►
From YouTube: City Council - December 5, 2017 - Part 2 of 2
Description
City Council, meeting 35, December 5, 2017 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=11868
Part 1 of 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgtnt599rjM#t=42m54s
Meeting Navigation:
0:03:42 - Meeting resume
A
B
A
D
E
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
On
page
fourteen
to
twenty
eight
point,
six
722
750
and
783
College
Street
zoning
amendment
application
I
would
just
like
to
very
quickly
point
out
that
this
is
legalizing
three
existing
live
music
venues
that
have
for
decades
been
in
nonconformity
I'm,
so
we'll
fix
that
pending.
What
is
the
request
to
our
licensing
staff
to
bring
back
a
new
licensing
regime
for
live
music
venues?
So
this
is
exciting.
Good
news.
Legalizing
live
music
venues
in
the
city
of
drop,
okay,.
A
G
H
A
A
I
G
G
J
J
J
A
I
H
Madam
Speaker,
the
reason
that
I'm
moving
this
and
I
was
going
to
if
I
can
have
this
the
staff.
But
ok,
this
is
the
map.
If
you
look
at
two
points,
point
number
one
and
point
number
two
point
number
one
is
Shepherd
and
Kennedy.
There's
a
ghost
station
right
there
we
own
property,
we
own
90
parking
spots
that
we're
selling
to
Metrolinx
and
we're
releasing
that
at
2
million
38
going
a
little
higher
at
this
area.
H
So
when
you
look
at
down
here
on
the
south
end,
if
you
look
on
the
south
end,
90
parking
spaces,
two
million
and
when
you
come
up
here,
220
spaces
comes
to
about
anywhere
between
six
eight
nine
million
whatever
it
is,
and
we
were
told
this
morning
we
don't
know
about
the
number,
but
we
will
speak
offline.
That
certainly
has
me
concerned.
It
has
me
concerned
when
we
look
at
designing
a
go
station
and
we're
talking
about
absolutely
putting
no
parking.
H
Madam
Speaker
I'm,
going
to
sort
of
give
you
a
scenario
for
my
colleagues
to
follow.
If
you
live
in
the
subdivision
right
here
right
in
the
middle
somewhere
there
and
you
want
to
get
on
to
to
a
TVC
bus
to
go
to
the
Go
station
you're,
looking
at
about
a
10
minute,
walk
from
your
house
to
the
TTC
bus,
stop
the
the
bus
route
you're,
looking
at
another
15
minute
ride
that
takes
you
to
about
half
an
hour
to
get
from
here
to
here
or
from
here
to
here
to
the
to
the
go
station.
Bus!
H
Stop!
If
that's
going
to
take
you
half
an
hour
on
the
bus
versus
ten
minutes
in
your
car,
a
lot
of
the
people
that
live
it
up
in
my
area,
a
lot
of
the
people
that
live
north
of
401
will
say
the
hell
with
it
I'm
going
to
drive
downtown
the
congestion
happens,
north
of
the
401
and
401
being
down
here
from
Sheppard
from
pharmacy
and
Steel's
to
Sheppard
and
Victoria
Park.
It
can
take
you
up
to
thirty
five
forty
minutes
in
order
to
drive
down
there.
H
Thank
you
to
my
colleagues
for
listening,
especially
the
right
to
my
right
side.
If
we
inquire,
I,
encourage
people
to
get
on
the
bus
and
come
downtown,
we've
got
to
make
sure
that
we
have
ample
parking
that
they
can
drive
to.
We
got
to
make
sure
that
we
have
ample
bus
routes.
Unfortunately,
madam
Speaker,
in
subdivisions
in
these
subdivisions,
there's
no
way
for
the
TTC
will
have
no
absolutely
no
bus
routes
and
for
people
to
go
to
the
bus
route.
H
It
will
take
them
10
to
15
minutes
if
it's
winter
time
it's
after
hours,
if
you're
a
female,
you
will
certainly
think
about
it
twice
before
you
would
walk
out
to
there.
So
if
we're
going
to
encourage
people
to
get
out
of
their
cars
and
get
to
ride
the
better
way
downtown
or
the
Go
station,
we
will
have
to
provide
parking
and
I
want
to
thank
staff
for
working
with
me.
H
I,
wasn't
it
was
the
last
a
little
bit
of
pushing
and
shoving
that
we
were
able
to
do
this,
and
especially,
we
want
to
thank
city
staff
for
holding
a
special
meeting
in
my
area
to
address
this
issue
in
October.
The
19th
I'd
like
to
make
sure
that
we
have
parking
I
like
to
make
sure
that
we
address
the
issue
of
parking,
be
at
pay
parking
or
free
parking
for
people
to
be
able
to
go
park.
H
Three
people
dissipation
public,
private
and
in
order
for
people
to
be
able
to
leave
their
cars
behind
and
come
downtown,
because
I
would
say
to
my
colleagues
any
words
in
here
to
go
from
here,
for
example,
to
here
or
from
here
to
there
it
is
going
to
be
half
an
hour.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
and
I'll
take
any
questions
that
anybody
might
have
at
my
seat.
G
City
Council
direct
the
city
manager
and
the
interim
chief
financial
officer
hate,
using
that
interim
word
to
report
through
the
executive
committee
to
City
Council
no
later
than
July
17
2018,
with
an
update
on
funding
and
financing
options
for
this
for
the
city
for
smart
track.
/Re
are
members
I've
seen
this
movie
before
I
I
had
the
great
privilege
of
co-authoring
a
report
in
2002
with
Steve
Monroe
entitled
transits
Lost
Decade.
G
The
fact
of
the
matter
is
that
we
are
going
down
that
road.
Again,
we've
seen
ridership
start
to
flatline
we've
seen
deep
constraints
on
the
TTC
operating
budget,
we've
seen
recent
cancellations
of
streetcar
purchases
and
deferral
of
bus
purchases.
At
the
same
time,
we
draw
ever
more
optimistic
maps
for
what
we're
going
to
be
able
to
do
and
of
capital
construction.
G
G
We
are
building
a
very
bleak
transit
future
and
before
we
go
any
further
down
the
road
of
adding
new
fantasy
lines
and
new
fantasy
stations
and
new
fantasy
underground
lines,
and
all
of
these
things
that
members
of
this
council
or
people
during
elections
added
to
the
the
capital
plan,
we
need
to
actually
understand
what
our
financial
capacity
to
deliver
transit
services,
so
that
will
stop
chasing
chasing
ghosts
and
phantoms
and
start
actually
putting
service
on
the
street
so
that
ridership
stops
its
decline
and
starts
to
grow.
Again.
G
It's
absolutely
essential
that
before
we
leave
office
at
the
end
of
this
term,
we
have
realistic
financial
plans
for
how
we're
going
to
invest
in
day
to
day
transit
service
and
have
some
understanding
that
we're
already
have
eyes
way
bigger
than
our
stomachs
in
terms
of
the
capital
plans
that
were,
we
keep
adding
in
at
every
council
meeting
or
every
election
I
hope
you'll
support.
My
motion.
A
I
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
madam
Speaker
might
I
have
a
motion
that
City
Council
delete
executive
committee
recommendation
for
B.
That
being
you
can
consider,
it
read,
it
is
the
the
added
direction
from
the
committee
to
add
a
working
group
to
continue
to
discuss
extended.
Tunneling
now
I
know,
I,
know
that
in
that
committee
the
purpose
of
of
this
working
group
was
to
assuage
the
fears
of
a
community
that
that
has
a
fully
digested
attachment
number
two.
That's
likely
the
most
important
reason
for
working
group
setting
up
a
working
group.
I
This
is
certainly
no
money
to
take
this,
this
mountain
tennis
to
renforth
and
turn
it
into
a
subway.
This
just
isn't,
but
there
is
if
they
had
been
given
to
help
to
understand
all
the
considerations
there
are
various
great
separations
being
considered
here
and
sometimes
above
grade
is,
is
called
for
in
very
exciting
ways
and
ways
not
contemplated
elsewhere
in
town
and
sometimes
below
grade
is
the
only
option.
There
will
be
some
tunnels.
I
The
biggest
change
on
changing
people's
mode
of
travel
to
work
is
to
proceed
with
the
10
stops,
and
we
know
this
from
from
cities
around
the
world
and
what
I
would
hate
to
see
happening
now
is
a
gain
in
an
effort
to
simply
politically
keep
the
waters
calm.
While
we
plan
we
keep
loading
into
the
hopper,
something
that
we
can't
ever
find.
