge any part of the lands subject to the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law without the written consent of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning or their designate. 4. City Council authorize and direct the City Solicitor to register the Part Lot Control Exemption By-law on title. 5. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Part Lot Control Exemption By-law as may be required. 6. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to release, or partially release, the Section 118 Restriction from title to all or a portion of the lands in her sole discretion after consulting with the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.
SC12.10amended
Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study - Proposals Report
The Golden Mile Secondary Plan ("GMSP") Study was initiated by City Planning staff in May 2016, and generally consisted of the lands located along Eglinton Avenue East, between Victoria Park Avenue and Birchmount Road. In April 2019, City Council expanded the study area boundary from 97 to 113 hectares to include additional lands east of Victoria Park Avenue within Wards 20 and 21, as well as approximately 4.3 hectares of land on the west side of Victoria Park Avenue within Ward 16 (refer to Attachment 1: Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study Area Boundary). The Golden Mile has been influenced by agricultural, industrial and commercial eras of development. The area became known as the "Golden Mile of Industry" during the post-World War II era with the construction of large-scale manufacturing buildings along Eglinton Avenue East, between Pharmacy Avenue and Birchmount Road. Large-scale commercial construction generally occurred during the 1990's, replacing many of the former industrial buildings that fronted onto Eglinton Avenue East. The draft Secondary Plan for the Golden Mile establishes a planning framework for future development in the Golden Mile area that sets out the long-term vision for a complete, liveable, connected, responsive, and prosperous mixed-use community. Golden Mile is intended to maintain its role as an important economic driver within the east end of Toronto and is envisioned as both a destination and a place for residents, workers, and visitors to live, work, shop, and play. The purpose of the report is to present the "GMSP Study: Final Consultant's Report", and provide a summary of the Phase Three findings of the Study (refer to Attachment 2: GMSP Study: Final Consultant's Report - Executive Summary). The preferred development alternative identified by the consultant has the potential to accommodate approximately 24,000 residential units, 43,000 residents and 19,000 jobs over the next 20+ years, in a mix of tall, mid and low-rise buildings ranging in height from 4 to 35 storeys. The report also presents draft Secondary Plan policies for the Golden Mile study area and recommends that City Planning staff invite comment and undertake stakeholder consultations on these policy directions (refer to Attachment 3: Draft Secondary Plan Policies for Golden Mile).
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council request that the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, invite comment and undertake stakeholder consultations on the draft plan in Attachment 3 of the report dated December 20, 2019 from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District to inform the final version of the policies for the Secondary Plan for the Golden Mile study area. 2. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to bring forward the final Secondary Plan for the Golden Mile for a Statutory Public Meeting, generally in accordance with the draft plan outlined in Attachment 3 of the report dated December 20, 2019 from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District and informed by the consultations with internal divisions and external stakeholders. 3. City Council direct the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, in consultation with the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division, to host a Business Forum with tenants, landowners, business owners and other key stakeholders within the Golden Mile area to consult on the opportunity to establish a business association for the Golden Mile area to advocate for business needs.
Staff recommendation as filed
The City Planning Division recommends that: 1. City Council request that the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, invite comment and undertake stakeholder consultations on the draft plan in Attachment 3 of the report dated December 20, 2019 from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District to inform the final version of the policies for the Secondary Plan for the Golden Mile study area. 2. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to bring forward the final Secondary Plan for the Golden Mile for a Statutory Public Meeting, generally in accordance with the draft plan outlined in Attachment 3 of the report dated December 20, 2019 from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District and informed by the consultations with internal divisions and external stakeholders. 3. City Council direct the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, in consultation with the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division, to host a Business Forum with tenants, landowners, business owners and other key stakeholders within the Golden Mile area to consult on the opportunity to establish a business association for the Golden Mile area to advocate for business needs. 4. City Council endorse the Draft Golden Mile Transportation Master Plan ("TMP"), and direct City Planning, Transportation Services and Engineering and Construction Services staff to use the TMP to advance mobility initiatives in the future Secondary Plan Area.