That's
a
cruel
and
inhumane
thing
to
do
to
communities.
In
my
view,
we
can't
ever
fund
it.
We
won't
ever
have
enough
money
as
it
is
the
cost
of
this
line.
I
Well,
surely,
well,
surely,
because
of
some
of
the
great
separations,
it
will
go
up
in
cost.
This
is
the
the
Scarborough
subway
has
gone
up
in
cost
and
will
continue
to
go
up
in
cost.
But
if
we
start
down
this
road-
and
we
continue
to
keep
the
little
flicker
of
a
flame
alive
of
this
conversation-
that
flame
begins
to
grow
and
grow
and
grow
and
pretty
soon
we're
sending
very
mixed
signals
to
the
other
players
in
this
game.
Metrolinx
I,
dare
say
the
Board
of
Trade
was
talking
about.
What
are
you
doing?
I
The
nine
stop
extension
disappeared
because
there
was
no
funding
for
it
and
now
we're
down
to
just
the
one
just
the
one
in
a
bus
terminal
and
those
are
no
one
will
argue.
Some
of
the
most
political
discussions
ever
taken,
so
if
we're
gonna
keep
this
flame
alive
simply
because
2018
is
an
election
year
for
one
and
all
no
matter
what
level
of
government
you're
running
for
what
well
for
all
of
us,
I
dare
say,
accounts
for
carriage
II
Anna's
for
all
of
us,
because
there
are
two
elections
and
no
one.
No
one
is
pretending.
L
A
I
To
we're
just
going
to
further
Mis
inform
and
keep
hope
alive
for
that
purpose,
we're
not
doing
our
community
any
favors.
We
need
to
do
really
well
at
designing
the
system
that
staff
have
already
told
it
from
the
studies
thus
far
they
can
do
and
are
ready
to
do
now.
The
only
other
thing
is
I
would
remind
you
the
answer
I
got
from
staff
on.
I
If
my
motion
fails
know
this.
If
you
are
starting
a
working
group,
well,
that
direction
says
in
consultation
with
local
councilors
I've
asked
staff
and
staff
have
made
it
their
commitment
that,
if
you
think
you're
setting
up
a
working
group
that
has
no
one
on
it,
that
is
a
daily
commuter
on
transit.
That's
not
going
to
happen!
There
will
be
riders
on
that
group,
but
my
most
humane
and
my
my
fondest
wish
is
that
we
not
even
strike
this
group.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
Thank
You.
A
Councillor
Fletcher,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Speaker
I
was
getting
a
glass
of
water
when
you
introduced
the
fantastic
students
from
Franklin
and
I,
just
want
to
personally
say
hello
to
them
again
and
let
everyone
know
that
Franklin
school
is
actually
built
as
a
school
and
a
City
of
Toronto
community
center
together.
So
welcome
Frankland
community
school.
J
J
J
F
Put
a
sheet
on
the
board
they're
in
total
total
support.
We
cannot
go
down
that
rabbit
hole
of
exploring
tunneling
here's
the
reason
they've,
if
you
are,
if
you
can
put
on
bass
case
at
grade
its
1.5
billion
dollars
to
the
airport,
about
1.1
billion
to
Martin
Grove,
the
edge
of
our
city.
If
you
add
underground
just
three
stops,
you
have
to
add
1.5
to
2
point
1
billion
dollars.
F
What
is
before
us
here,
this
piece:
we
have
to
nip
it
in
the
bud.
We've
got
a
good
plan,
it's
already
been
researched
fairly
fairly
thoroughly
and
we've
got
to
take
it
to
the
next
step,
sending
them
on
this
detour
there's
no
one
any
good,
and
it
threatens
the
entire
smart
track
project.
So
I
would
urge
my
colleagues
to
not
go
in
this
direction.
Thank
you.
M
You
Venice
figure
well,
it's
interesting
that
the
counselor
wants
to
endorse
the
plan
that
has
been
fairly
thoroughly
researched
and
he
points
out
that
you
could.
You
could
land
a
plane
on
a
long,
Edmondson.
Well,
I,
I,
wonder
if
he's
been
along
Eglinton
later
lately,
because
if
you
did
so
you'd,
probably
you
would
take
out.
You
know
six
lanes
of
traffic.
In
some
cases,
traffic
congestion
along
Eglinton
is
unbearable
for
people.
In
my
neighborhood
traffic
and
I'm
the
counselor
most
affected
by
this
proposed
Eglinton
LRT.
M
There
seems
to
be
the
view
of
some
councillors
that
people
in
this
area
are
unsupportive
of
mass
transit
and
that's
not
the
case.
All
people
are
looking
for
is
an
opportunity
for
a
real
consultation.
There
was
a
we
had
some
meetings
at
a
number
of
the
local
high
schools.
People
were
adamant
that
they
wanted
to
be
listened
to
in
regard
to
either
tunneling
a
tunneling
option
or
in
regard
to
grade
separations,
and
when
it
comes
to
tunneling.
M
There
are
some
2,000
units
that
will
be
on
the
books
and
in
the
planning
process
in
the
next
in
within
the
next
few
years,
and
residents
in
our
area
are
really
just
looking
for
an
opportunity
to
engage
with
staff
who
really
haven't
looked
at
the
tunneling
option
in
any
shape
or
form
it
has
not
been.
It
has
not
been
costed,
a
councilor
Mavic,
it
has
not
been
costed
and
different
scenarios
have
not
been
costed
out.
So
it's
and
I
find
it
it's
all.
M
It's
really
comical
that
counselors,
who
have
subways
in
their
wards,
you
know,
don't
want
to
see
it
anywhere
else
in
the
City
of
Toronto,
and
you
know
far
be
it
from
us
to
have
any
any
far
be
it
from
us
to
even
talk
or
think
about
the
opportunity
of
of
tunneling,
so
I
think
what
we're
looking
for.
This
is
not.
This
is
not
an
opportunity
for
us
where
we're
looking
for
an
interminable
delay.
We
know
the
work
that
city
Transportation
has
put
into
it.
M
It's
our
view,
it's
my
view
and
it's
the
view
of
councilor
holiday,
that
a
more
thorough
look
at
some
of
the
options
needs
to
take
place
and
by
the
way,
if
we
need
people
on
the
working
group
that
take
public
transit,
I'm
one
as
is
councilor
holiday
and
we're
more
than
happy
to
endorse
public
transit.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank.
G
You
speaker
councillor,
Campbell,
said
something
during
a
speech:
I'm
sure
it
was
inadvertent,
but
he
made
the
claim
that
staff
have
not
looked
at
tunneling
in
any
shape
or
form.
I
know
he
would
never
impune
staff.
That
way.
Given
that
we
have
a
report
that
mentions
the
work,
staff
has
done
to
look
at
certain
shapes
and
forms
of
tunneling.
L
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I
do
have
a
motion
and
the
motion
is
actually
to
ask
that
the
work
that
we're
doing
on
the
st.
Clair
station
and
the
st.
Clair
transportation
network
take
in
consideration
the
expansion
north
of
the
West
on
a
rail
path
which
has
been
a
goal
of
ours.
Of
the
ten-year
cycling
plan.
L
You,
madam
Speaker
council,
palácio,
put
several
motions
to
make
sure
that
the
West
Toronto
rail
path
is
expanded
north
as
well.
We
are
planning
all
this
work.
It
should
be
done
and
taking
consideration
at
the
same
time
making
sure
that
we
allocate
the
land
necessary
for
it
and
if
we
don't
have
it
that
we
have
alternatives
to
take
the
path
which
is
just
south
of
Davenport
to
be
integrated
with
public
transportation
and
with
a
road
network
as
well
so
I
hope
I
can
get
your
support.
L
My
community
is
very
excited
to
be
able
to
not
only
have
good
trails
through
the
western
areal
path,
but
now
have
the
connection
of
that.
We've
been
talking
about
for
many
years
through
the
st.
Clair
station
through
the
the
lauren
dunder
station,
through
Lauren
Lansdowne
through
the
West
Queen
West
Liberty
station.
So
we,
when
we
found
out
a
few
years
ago,
that
the
downtown
relief
line
was
not
going
to
come
to
the
west
we've
advocated
strongly
to
have.
This
looked
at.
L
Our
community
very
often
says
that
we've
been
looking
at
the
trains
go
by
for
way
too
often,
it
is
about
time
that
we
get
on
them
and
make
make
good
use
of
them
as
a
commuter
line
as
well.
So
we're
looking
forward
to
be
able
to
to
get
on
these
stations
to
get
on
the
trains
to
get
around
using
public
transportation,
but
taking
full
advantage
of
opportunities
that
we
have
to
enhance
other
networks,
such
as
the
cycling
Network
as
well.
L
E
Thank
you
very
much
if
the
clerk
could
put
the
motion
on
the
on
the
page.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
correctly,
because
we're
looking
at
integration
into
the
design
network
of
the
st.
Claire,
Old
West
and
smart
track
stations,
but
is
the
intent
also
to
integrated
into
the
Liberty
Village
station.
So.
L
That
that
work,
we
are,
we
are
it's
there.
If
you
look
at
there's
the
99
Sudbury
the
building
allocates
for
the
real
path
behind
it.
As
we
approved
it,
there's
the
connection
to
the
they
are
looking
at
the
possible
Highline.
So
we
are
looking
into
that
in
in
in
the
north
I
haven't
seen
on
the
drawing,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
staff
are
looking
at
guaranteeing
the
space
and
are
looking
into
the
network.
There.
N
You,
speaker
is
deputy
mayor
by
love.
So
it's
your
motion.
The
intent
of
your
motion
is
simply
to
ensure
what
it's
been
done
in
the
past,
because
there
has
been
a
number
of
requests
through
knowledge
through
motions
here
adopted
by
council,
that
they
want
to
the
restaurant
red
path
be
extended
to
the
north.
Exactly
what
we're
doing.
L
We've
had
several
votes,
expressing
our
full
support
for
the
expansion
north,
but
since
we
are
doing
this
design,
we
just
need
to
make
sure
that
we
allocate
for
the
space
beside
the
tracks
and
if
it's
not
there,
since
that
the
the
transportation
network
work
is
being
done
as
well,
that
we
look
at
that,
so
that
we
can
expand
north
of
caribou
that
the
path
as
well.
But
several
motions
have
been
put
on
this
floor
by
you
by
a
speaker,
Nunziata
the
tenure
cycling
network.
All
of
it
has
the
western
a
rail
path
going.
L
N
You
your
motion
is
speaks
actually
to
what
the
community
is
been
telling
us
all
along
that.
It
only
makes
sense
to
extend
the
restaurant
of
rail
path
to
the
north
to
create
the
connectivity
in
terms
of
them
the
bicycle
master
plan
with
the
northern
parts
of
the
city.
Absolutely
that's
really
intentional.
Absolutely.
N
C
You
speaker,
I
have
two
motions
and
they
both
relate
to
including
information
in
the
queue
to
report.
That's
coming
back
next
year.
The
first
is
to
include
updated
ridership
ridership
projections
in
the
second
quarter
report,
and
the
second
is
to
give
an
update
on
the
status
of
discussions
with
Metro
links
to
pay
for
dedicated
city
staff
who
are
working
on
our
er
I.
C
We
should
then
have
sufficient
information
to
make
some
final
decision
about
whether
to
proceed
with
these
stations.
But
one
of
the
key
pieces
of
information
is
the
ridership
and
we
have
not
had
an
update
on
the
ridership
since
the
original
modeling
that
was
done
and
I
know
that
it's
related
to
what
the
fares
will
be
and
I
sure
hope
that
by
that
time,
we'll
have
better
information
about
what
the
fares
will
be.
That
will
give
us
sufficient
understanding
about
whether
or
no
this
project
will
be
successful.
C
And
it's
a
bit
of
a
chicken
and
egg.
You
can't
decide
whether
or
not
to
proceed
with
something
until
you
have
the
information
and
it
takes
money
to
spend
on
doing
the
design
work
to
get
this
project.
To
the
point
that
we
can
accurately
estimate
the
costs
and
it's
the
same
problem
we
have
with
the
Scarborough
subway
extension.
By
the
time
we
make
a
decision
to
proceed
to
construction.
C
We
will
have
sunk
costs
that
are
huge,
so
we
are
doing
a
bit
a
bit
of
a
you
know
best
guess,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
getting
the
the
best
information
possible.
Secondly,
we
have
approximately
30
to
40
the
equivalent
of
30
to
40
full-time
staff.
Right
now
who
are
working
on
the
RER
project
from
transportation
services
planning
water
parks,
buildings,
they
are
all
working
on
the
RER
project
and
recommendation.
C
5
says
we
should
go
and
negotiate
with
Metrolinx
to
get
that
money
back,
because
they
are
using
our
expertise,
our
review
capacity
to
help
them
with
RER
and
that's
fair,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
they
pay
for
those
costs.
So
the
second
recommendation
simply
says:
give
us
an
update
in
q2
of
2018
on
where
you
are
with
Metrolinx
in
securing
those
costs.
C
Now
metro
links
are
has
entered
into
an
agreement
with
the
city
for
the
Eglinton
crosstown
that
they
will
pay
for
our
staff
time
that
has
gone
into
that
project,
but
I
think
this
is
going
to
ramp
up
much
quicker
and
we
are
going
to
be
finding
ourselves
very
quickly
with
a
lot
of
money
owing
us
without
clear
terms
and
so
I
think
it's
important
that
we
end
this
down
by
q2.
2018
I
also
will
not
support
us
going
out
and
raising
expectations
that
we
are
going
to
build
a
subway
in
Etobicoke.
O
We
continued
working
that
equation
and
even
when
mayor
Miller
at
the
time
introduced
a
new
concept
on
on
Eglinton,
there
was
also
an
agreement
that
half
of
that
would
be
underground
and
somewhere
along
the
line.
Someone
decided
to
change
that
and,
of
course
it's
always
cost
that's
a
factor,
but
in
Etobicoke
and
the
south
end
of
york
they
deserve
and
have
been
waiting
for
a
particular
form
of
of
transportation.
That
was
underground.
So
what's
happened
since
then,
is
this
councils
taking
a
different
turn
every
time
and
any
time
a
suburban
area
wants
and
expects?
O
What's
rightfully
theirs
with
ridership
or
otherwise?
It's
always
a
no,
no
matter
what,
even
if
they
have
the
ridership
and
they
can.
They
can
justify
that
particular
argument.
This
council
says
no.
All
you
deserve
is
an
above
ground
LRT,
and
that's
all
we're
going
to
give
you
that's
why
this
makes
this
particular
project
needs
to
be
sent
back
with
the
with
the
motion
that
councillor
Ford
has
brought
forward.
I
won't
be
supporting
this,
this
report,
without
the
tunneling,
it
won't
happen
and
I
say
this
to
Scarborough
councillors
as
well.
O
That
are
going
to
be
simple
during
this
particular
plan.
You're
supporting
the
plan
and
I
know
why
you're
supporting
the
plan,
because
you
believe
in
one
way
or
another,
your
particular
subway
is
going
to
hit
your
your
community
and
and
that
that
commitment
is
going
to
be
made
to
you
in
the
future.
You
are
going
to
lose
the
subway
as
quick
as
you
vote
for
this
particular
plan.
That's
what's
going
to
happen
here.
O
So,
if
you
think
you're
representing
Scarborough
by
making
this
particular
decision,
I'll
say
this
to
you,
my
colleagues
and
to
everybody
in
Scarborough.
You're
gonna
lose
your
subway
plan.
If
this
council
has
anything
to
do
with
it
all,
right
and
and
that
I
think
is
going
to
happen
in
the
near
future,
and
it's
gonna
be
based
on
cost
again
after
this
particular
vote
has
been
taken
and
let's
get
to
another
part
of
of
the
equation
in
the
suburbs,
that's
Finch,
Avenue
councillor
Davis
says
we
should
be.
We
should
have
a
an
up-to-date
count
of
ridership.
O
Absolutely
I've
been
saying
that
right
from
the
beginning,
the
policy
of
TTC
is
if
nobody
wants
to
pay,
especially
along
Finch
Avenue.
Don't
ask
any
questions,
driver
which
means
they're,
not
counting
and
then
Jane
and
Finch
in
the
in
the
area
that
we're
told
we
don't
have
the
ridership.
They
haven't
been
counting
for
years.
90%
of
the
people
that
get
on
to
the
under
the
Finch
buses
right
now
still
to
this
day,
are
getting
on
for
free
and
we're
not
counting
them.
How
unfair
is
that
again?
O
It's
the
suburbs
that
would
expect-
and
rightly
so,
the
ridership
that
warrants
it,
but
we're
not
counting
them
being
told
that
they're
not
allowed
to
have
a
subway
that
the
only
thing
they
can
have
is
is
the
LRT
and
you
have
a
community
that
doesn't
want
it
and
so
I
stand
in
my
place,
saying
yeah,
it's
a
vision
that
the
mayor
has-
and
you
know
up
until
this
point,
I
I
have
I
have
supported
that
particular
vision.