SC12.11deferred indefinitely
Application to Remove a Private Tree - 30 Ainsdale Road
This report requests that City Council deny the request for a permit to remove one (1) privately owned tree located at 30 Ainsdale Road. The application indicates the reasons for removal are concerns over damage to the weeping tiles caused by the tree's roots and that the tree is attracting an abundance of squirrels that have damaged electrical wiring. The subject tree is a black walnut (Juglans nigra), measuring 63 cm in diameter. The Tree By-law does not support the removal of this tree as it is healthy and maintainable.
Scarborough Community Council directed: 1. That consideration of the item be deferred indefinitely.
Staff recommendation as filed
The General Manager of Parks, Forestry and Recreation recommends that: 1. City Council deny the request for a permit to remove one (1) privately owned tree located at 30 Ainsdale Road.
SC12.12amended
All-Way Stop Control - Nancy Avenue and Bertha Avenue - and Amendments to Parking Regulations
This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends that all-way stop control be installed at the intersection of Nancy Avenue and Bertha Avenue as the existing conditions meet the warrant for the installation of such a traffic control device. This location currently has a stop control facing the northbound approach on Bertha Avenue. Amendments to parking regulations on Nancy Avenue are also recommended.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Authorized all-way compulsory stop control at the intersection of Nancy Avenue and Bertha Avenue. 2. Rescinded the existing maximum 30-minute parking regulation in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on the north side of Nancy Avenue, between Pharmacy Avenue and a point 53 metres east and between a point 73 metres east of Pharmacy Avenue and a point 45 metres further east. 3. Prohibited stopping at all times on the north side of Nancy Avenue, between a point 73 metres east of Pharmacy Avenue and a point 45 metres further east. 4. Authorized parking for a maximum period of 30 minutes from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on the north side of Nancy Avenue, between a point 53 metres east of Pharmacy Avenue and a point 20 metres further east. 5. Authorized parking for a maximum period of 30 minutes from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on the north side of Nancy Avenue, between a point 118 metres east of Pharmacy Avenue and Presley Avenue.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council authorize all-way compulsory stop control at the intersection of Nancy Avenue and Bertha Avenue. 2. Scarborough Community Council rescind the existing maximum 30-minute parking regulation in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on the north side of Nancy Avenue, between Pharmacy Avenue and a point 53 metres east and between a point 73 metres east of Pharmacy Avenue and a point 45 metres further east. 3. Scarborough Community Council prohibit stopping at all times on the north side of Nancy Avenue, between a point 73 metres east of Pharmacy Avenue and a point 45 metres further east.
SC12.13deferred
Stopping Prohibition - Kitson Drive
This staff report is about a matter that the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends that stopping be prohibited during school hours on the east side of Kitson Drive in the vicinity of the walkway access to John A. Leslie Public School. The proposed stopping prohibition will reduce conflicts between all traffic movements and improve sight-lines.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Deferred consideration of the item until the February 5, 2020 Scarborough Community Council meeting.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council prohibit stopping from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on the east side of Kitson Drive, from a point 75 metres north of Garrick Road to the west limit of the cul-de-sac at the south end of Kitson Drive.
SC12.14amended
All-Way Stop Control Review - Ivorwood Crescent and Dewey Drive
This staff report is about a matter that Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends that Community Council not authorize the installation of all-way stop control at the intersection of Ivorwood Crescent and Dewey Drive as the existing conditions do not meet the warrant for the installation of such a traffic control device. This T-type intersection currently has a stop control for the westbound movement on Dewey Drive at Ivorwood Crescent.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Authorized all-way compulsory stop control at the intersection of Ivorwood Crescent and Dewey Drive.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council not authorize all-way compulsory stop control at the intersection of Ivorwood Crescent and Dewey Drive.