But
it's
always
been
contingent
on
the
Scarborough
subway
plan
and
yes,
the
tunneling
on
Eglinton
Avenue.
O
If
we're
going
to
do
these
kinds
of
ventures,
then
you've
got
to
think
about
the
rest
of
the
city
and
what
our
residents
want,
the
rest
of
the
city
and
we're
not,
and
lastly,
I
don't
believe
that
TTC
belongs
to
us
anymore.
I
think
we
should
of
it
to
Metrolinx
and
let
them
run
it.
And,
quite
frankly,
we
have
had
all
these
boondoggles,
because
the
politicians
have
sat
on
the
boards
of
TTC
and
otherwise.
O
And
let's
give
it
to
a
group
of
experts,
give
them
the
mandate
to
deliver
what
they
think
makes
sense
with
the
win
in
respect
to
transportation
in
the
city
and
get
it
off
our
hands
completely,
because
if
not
we're
just
going
to
be
back
here
time
and
time
again,
every
time
there's
a
mayor
that
has
his
own
vision,
his
own
line,
and
he
and
he
wants
it
as
a
Legacy
Project.
That's
what's
happening
here
and
while
we've
done
this,
everybody
else
is
gonna
lose
out.
Scarborough
you're
losing
out
you're
losing
out.
O
It's
not
gonna
happen
and
Eglinton
I
recall
in
2010
when
we
had
those
debates
in
along
that
corridor.
The
solution
was
the
tunneling
on
Eglinton
Avenue,
and
that
particular
council
said
yes
to
that.
Now
you
want
to
take
it
away
from
from
the
suburbs.
Again,
congratulations!
We
want.
We
live
in
a
wonderful
city
that
really
cares
about.
Everybody
seems
to
me
every
time
we
stand
up.
Thank
you
trying
to
do
the
best
we
can
for
the
suburbs
and
we
lose
out
every
single
time.
Your.
N
You,
madam
Speaker,
first
and
foremost
I'd
like
to
to
make
a
friendly
amendment
to
cut
to
deputy
mayors.
Bylaws
motion
in
essence
is
asking
city
staff
to
report
back
to
Council
on
second
quarter
or
2018.
Ideas
speak
to
them
and
they're.
Okay,
with
that
as
I
wholeheartedly
support
their
conditions
before
us
and
Lomb
speaker
and
I
think
that
that
every
time
that
we
are
getting
this
report,
City
Council
we're
getting
one
step
closer
and
every
step
that
we
take.
N
We
are
getting
closer
and
closer
to
the
finishing
line
for
me
for
the
community
that
I
represent.
This
will
be
a
dream,
come
true,
because
we've
been
waiting
for
too
long.
For
this
to
happen,
the
construction
of
the
st.
Clair
exclusive
right
away
on
Sand
Clara's,
you
know
elect
a
lot
to
be
and
I've
been
fighting
for
years
to
correct.
The
wrongs
that
were
done
is
with
the
previous
administration
and,
at
this
point,
I
think
that
we
all
know
that
the
status
quo
is
not
acceptable
anymore.
N
Something
needs
to
be
done.
We
are
losing
billions
of
dollars
in
productivity,
as
well
as
because
of
the
years
of
inaction,
political
indecision,
political
inertia
in
the
lack
of
funding
and
on
that
I
really
want
to
give
credit
to
Mayor
Tony
for
his
Restless
approach
on
the
transit
file
for
his
approach
on
this
more
try
on
the
smart
track
transmission,
which
make
makes
a
lot
of
sense
mayor
Tory.
N
N
We
have
one
of
the
worst
bottlenecks
and
the
City
of
Toronto
and
I'm,
repairing
to
that
section
on
st.
Claire
between
on
Western,
Front
and
Keeler
Street,
an
area
that
where,
if
you
dare
to
drive
there,
you
are
inching
forward
in
a
bumper-to-bumper
congestion
there,
which
is
extremely
difficult
to
navigate
for
those
of
us
that
we
have
to
go
through
that
every
single
day.
N
The
right
way
the
way
was
constructed.
As
you
know,
we
spend
over
160
million
dollars
in
that
project
and
now
I'm,
not
arguing
in
terms
of
the
merits
or
the
exclusive
right
away,
but
that
project
leads
to
nowhere
because
from
point
A
to
point
B
to
a
loop,
nothing
more
than
that,
but
this
station
on
st.
Claire.
It's
actually
doing
something
something
very
special,
because
that's
bringing
other
modes
of
transportation,
public
transit
from
different
routes.
N
It's
going
to
be
one
of
the
major
transportation
scarves
in
the
in
the
West
End
of
the
city
and
that's
bringing
something
new,
that's
bringing
investment
to
the
area.
The
number
of
investors
that
are
coming
to
the
area
is
something
that
we
never
seen
that
before
and
that's
good.
It's
going
to
be
good
for
development,
economic
renewal,
revitalization,
employment
and
all
of
that
part
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
here.
So,
madam
Speaker
and
members
of
council
I
think
this
report
the
recommendations
that
are
before
us.
N
It's
they
are
loaned.
You
and
I
think
that
what
City
Council
is
doing
is
doing
the
right
thing
and
I
urge
you
support
the
recommendations
that
are
before
us.
Of
course,
there
is
the
motion
that
my
dear
colleague
called
forward,
as
well
as
a
be
supporting
the
recommendations
from
my
dear
colleagues
from
the
from
the
from
Etobicoke,
because
what
they've
been
saying
all
along
is
long
overdue
as
well.
Thank
you.
E
F
P
F
P
Q
Q
My
take
on
this
is
that
this
city
has
experienced
a
remarkable
transformation
over
the
last
couple
of
decades.
I
think
that
we
are
poised
to
become
one
of
the
premier
cities
of
this
world,
but
to
get
there,
among
other
things
you
have
to
you,
have
to
present
to
the
hundreds
of
thousands
of
people
who
are
flocking
to
this
city.
Q
You
have
to
give
them
the
opportunity
to
make
their
count
to
maximize
their
contribution
to
the
life
of
the
city,
and
that
means
to
the
huge
immigrant
populations
in
the
East
End
of
the
city
and
the
West
and
North
End's,
the
ability
to
access,
rapid
transportation
and
some
speaker
I
support
any
opportunity
that
creates
as
much
Rapid
Transit
as
quickly
as
possible.
I,
remember:
I've
been
participating
in
these
debates
for
a
number
of
years,
and
you
know
speaker
if
we
had
built
some
of
those
lines
when
they
were
originally
proposed.
K
You,
madam
Speaker
I'm,
standing
to
ask
members
of
council
to
consider
carefully
the
recommendations
put
forward
by
the
executive
committee.
They
were
not
developed
lightly.
They
were
developed
after
a
process
that
just
happened
over
the
last
month
and
to
reject
the
motions
place
by
councillor
Carroll
and
councillor
Crecy
I'm,
also
going
to
say
about
councillor
Ford's
motion
that
I
really
really
appreciate
the
intent.
There
are
a
couple
of
fatal
flaws
in
there
that
caused
me
concern,
including
the
fact
that
you
cannot
grade
separate
at
Islington
because
of
the
slope
of
the
earth
there.
K
If
you
read
the
report
in
the
cross
section,
it's
very
as
very
detailed
I
can't
support
something
that
takes
away
stations
because
these
stations
were
already
half
a
kilometer
apart,
and
that
would
result
in
reduced
service
for
the
people
that
live
in
the
area
that
I
represent.
And
finally,
the
section
of
the
LRT
that
is
west
of
highway
427
has
not
been
contentious.
It
is
the
section
between
427
and
somewhere
between
Royal,
York
and
scarlet.
K
That
is
the
the
matter
of
discussion
that
latter
portion,
which
is
a
very
large
part
that
was
in
the
original
tunneling
calculation,
has
been
deemed
by
the
community
as
something
that
is
not
an
issue
because
it
runs
along
the
side
of
the
401.
But
I
want
to
take
take
us
back
to
a
dark
and
stormy
night
about
a
month
ago,
and
that
was
the
the
first
consultation
that
I
went
to
with
some
of
the
community
stakeholders.
K
It
literally
was
a
dark
and
stormy
night
and
that's
where
we
arrived,
and
we
were
told
for
the
first
time
by
staff
that
you
know,
we've
done
some
calculations.
The
city
has
done
some
calculations
and
we
figured
out
how
much
it
cost
to
do
these
grade
separations
that
were
asked
in
this
report
for
us
to
look
at,
and
then
we
figured
out
what
your
time
is
worth
when
we
recommend
against
it,
because
they
cost
too
much
near
times
not
worth
that
much.
K
K
All
the
cars
haven't
been
drawn
in
here
like
this
is
like
6
a.m.
on
a
Sunday
morning.
What
we
actually
know
is,
what's
shown
on
our
own
very
own
web
page.
This
is
something
more
like
what
Eglinton
is
all
about
today
and
you
understand
why
people
are
really
really
worried
about
this.
This
promises-
and
it
says
it
right
in
the
report
to
disrupt
significantly
the
traffic
on
Eglinton,
and
it
is
an
important
street
in
the
neighborhood-
is
not
the
only
one.
But
why
is
that?
K
Even
a
bigger
issue
and
I
think
they're
going
to
take
issue
to
some
of
the
counselors
here
that
it
said
Wow
well,
you
know
build
this
and
then
people
can
take
transit
and
go
elsewhere.
Well,
I
explained
this
an
executive
committee.
This
is
the
intersection
of
highway
401,
427
and
essentially,
what
you
get.
Are
these
highways
that
empty
out
onto
an
off-ramp
on
to
Eglinton,
Avenue
and
Eglinton
Avenue
was
originally
thought
to
be
an
expressway,
but
it
was
never
built
that
way.
K
Guess
what
today
it
behaves
like
that
all
of
these
cars
exit,
these
highway
ramps
and
they
begin
to
distribute
along
this
spine
of
Eglinton
and
they
go
outwards
into
the
neighborhood,
and
this
is
the
cars
distributing
through
that
the
network
of
our
hierarchy
of
roads.
This
highway
system
doesn't
connect
you
to
the
block
away.
It
connects
you
to
two
destinations
in
the
GTA,
to
Oak
Hill,
to
Brampton,
to
Hamilton,
to
Burlington
and
places
farther
and
beyond.
So
by
simply
saying,
you
know,
just
take
transit.
K
Well,
this
is
a
great
view,
a
great
alternative,
I'm,
sorry,
the
Edmonton
LRT
doesn't
run
to
Oakville
or
wherever
somebody
is
going
to
be
working
that
day.
All
this
is
is
a
gateway
for
people
to
come,
to
go
to
and
come
away
from
destinations
in
the
GTA
and
get
back
to
their
homes
in
this
neighborhood
using
the
hierarchy
of
streets,
I
think
the
the
members
of
the
public
are
very
very
upset
about
this.
At
that
dark
and
stormy
meeting,
we
began
to
ask
questions
myself
included
about
you
know.
How
did
you
make
these
calculations?
K
How
did
you
determine
the
value
of
our
time?
How
did
the
traffic
modeling
work
and
we
kind
of
got
these
very
short
answers
of?
Well
trust
us.
We
have
this
algorithm
over
at
Metro
Links
and
we
work
with
our
consultants.
Essentially
it
was
a
black
box.
The
members
of
the
community,
who
are
very
smart
professionals,
objected
to
this
and
said.
Well,
we
want
to
see
the
detail,
we
don't
we
don't
believe
you
or
think
we
can
add
some
some
ideas
to
that.
So
all
this
motion
does
is
give
us
an
opportunity.
K
There's
this
working
group
is
to
get
into
those
details
and
perhaps
find
and
see
if
there's
a
better
way
or
all
of
the
details
of
being
covered
and
essentially
restore
some
of
the
public
confidence
that
has
been
broken
in
this
process.
I
think
we
owe
it
to
them
to
that.
It's
a
multi-billion
dollar
project,
let's
take
a
little
bit
of
time,
just
to
bring
people
along
with
the
planning
and
see
if
there's
some
great
ideas
that
might
come
from
that
community.
Thank
you.
R
K
F
Electrifying
of
trains
there's
been
all
sorts
of
meetings
that
have
occurred
in
my
area.
That
creates
some
some
problems
for
residents,
but
the
nature
of
the
consultation
and
the
the
quality
of
the
consultation
that
has
been
going
on
leads
me
to
to
support
what
Metrolinx
is
doing
and
I
think.
Hopefully
everybody
will
be
happy
with
what
happens
on
on.
D
Madam
Speaker,
thank
you
and
I
want
to
thank
all
the
members
of
council
have
participated
in
the
debate
today.
I
have
no
motions,
but
I
do
want
to
just
comment
on
some
of
the
motions
that
are
before
us.
I
will
be
supporting
councilor
Carrie
Janice's
motion,
because
I
think
it's
fair
to
examine
opportunities
to
see
about
what
a
parking
their
options
are.
I
will
be
supporting
a
councillor,
perks,
motion
with
respect
to
updating
the
funding
and
financing
options
for
the
city
for
smart
track
again,
I
would
say
in
commenting
on
that.
D
I
am
or
optimistic
attitude
based
on
just
the
facts
in
terms
of
what
is
included
in
our
ten-year
plan
now,
with
respect
to
both
a
smart
track
and
our
obligations
in
that
regard
on
the
stations
and
also
at
the
Eglinton
West
LRT
for
that
matter
in
its
present
proposed
form.
But
having
said
that,
I'm
quite
happy
to
see
those
numbers
updated
I'll
be
supporting
councillor
bylaws
recommendation,
because
I
think
it
is
a
sensible
time
for
us
to
look
at.
You
know,
while
we're
at
doing
design
work
on
st.
D
Clare
old
Weston
a
smart
track
station
to
look
at
how
we
can
integrate
some
of
these
things
together.
I'll
be
supporting
councillor
Davis's
motion
with
respect
to
updating
ridership
projections
in
the
second
1/4
of
the
2018
report
and
supporting
her
motion
with
respect
to
the
use
of
city
staff
and
finally
supporting
councillor
Palacios
amendment
to
motion
six.
D
What
I
will
not
be
supporting
is
motions
that
seek
to
remove
what
I
think
is
notwithstanding
some
of
the
comments
I've
heard
here
today
to
support
the
examination
of
options,
a
grade
separation
or
tunneling
in
with
respect
to
the
Eglinton
West
LRT.
It
is
not,
as
some
people
have
suggested,
a
detour
or
a
delay.
It
is
work
that
can
be
done
and
should
be
done,
I
think
in
response
to
there's
no
point
in
going
out
and
having
public
consultation.
D
If
you
then
pay
absolutely
no
attention
to
what
you've
heard
and
at
least
then
expressed
a
willingness
to
consult
with
people
in
that
regard,
and
so
in
that
sense,
I
have
no
trouble
at
all.
In
fact,
I
supported
an
executive
committee.
I'm
ITV
moved
it
and
I
support
here
the
notion
that
we
will
do
that
work.
It
will
not
be
a
delay.
It
will
be
responsive
to
the
people
that
we
represent.
D
All
of
us
collectively,
especially
some
of
my
colleagues
from
Etobicoke
I,
want
to
just
address
myself
for
a
minute
to
smart
truck
and
I
did
this
morning
with
the
media,
but
I
think
it's
important
to
repeat
this:
the
go
train
corridors
through
the
city
of
Prada
Romero,
those
who
insist
every
day
just
to
vote
in
playing
politics
with
this,
but
the
GO
train
corridors
through
the
City
of
Toronto.
We're
used
almost
exclusively
before
my
arrival
to
office
to
transport
people
from
the
905
into
the
city
and
back
out
again.
D
But
what
is
a
reality
is
this
when
it
is
done
and
I'm
not
saying
if
it
is
done,
when
it
is
done,
because
I'm
confident
it's
gonna
pass
through
each
of
the
stage
gates
of
which
this
is
another
one.
When
it
is
done,
it
will
provide
24
stations
along
its
route.
It
will
provide
transit
that
did
not
exist
in
the
City
of
Toronto
before
it
will
provide
an
option
that
will
move
people
around
the
city
that
didn't
exist
before
and
frankly,
wasn't
even
in
the
contemplation
in
any
realistic
manner
of
any
previous
City
Council.
D
It's
been
talked
about,
but
the
difference
here
is
we're
actually
settling
down
as
a
council
and
with
lots
of
support
around
this
chamber
to
move
it
forward
and
to
do
it
and
yes
to
say,
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
to
councillor
perks
respectfully
to
finance
it.
It's
going
to
get
done,
and
it's
going
to
get
done
sooner
than
many
of
these
other
projects,
not
because
we
placed
it
ahead
or
behind
anything
on
the
list.