SC12.15adopted
School Zone Parking Regulations Review - Antrim Crescent
This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. In response to a request received from Councillor Thompson and Glamorgan Junior Public School to reduce traffic congestion and provide safe access to school children walking on Antrim Crescent, staff reviewed parking regulations on Antrim Crescent. Staff recommend prohibiting parking at all times on both sides of the cul-de-sac at the west end of the street, and reducing the maximum 30-minute parking limit in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., daily, to a maximum period of 10 minutes on the south side of Antrim Crescent, from a point 82 metres west of Dundalk Drive to the south limit of the cul-de-sac.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Rescinded the maximum 30-minute parking limit in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on both sides of Antrim Crescent between the north limit of the cul-de-sac and south limit of the cul-de-sac at the west end of Antrim Crescent. 2. Amended the maximum 30-minute parking limit in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., daily on the south side of Antrim Crescent, between a point 82 metres northwest of Dundalk Drive and the south limit of the cul-de-sac at the west end of Antrim Crescent, to be in effect for a maximum period of 10 minutes. 3. Prohibited parking at all times on of both sides of the cul-de-sac at the west end of Antrim Crescent, between the north limit of the cul-de-sac and south limit of the cul-de-sac.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council rescind the maximum 30-minute parking limit in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on both sides of Antrim Crescent between the north limit of the cul-de-sac and south limit of the cul-de-sac at the west end of Antrim Crescent. 2. Scarborough Community Council amend the maximum 30-minute parking limit in effect from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., daily on the south side of Antrim Crescent, between a point 82 metres northwest of Dundalk Drive and the south limit of the cul-de-sac at the west end of Antrim Crescent, to be in effect for a maximum period of 10 minutes. 3. Scarborough Community Council prohibit parking at all times on of both sides of the cul-de-sac at the west end of Antrim Crescent, between the north limit of the cul-de-sac and south limit of the cul-de-sac.
SC12.16adopted
Traffic Control Signals Review - Lawrence Avenue East and Valparaiso Avenue
As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates a transit service on Lawrence Avenue East, City Council approval of this report is required. Further to a request from a private citizen, Transportation Services staff reviewed the feasibility of installing traffic control signals on Lawrence Avenue East at Valparaiso Avenue. This report recommends that traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and Valparaiso Avenue as the existing conditions meet the technical warrant for the installation of pedestrian crossing protection. Currently, this location is controlled by a stop sign for southbound traffic on Valparaiso Avenue. The results of our study indicate that a total of 219 pedestrians were recorded crossing Lawrence Avenue East, of which 210 pedestrians experienced delays over 10 seconds.
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council authorize the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and Valparaiso Avenue.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services recommends that: 1. City Council authorize the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and Valparaiso Avenue.
SC12.17adopted
This staff report is about a matter that the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends a U-turn prohibition on Marcos Boulevard, between Midland Avenue and Cicerella Crescent east intersection. Prohibiting U-turns will provide a safer environment for all road users along this section of Marcos Boulevard, which is in the vicinity of Charles Gordon Senior Public School.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Prohibited eastbound and westbound U-turn movements at all times on Marcos Boulevard, between Midland Avenue and Cicerella Crescent (east intersection).
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council prohibit eastbound and westbound U-turn movements at all times on Marcos Boulevard, between Midland Avenue and Cicerella Crescent (east intersection).
SC12.18adopted
As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates a transit service on Middlefield Road, City Council approval of this report is required. This report recommends that southbound and westbound left turns be prohibited from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Friday at the driveway to Milliken Crossing shopping centre (5631-5671 Steeles Avenue East), located on the east side of Middlefield Road at a point approximately 92 metres south of Steeles Avenue East. Prohibiting southbound and westbound left turns at this driveway will improve safety by preventing conflicts between vehicles, reducing congestion, and maintaining traffic flow in the vicinity of the driveway.
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council prohibit southbound and westbound left turns from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Friday at the driveway at 5631-5671 Steeles Avenue East (Milliken Crossing shopping centre) located on the east side of Middlefield Road at a point approximately 92 metres south of Steeles Avenue East.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. City Council prohibit southbound and westbound left turns from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Friday at the driveway at 5631-5671 Steeles Avenue East (Milliken Crossing shopping centre) located on the east side of Middlefield Road at a point approximately 92 metres south of Steeles Avenue East.
SC12.19amended
All-Way Stop Control Review - Dale Avenue and Cromwell Road
This staff report is about a matter that the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends that the Community Council not authorize the installation of all-way stop control at the intersection of Dale Avenue and Cromwell Road as the existing conditions do not meet the warrant for the installation of such a traffic control device. This T-type intersection currently has a stop control for the northbound approach on Cromwell Road at Dale Avenue.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Authorized all-way stop control at the intersection of Dale Avenue and Cromwell Road.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council not authorize all-way stop control at the intersection of Dale Avenue and Cromwell Road.