D
But
because
the
time
that
taken
to
get
smart
track
done
and
operating
is
just
going
to
be
less
given
the
nature
of
the
fact.
You
don't
have
to
dig-
and
you
don't
have
to
do
this
and
you
don't
have
to
do
that,
and
a
large
portion
of
the
tracks
are
already
in
place
and
so
I
say
again,
as
I've
said,
with
respect
to
other
projects
that
people
want
us
to
move
forward
and
they
want
us
to
move
forward
in
a
reasonable
responsible
way.
D
As
we
are
doing
and
you've
heard
me
say
today
that
some
of
these
motions
moved
to
update
on
various
things,
I'm
very
happy
to
see
those
kinds
of
things
updated.
That's
what
we
should
be
doing
here,
but
on
the
principle
of
weather,
smart
track
is
going
to
move
forward,
whether
it
should
move
forward,
whether
it
is
something
that
is
going
to
add
materially
to
the
transit
options
available
to
move
people
through
this
city
using
infrastructure.
That's
been
there
in
many
cases
for
a
long
time,
I
say
it's
time
to
get
on
with
it.
O
O
D
First
of
all,
I
don't
make
the
connection
you
make
respectfully
through
secret
to
the
counselor
I,
don't
make
the
connection
you
make
that,
because
smart
track
is
in
existence,
somehow
some
other
project
has
been
changed
or
will
not
happen
at
all.
I
would
say
to
you
that
what
we
have
for
the
first
time
ever
and
that
people
in
scarborough
should
take
great
heart
from
this.
D
We
have
a
Scarborough
Network
transit
plan
and
it
consists
yes,
a
smart
track
which
is
going
to
provide
new
stations
and
new
transit
service
using
GO
train
tracks
for
the
people
of
Scarborough,
significant
new
stations
at
Finch
and
Kennedy
and
Lawrence
and
Kennedy.
It
is
going
to
provide
for
an
LRT
on
Eglinton
Avenue
East,
which
is
going
to
serve
the
U
of
T
Scarborough
campus
and
eventually
will
serve
the
Malvern
community,
and
that
is
going
to
proceed
ahead.
D
And
finally,
you
have
the
bluer
Danforth
subway
extension,
which
I
stand
behind
I
notice
with
interest
that
again
the
political
consensus
is
going
to
recreate
itself
and
represent
itself
to
the
people
in
that
you
have
mr.
Brown
now
not
only
saying
that
he
would
commit
himself
and
has
committed
himself
to
the
Scarborough
subway,
but
he
will
pick
up
our
share
of
the
cost
if
he
becomes
the
Premier
of
Ontario
and
so
I
just
say.
D
O
Well,
before
a
smart
track,
they
were
getting
a
subway
and
there
were.
There
were
many
more
stops
along
that
subway
and
they
were
happy
with
that.
In
fact,
Scarborough
was
ecstatic
that
they
were
getting,
what
they,
what
what
they've
been
long
waiting
for,
and
it
wasn't
until
this
particular
plan
that
that
that
other
plan
was
next
there's
only
one
stop
and
now
we're
about
to
venture
into
spending
three
or
four
billion
dollars.
For
that
one
stop.
Are
you
saying
that
that
that
part
of
the
equation
isn't
gonna
surface
at
one
point
or
another?
O
D
Seeing
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
to
the
councilor
that
what
is
going
to
happen
is
that
we
are
going
to
be
end
up
being
better
off
than
we
are
today
with
respect
to
the
financing
of
the
blur
Danforth
subway
extension
into
Scarborough,
because
we
have
already
one
of
the
political
parties
from
the
election
to
come.
That
is
indicated,
they're
going
to
do
better
for
the
City
of
Toronto
in
that
regard
and
Isis
others
will
follow
and
we
will
be
better
off
than
we
are
today.
D
I,
don't
know
exactly
where
we'll
end
up,
but
I'll
also
say
this:
we
are
going
to
end
up
with
the
Scarborough
Network
transit
plan,
the
subway
extension,
the
LRT
and
smart
track
with
Scarborough
having
a
lot
more
transit
serving
that
part
of
the
city,
whereas
today
they
have
no
higher
order
transit
at
all
and
that
that,
and
in
particular
the
bluer
Danforth
subway
extension
will
be
a
magnet
for
jobs
and
investment
for
Scarborough.
They
need
jobs
out
there.
We
want
jobs
out
there.
D
There
have
been
no
buildings
commercial
buildings
built
out
there
for
a
long
time,
and
there
haven't
been
an
adequate
number
of
residential
buildings
built
out
there,
so
that
people
can
live
and
work
in
Scarborough
and
not
feel
they
have
to
come
downtown
and
this
transit
plan.
The
network
transit
plan
for
Scarborough
is
going
to
deliver
that
transit
for
them
to
make
sure
that
they
can
be
equal
players
in
the
city
of
Toronto
for
jobs
and
investment
and.
O
They
finally
got
a
commitment
by
by
the
previous
administration
and
the
one
before
that
to
tunnel
along
Eglinton
Avenue
and
now,
for
the
first
time
in
a
number
of
years,
they're
here
and
yet
again
that
they're
not
going
to
get
the
tunneling
and
they've
got
to
settle
with
an
above
ground
LRT,
and
it
just
seems
to
be
at
the
same
time
that
we're
approving
the
billions
of
dollars
that
are
going
to
go
into
this
new
line
that
the
rest
of
the
city
isn't
getting.
What
they
want
in
the
way
of
fair
transportation.
A
D
Say
to
the
member
he's
barking
at
the
wrong
tree
here
up
the
wrong
tree
here,
because
I
am
the
one
who
stood
here,
who,
at
the
executive
committee,
moved
the
motion
to
look
at
tunneling.
So
in
that
sense,
when
you're
saying
somehow
that
something
I'm
doing
is
taking
tunneling
away,
the
tunneling
was
never
there,
but
I'm
at
least
prepared
to
look
at
it.
D
Based
on
what
the
people
said
and
I'm
standing
next
to
madam
Speaker,
the
man
who
says
please
don't
give
us
an
LRT
on
Finch
Avenue
and
that's
transit
for
a
total
cost
well
for
North
Etobicoke
and
going
to
Humber
College.
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
building
or
the
Metro
links
is
building
with
our
support
the
transit
line
along
Finch
and
we're
looking
at
tunneling
along
agents,
and
so
you
should
be
a
happy
man.
I
stay
tuned
to
the
member.
Madam
Speaker.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
S
Madam
madam
Speaker
to
the
mayor
during
the
last
election
you
promised,
along
with
countless
debates
and
on
lawn
signs,
something
called
smart
RAC.
You
said
it
was
gonna
have
22
stations.
You
promised
consistently
that
it
would
be
built
in
seven
years.
You
promised
consistently
that
it
would
be
fully
funded
by
TIF
when
your
opponents
even
questioned
the
the
logic
of
heavy
rail
on
the
western
spur.
S
S
Why
should
people
in
Etobicoke
or
Scarborough
believe
you
today
when
you
say
that
this
is
a
good
plan
for
them
and
when
you
say
that
this
is
going
to
be
fully
funded
and
when
you
say,
for
example,
that
we
should
move
ahead
with
Lawrence
east,
even
though
the
evidence
suggests
that
it
needs
to
be
reviewed?
Why
should
anyone
believe
in
anything
you
know.
D
I
I'm
happy:
you
should
go
on
matter.
Speaker.
Are
you
that
your
question?
Yes,
it
is
okay!
Well,
I!
Thank
you
for
the
question
through
you,
madam
Speaker.
I.
Very
much
regret
the
fact
that
you
have
to
sort
of
imply
that
somehow
I'm
not
telling
the
truth
or
that
I'm
trying
to
mislead
people,
that's
very
unfortunate
and
not
really
necessary
and,
frankly,
I
think
in
some
other
places.
That
kind
of
thing
would
probably
be
ruled
out
of
order.
D
But
having
said
that,
I
would
just
say
to
you:
I
stood
here
not
five
minutes
ago
and
said
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
that
smart
track
is
not
in
exactly
the
form
that
it
was
presented.
I
said
that
I
acknowledge
that,
but
what
I
also
said
and
in
fact
you're
right-
there's
not
going
to
be
22
stations
when
you
add
in
the
stations
with
the
LRT
as
presently
proposed,
it's
going
to
be
24,
there'll,
be
24
stations
on
smart
track
and
so
it'll
be
two
more
than
we
talked
about
and
I
would
say.
D
Another
thing
that
the
Scarborough
network
transit
plan,
which
we
have
put
together
and
approved
as
a
council
that
in
the
Scarborough
Danforth
blur
Danforth
subway
extension,
the
LRT
and
smart
track,
actually
will
add
more
transit
stations
because
I
didn't
count
them
up,
but
more
new
transit
stations,
plus
the
ones
that
are
being
added
for
smart
track,
then
probably
has
been
done
by
any
Administration
in
the
history
of
the
City
of
Toronto.
And
that
is
because,
unlike
previous
councils,
we
haven't
focused
on
one
project.
At
a
time
we
have
actually
developed
and
approved
the
council.
D
I
know
it's
difficult.
I,
say,
madam
Speaker,
to
the
member
to
understand
that
the
majority
of
the
council
on
repeated
occasions
has
approved
the
transit
plans
that
were
here
debating
today.
Smart
track,
the
Scarborough
LRT
and
so
on.
The
Scarborough
Danforth
separate
a
subway
extension,
but
the
fact
is,
that's
what's
happened
and
we
will
keep
having
the
boats
as
necessary.
D
So
I
will
say
to
the
member
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
I'm,
proud
of
what
this
council
has
done
so
far.
It
is
going
to
lead
to
incredible
improvements
in
transit
in
the
city
in
our
lifetime
for
a
change
and
it's
going
to
lead
to
thousands
upon
thousands
of
jobs
to
be
created
in
places
like
Scarborough
and
I'm,
not
going
to
play
political
games
with
this
I'm.
Just
gonna
move
forward
with
a
majority
of
this
council
with
the
other
parties
and
with
the
other
governments
to
build
transit,
which
is
why
I
was
sent
here
and.
A
S
A
S
You
know
for
tomorrow's
debate,
but
if
counsel
was
asked
with
respect
to
the
network
that
you're
referring
to
to
simply
look
at
the
facts,
you
you
acknowledge
that
you
didn't
have
access
to
a
lot
of
the
facts
when
you
promised
the
smart
track
version
that
you
came
out
with.
So
if
we
ask
that
there
be
access
to
the
facts
about
the
one-stop
subway
proposal
and
the
approved
seven
stop
our
tea
as
part
of
the
master
agreement
and
we
compare
apples
to
apples.
D
Say
three
amount
of
speaker
to
the
member
that
we
have
looked
at
lots
of
facts
and
we'll
continue
to
look
at
lots.
More
and
I
indicated
a
willingness
today
on
smart
track
to
look
at
things
that
need
to
be
revised
and
updated,
but
again,
I
very
much
regret
the
fact
that
he
chooses
to
stand
up
here
and,
in
effect,
impugn
my
credibility
and
say
that
I
somehow
have
told
lies
to
the
people
of
Ontario.
You
came
yeah,
you
know
you
just
used
everyone.
D
Guess
I
was
actually
just
answering
better
yeah
before
you
interrupted
me.
No
no
I
know
who
you
used
every
word,
except
that
which
is
really
unfortunate.
That's
the
style
of
politics!
That
I,
don't
believe,
should
happen
in
this
chamber
anymore.
It's
the
style
actually,
which
most
people
in
this
chamber
don't
follow
anymore,
but
if
you
wish
to
be
the
exception,
so
be
it.
Madam
Speaker
thank.
E
You
very
much
I
wasn't
going
to
ask
questions
because
actually
there's
a
good
portion
of
the
notion
of
smart
check
of
our
er
that
I
think
I
see
some
agreement
with
its
execution.
I
think
will
look
quite
different
than
again
what
you've
had
proposed
in
the
election,
but
what
I
do
and
what
was
causing
me
to
stand
here
as
a
comment
that
you
just
made
that
no
other
administration
before
you
has
worked
with
the
provincial
government
to
tight.
D
E
There
I
believe
if
we
run
some
of
the
tape
back,
no
other
council
has
and
if
that,
if
that
isn't
what
you
meant,
I
I,
just
I
think
we
should
clarify,
because
even
in
the
last
city
council,
though
I
wasn't
part
of
the
administration,
I
know
that
some
of
my
colleagues
here
were,
and
they
in
fact
did
their
best
to
attract
some
money.
I
know
for
a
fact
when
I
wasn't
a
city
council
that
the
the
Miller
administration
did
quite
well
in
getting
some
money,
although
some
of
it
was
retracted.
E
D
Speaker
certainly
I'll
say
to
the
member
what
I
meant
to
say
and
I
think
I
did.
But
having
said
that,
there's
no
point
in
reviewing
the
tape,
because
I'll
clarify
right
now
that
I,
don't
think
there's
any
administration
that
has
done
more,
and
that
includes,
in
particular
the
bringing
in
on
a
on
a
on
a
consistent
I'll
call.
It
permanent
basis.
D
I
hope
it's
permanent
of
the
Government
of
Canada
to
the
to
the
to
the
funding
of
transit
going
forward
and
I
will
acknowledge,
standing
right
here
now
that,
for
example,
the
subway
we're
about
to
open
in
ten
days.
Time
is
a
subway
that
was
funded
by
all
three
governments,
but
that
was
a
project
of
Mayor,
David,
Miller
and
Premier
Dalton
McGuinty,
and
that
that
wouldn't
have
happened
were
it
not
for
that
council
and
that
mayor
and
that
premier,
and
the
same
with
the
fact
that
there
was
some
federal
funding.
D
The
problem
with
a
lot
of
the
funding
in
those
days
gone
by
was
it
was
episodic
funding
on
a
project-by-project
basis,
as
opposed
to
where
we've
moved
now.
Sex,
certainly
federally,
and
you
know
that
the
effort
I
was
spending.
This
past
summer-
and
it's
not
concluded
yet-
was
to
get
the
province
onto
the
same
footing
where,
instead
of
once
in
a
while,
there
would
be
a
project
announced
that
they
would
fund
they
get
into
a
consistent
funding.
D
That
ideally,
would
be
very
much
related
to
the
federal
funding,
so
we
would
know
and
be
able
to
plan
on
the
basis
that
both
those
governments
were
participate,
but
I
certainly
didn't
mean
to
imply.
This
was
the
only
council
I,
don't
think
I
said
that,
but
certainly
there's
no
council,
that's
done
more,
including
in
particular
attracting
billions
of
dollars
from
the
federal
government
and
I
also
said
very
clearly.
E
F
H
F
D
Make
some
personnel
changes
at
the
TTC
and
move
forward
so
that
we
could
in
2017
not
2019,
be
opening
that
subway,
which
was
initiated
by
Mayor
David,
Miller
and
Premier,
Dalton
McGuinty
and
prime
minister,
who
was
it
Paul
Martin?
And
so
yes?
Yes,
yes,
that
that
was
done.
And
but
it
was
certainly
in
a
sorry
state.
The
day
after
I
got
elected
and.
F
D
D
Guess,
mayor
Ford
and
also
premiered
Dalton
McGuinty
again,
and
so
yes,
that's
happening,
but
the
bottom
line
is
this
you're
kind
of
going
down
the
road
I
say
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
where
you
want
to
say:
let's
congratulate
ourselves
on
how
great
those
projects
were
and
maybe
sit
back
and
say
we
don't
have
to
do
anything
more
I'm
talking
about
what
we
do
after
and
what
wasn't
happening.
What
wasn't
happening
at
the
time?
Those
two
great
projects,
the
tys
se
subway
that'll
open
in
a
couple
of
weeks
and
the
Eglinton
west
crosstown.
D
D
Thanks
to
the
fact
that
the
government
of
Ontario,
the
current
government
under
premier
Wynne,
is
putting
a
hundred
and
fifty
million
dollars
into
it
and
that
we
put
it
as
a
council
on
our
priority
list
so
that
when
the
federal
money
came,
we
were
able
to
say
to
them
because
it
was
a
condition
of
getting
the
federal
money
billions
of
dollars.
We
didn't
have
before
that.
The
relief
line
was
one
of
the
projects
that
would
be
funded
by
that
money.
D
So
what
I'm
saying
is
when
I
got
here
along
with
some
others,
we
had
those
two
projects
underway
and
full
marks
to
David
Miller
and
to
Rob
Ford
and
to
Dalton
McGuinty,
and
anybody
else
that
deserves
credit,
Paul
Martin.
But
the
number
of
things
that
were
on
the
books
that
were
planned
to
go
forward
were
a
lot
less
than
is
the
case
today,
because
you
now
have
which
you
didn't
have
before
smart
track.