SC12.20adopted
Compulsory Stop Controls - Botany Hill Road Area
This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends that stop control be authorized at seven uncontrolled three-way intersections in the Botany Hill Road area in order to clearly define the right-of-way and to regulate traffic flow.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Authorized compulsory stop control for northbound traffic on Cresswell Drive at Botany Hill Road (north intersection). 2. Authorized compulsory stop control for southbound traffic on Cresswell Drive at Botany Hill Road (south intersection). 3. Authorized compulsory stop control for southbound traffic on Madras Crescent at Hapley Drive (east intersection). 4. Authorized compulsory stop control for westbound traffic on Hapley Drive at Madras Crescent (west intersection). 5. Authorized compulsory stop control for eastbound traffic on Hapley Drive at Cresswell Drive. 6. Authorized compulsory stop control for westbound traffic on Plover Road at Botany Hill Road. 7. Authorized compulsory stop control for eastbound traffic on Doucett Place at Botany Hill Road.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for northbound traffic on Cresswell Drive at Botany Hill Road (north intersection). 2. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for southbound traffic on Cresswell Drive at Botany Hill Road (south intersection). 3. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for southbound traffic on Madras Crescent at Hapley Drive (east intersection). 4. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for westbound traffic on Hapley Drive at Madras Crescent (west intersection). 5. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for eastbound traffic on Hapley Drive at Cresswell Drive. 6. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for westbound traffic on Plover Road at Botany Hill Road. 7. Scarborough Community Council authorize compulsory stop control for eastbound traffic on Doucett Place at Botany Hill Road.
SC12.21adopted
All-Way Stop Control Review - Golders Green Avenue and Whiterock Drive
This staff report is about a matter for which the Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. This report recommends that Scarborough Community Council not authorize the installation of all-way stop control at the intersection of Golders Green Avenue and Whiterock Drive as the existing conditions do not meet the warrant for the installation of such a traffic control device. Currently, this intersection has a stop control facing the northbound approach on Whiterock Drive at Golders Green Avenue.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Did not authorize all-way compulsory stop control at the intersection of Golders Green Avenue and Whiterock Drive.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. Scarborough Community Council not authorize all-way compulsory stop control at the intersection of Golders Green Avenue and Whiterock Drive.
SC12.22adopted
Proposed U-Turn Prohibition - Sheppard Avenue East
As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates transit service on Sheppard Avenue East, City Council approval of this report is required. This report recommends that northbound U-turns be prohibited on Sheppard Avenue East at the end of the centre median located 48 metres north of Kingston Road. Prohibiting northbound U-turns at this location will improve safety by eliminating conflicts between vehicles traveling southbound and vehicles attempting to make northbound to southbound U-turns
Scarborough Community Council recommends that: 1. City Council prohibit northbound U-turns at all times on Sheppard Avenue East at the north end of the centre median located 48 metres north of Kingston Road.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services, recommends that: 1. City Council prohibit northbound U-turns at all times on Sheppard Avenue East at the north end of the centre median located 48 metres north of Kingston Road.
SC12.23adopted
The purpose of re-opening this item is to give members an opportunity to ask further questions on the very important safety concerns on our roads, and to allow for a broader discussion and an opportunity for members to move recommendations and amendments on speed limit reductions.
Scarborough Community Council: 1. Re-opened Item SC11.8 - "Scarborough Minor Arterial and Collector Road Speed Limit Reductions as Part of Vision Zero Speed Management Strategy", adopted by Scarborough Community Council at its meeting on December 3, 2019. 2. Amended Attachment 3 to Item SC11.8 as follows: a. Removed the line: "Add - Galloway Road between Lawrence Avenue East and Guildwood Parkway (40 km/hr speed limit)"; and b. Added the following lines: i. "Add - Galloway Road between Lawrence Avenue East and CN Rail (30 km/hr speed limit)"; and ii. "Add - Galloway Road between CN Rail and Guildwood Parkway (40 km/hr speed limit)". 3. Amended Item SC11.8 by adding the following new Recommendations: "1. Added the following minor arterial road segments in Ward 24, Scarborough-Guildwood and reduced the speed limits to 40 km/h on: a. Orton Park Road from Ellesmere Road to Lawrence Avenue East; and b. Scarborough Golf Club Road from Chandler Drive to CNR. 2. Added the following collector road segments in Ward 24, Scarborough-Guildwood and reduced the speed limits to 30 km/h on: a. Benleigh Drive from Benadair Court to Ben Alder Drive; b. Cedar Drive from Dunelm Street to Eglinton Avenue East; c. Dearham Wood from Poplar Road to Galloway Road; d. Dolly Varden Boulevard from Ellesmere Road to Brimorton Drive; e. Dunelm Street from Markham Road to Cedar Drive; f. Eastpark Boulevard from Daphne Road to Markham Road; g. Galloway Road from Weir Crescent to Lawrence Ave East; h. Highcastle Road from Oakmeadow Boulevard (at north end) going south to Military Trail; i. Holmfirth Terrace from Greencrest Circuit to Scarborough Golf Club Road; j. Lynnbrook Drive from Parkington Crescent to Acre Heights Crescent (North End); k. Military Trail from Highcastle Road to Neilson Road; and l. Slan Avenue from Scarborough Golf Club Road to Orton Park Road. 3. Added the following local road segment in Ward 24, Scarborough-Guildwood and reduced the speed limit to 40 km/h on: a. Progress Avenue from Highway 401 bridge to Markham Road. 4. Added the following local road segments in Ward 24, Scarborough-Guildwood and reduced the speed limits to 30 km/h on: a. Adams Drive from / to Whole Street; b. Aveline Crescent from Huronia Gate to Denver Place; c. Bainhart Crescent from Brantwood Drive to Brimorton Drive; d. Baybrook Crescent from Lynnbrook Drive to Faraday Drive; e. Beachell Street from / to Whole Street; f. Bellechase Street from McCowan Road to Benshire Drive; g. Benshire Drive from Brantwood Drive to Ben Nevis Drive; h. Beran Drive from Kollar Drive to Vanwart Drive; i. Berkham Road from Lynnbrook Drive to Northleigh Drive; j. Botany Hill Road from Orton Park Road to Bow Valley Drive; k. Brantwood Drive from Bellechasse Street to Jarwick Drive; l. Brinloor Boulevard from Kingston Road to Duncombe Boulevard; m. Catalina Drive from Bethune Boulevard to Prince Philip Boulevard; n. Celeste Drive from Adams Drive to Templeton Court; o. Centre Street from / to Whole Street; p. Chandler Drive from Janray Drive to Scarborough Golf Club Road; q. Conn Smythe Drive from / to Whole Street; r. Coronation Drive from Galloway Road to Poplar Road; s. Dormington Drive from / to Whole Street; t. Dunera Avenue from Payzac Avenue to Galloway Road; u. Eastpark Boulevard from Bellamy Road North to Daphne Road; v. Emcarr Drive from Apsco Avenue to Payzac Avenue; w. Erinlea Crescent from Northleigh Drive to Northleigh Drive; x. Falaise Road from Warnsworth Street to Kingston Road; y. Faraday Drive from Baybrook Crescent to Brimorton Drive; z. Fortune Gate from Lawrence Avenue East to Janray Drive; aa. Gatesview Avenue from Cedar Drive to Scarborough Golf Club Road; ab. Gloaming Drive from / to Whole Street; ac. Greenock Avenue from Milford Haven Drive (North End) to Marawa Court; ad. Havenway Gate from Waldock Street to Cultra Square; ae. Heathfield Drive from / to Whole Street; af. Janray Drive from Hiscock Boulevard to Densgrove Road; ag. Jarwick Drive from Benshire Drive to Deborah Drive; ah. Kingsmere Crescent from / to Whole Street; ai. Kollar Drive from / to Whole Street; aj. Lausanne Crescent from / to Whole Street; ak. Luella Street from / to Whole Street; al. Marcella Street from Summerbridge Road to Susan Street; am. Milford Haven Drive from Newark Road going North/East to Greenock Avenue; an. Monmouth Court from / to Whole Street; ao. Montavista Street from / to Whole Street; ap. Mountland Drive from Brimorton Drive to Stonehenge Crescent (West End); aq. Nelson Street from Bellamy Road North to Blakemanor Boulevard; ar. Northleigh Drive from Bellamy Road North to Brimorton Drive; as. Nuffield Drive from / to Whole Street; at. Overture Road from Lawrence Ave East to Pilot Street (North End); au. Pandora Circle from Bellamy Road North to Silurian Road; av. Parkington Crescent from / to Whole Street; aw. Pineslope Crescent from Oakmeadow Boulevard to Highcastle Road; ax. Schubert Drive from Dearham Wood to Guildwood Parkway; ay. Sedgemount Drive from Painted Post Drive to Daventry Road; az. Shoredale Drive from Mayhill Crescent to Windover Drive; ba. Somerdale Square from / to Whole Street; bb. Sonneck Square from / to Whole Street; bc. Spraywood Gate from / to Whole Street; bd. Starlake Drive from / to Whole Street; be. Stevenvale Drive from Confederation Drive to Holmfirth Terrace; bf. Stonehenge Crescent from / to Whole Street; bg. Susan Street from Lawrence Avenue East to Marcella Street; bh. Sylvan Avenue from Bethune Boulevard to Prince Philip Boulevard; bi. Toulon Road from Fortune Gate to Hiscock Boulevard; bj. Van Allen Road from / to Whole Street; bk. Vanwart Drive from Beran Drive to Holmfirth Terrace; bl. Waldock Street from / to Whole Street; bm. Weir Crescent from Pickford Road going North East to Craggview Drive; bn. Weir Crescent from Galloway Road to Craggview Drive; bo. Windover Drive from / to Whole Street; and bp. Wooster Wood from / to Whole Street. 5. Reduced the speed limit on all local roads in Ward 22 - Scarborough-Agincourt to 30 km/hr.".
Staff recommendation as filed
Councillor Paul Ainslie recommends that Scarborough Community Council: 1. Re-open Item SC11.8 - Scarborough Minor Arterial and Collector Road Speed Limit Reductions as Part of Vision Zero Speed Management Strategy.
SC12.24amended
Request for Transportation Study to consider advance green lights or arrows on Port Union Road
Port Union Road is classified as a minor arterial road with a speed limit of 60km/hr. The road is a key commuter route to the Rouge Hill GO Station for both local residents and individuals living in Pickering and northeast Scarborough. In 2021/2022, the City of Toronto will be widening Port Union Road from Lawrence Avenue East to Island Road. Work will include the addition of a second northbound lane, complete sidewalks on both sides, bicycle lands, landscaped median between Lawrence Avenue East and Clappison Boulevard and centre-turn lanes in some locations. When completed, this important project will address traffic congestion and improve conditions for all road users. Currently, City Transportation staff are advancing detailed design for this project. This includes finalizing utility relocation design, and modifying the roadway in certain sections to address concerns raised by residents and to minimize impacts to private property. This work will be completed in 2020. In December 2019, a local resident and the West Rouge Community Association, which represents approximately 3,400 households, contacted my office to express concerns about traffic flow at Port Union and Island Road and Port Union at Fanfare Avenue/Lawson Road. At Island Road, there is an advanced green signal for cars driving south on Port Union to make a left hand turn. Often cars heading west on Island will turn right onto Port Union during that advanced green light. However, there is not an advanced green signal for those people turning right, and local residents report it is hard to see when the advanced green is ending. At Fanfare Avenue/Lawson Road, there are currently no advanced green lights or arrows. This controlled intersection has two commercial plazas and is used by TTC route 38. When the northbound bus turns from Port Union onto Lawson Road, local residents report difficult site lines for southbound drivers turning eastbound onto Fanfare Avenue. I hereby request Transportation Staff to study if advance green lights or arrows at these two locations are warranted for improved safety.
Scarborough Community Council directed: 1. Transportation Services to undertake a traffic study on Port Union Road, between Island Road and Lawrence Avenue East, to determine if any advance green lights or arrows are warranted for improved safety and report back to Scarborough Community Council in Q4 2020.
Staff recommendation as filed
Councillor Jennifer McKelvie recommends that: 1. Transportation Services undertake a traffic study on Port Union Road, between Island Road and Lawrence Avenue East, to determine if any advance green lights or arrows are warranted for improved safety and report back to Scarborough Community Council in Q2 2020.
SC12.25adopted
Introduction and consideration of Bills for enactment of By-laws.
General Bills Scarborough Community Council enacted By-laws 19-2020 to 23-2020. Confirmatory Bill Scarborough Community Council passed a Confirmatory Bill as By-law 24-2020.