You
have
the
Eglinton
East
LRT,
which
is
moving
going
to
move
forward.
D
You
have
the
exact
in
West
LRT,
which
is
going
to
move
forward.
You
have
the
priority
list
that
we've
gone
through
and
the
Scarborough
as
transit
extension,
which
was
at
the
core
objective,
endless
and
exhaustive
debates
before
I
got
here
and
for
some
reason,
continues
to
be
the
subject
of
exhaustive
endless
debates.
Now,
even
though
it's
been
voted
on
here,
I
believe
nine
times
so.
F
F
D
George
Roma
Malini,
who
think
we
should
stop
it
and
put
it
in
mothballs,
but
I
would
say
to
you
that
again,
I'll
repeat
what
the
problem
was
through.
You,
madam
speaker,
which
was
that
yes,
those
programs
when
there
were
books
for
a
long
time
and
they
were
for
years,
nothing
was
happening
with
them,
and
so
yes,
now
they're
proceeding
crosstown
going
ahead.
Tick
mark
Eglinton
of
these
Finch
Avenue
tick
mark
not
rolling
along
I,
wouldn't
say,
but
at
least
it's
creaking,
maybe
into
some
sense
of
action
and
finally,
the
the
York
University
subway.
D
But
the
problem
was
there
wasn't
the
roadmap
as
to
where
we
were
going
from
from
there.
There
was
a
lot
of
talk,
and
now
we've
got
a
lot
of
projects
to
the
point
where
my
friend
I
say
through
you,
madam
speaker,
councillor
perks
is
worried.
We
have
too
many
friends
of
transit
president
well
I'll
tell
you
something:
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
such
thing
in
the
life
of
this
city
at
this
time,
given
the
people
who
are
moving
here,
the
growth
were
approving
seemingly
without
difficulty.
There's
no
such
thing
as
too
much
transit.
D
R
A
I
J
A
J
B
B
One
of
many
the
the
growth
areas
are
under
significant
pressure,
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
Downtown
are
among
among
the
most
parks,
efficient
areas.
Downtown
currently
has
a
parks
provision
of
10.8
square
metres
per
resident,
which
compares
to
a
city
on
citywide
average
of
28
square
meters,
alright,
from.
J
B
We've
seen
in
major
American
cities
and
in
Australia
the
use
of
creating
a
new
signature
public
space
as
a
new
way
of
reimagining.
The
way
that
city
is
experienced
in
in
in
Chicago
and
many
of
through
this
through
the
speaker,
many
people
have
probably
seen
Millennium
Park,
which
is
a
large
comparatively
sized
park,
installation
on
the
waterfront.
It
currently
is
Chicago's
number
one.
Tourist
attraction
attracted
almost
13
million
people
in
the
last
part
of
2016.
J
B
J
You
to
our
deputy
city
manager,
mr.
living
there's,
been
a
lot
of
conversation
related
to
ownership,
as
it
relates
to
the
air
rights
as
well
as
the
land
around
the
rail
corridor.
Through
this
process,
did
staff
undertake
a
title
search
and
if
so,
what
are
the
conclusions?
As
of
the
publication
of
this
report,
madam.
P
Speaker,
yes,
staff
undertook
a
title
search
and
constantly
looks
at
the
registrations.
There
are
four
owners
of
the
land,
there's
the
Toronto
terminal,
railways,
CN
the
City
of
Toronto
and
Metro
links,
and
so
that
is
the
orders
of
the
land
and
we're
aware
of
a
company
that
has
applied
for
an
official
plan.
Amendment
called
pits
or
craft
the
orchid
development
who
are
an
agent
for
those
owners
for
the
TTR.
So.
J
J
P
J
J
J
Now,
on
the
funding
question
you
have
spoken
often
and
I've
heard
you
about
growth,
paying
for
growth.
It's
alluded
to
in
the
report
as
part
of
the
section
42
park
acquisition
funds
do
I
understand
correctly
that
when
tÃo
Corps
comes
forward
in
the
spring,
you
are
proposing
to
bring
forward
a
new
section,
42
rate
in
essence,
to
increase
the
amount
we
collect
as
award
and
as
a
City.
Is
that
correct
that.
C
B
Yonge
and
Eglinton
is
one
of
the
city's
fastest
growing
residential
and
hopefully
employment
areas,
the
the
work
that
we've
done
with
Midtown
and
focus,
which
is
also
on
the
agenda.
Mountain
speaker,
yes,
identifies
parkland
deficiency
issues
among
other
infrastructure
issues.
There
is
a
parkland
and
public
realm
plan,
that's
been
already
put
through
Council
and
we're
updating
that
through
the
Midtown
of
focus
exercise,
and
we
would
be
bringing
forward
strategy
in
the
new
year
with
the
secondary
plan
to
increase
the
funding
rate
in
in
Yonge
and
Eglinton
to
support
the
implementation
of
that
parkland
strategy.
So.
C
C
Them
one
of
the
things
that
a
number
of
residents
and
parents
would
have
liked
to
have
seen
as
18:30
erskine
beside
John
Fisher
school
have
been
purchased
as
parkland.
That
couldn't
happen
for
a
number
of
reasons
very
disappointing,
but
I
guess
they
look
down
to
the
downtown
core
and
what
and
potentially
may
happen
there
and
say
there
they're
very
fortunate,
so
I
guess
my
question
is:
will
this
in
any
way
impact
Yonge
and
Eglinton
in
in
securing
green
space,
public
realm,
streetscape
improvements,
etc?
No.
B
C
I
think
what
you're
saying
to
me
is
if
this
goes
forward
in
no
way
affects
Yonge
and
Eglinton
and
that
there
will
be
parkland
purchased
there,
because
literally
there
is
I
like
to
say
not
a
blade
of
grass
and
it's
getting
worse
and
buildings
are
coming
down
and
taller
ones
going
up
dust
everywhere,
very
hard
to
even
really
live
in
that
area.
Currently
so
you're
saying
this
will
in
no
way
impact
this
part
of
the
city,
which
is
also
really
desperate
for
green
space
and
parkland.
B
P
P
P
Speaker
that
could
be
built
in
phases
and
it
could
be
built
earlier.
The
first
likely
face
that
we'd
like
to
see
advanced,
would
be
the
top
of
the
Spadina
Front
Metrolink
subway,
our
ops,
smart
trucks
spark
track
station
or
trial
soon,
both
station.
How
soon
would
that
be?
That
could
reasonably
start
in
3
years,
so.
O
P
P
Speaker
we've
taken
extreme
paints
to
look
at
the
costing
you'll
see
in
the
report
that
the
deck
construction
itself
is
eight
hundred
and
forty
four
million
dollars
the
park
construction.
To
do
the
landscaping
says
95
million
designed
piece
at
95,
but
we
have
two
amounts:
a
contingency
of
327
million
and
an
allowance
of
304
million
for
a
total
of
630
1
million
dollars,
basically
in
contingencies
and
allowances,
which
we
think
is
sufficient
to
cover
off
the
risk
of
any
cost
escalation.
Ok,.
O
O
Get
that
from
that
change,
I
get
that
I've
asked
for
very
detailed
lists
and
it
passed
your
council
along
with
this
report.
You
know,
yes
that
asked
for
each
one
of
our
parks
in
our
own
wards
and
to
be
to
be
looked
at
and
given
us
the
evaluations
based
on
how
insufficient
some
of
them
are,
so
that
we
get
an
idea
of
whether
or
not
we
should
be
supporting
the
at
this
point
anyway.
O
It
sounds
like
over
two
billion
dollars
in
funding
and
to
leave
our
parks
that
need
their
playgrounds
and
that's
that
sort
of
thing
yeah.
So
where
is
that
list?
Because
nobody
from
parks
has
come
to
me
anyway
and
said:
hey
counselor,
these
parks
are
are
not
up
to
standard
and
we
should
fix
them
before
we
spend
two
billion
dollars
on
a
new
park.
I'll.
P
T
Three,
madam
Speaker
I'm,
looking
at
the
recommendations
from
the
previous
report,
one
requesting
and
information
on
deficiencies
in
parks
in
the
suburbs,
specifically
through
your
motion,
so
we
did
report
through
at
a
active
Committee
on
phase
one
of
an
updated
parkland
strategy
that
is
looking
at
parkland
across
the
city
and
we'll
be
reporting
back
on
the
final
parkland.
You.
T
T
R
B
Through
you,
madam
Speaker,
the
the
course
of
the
last
10
or
15
years
with
the
growth
that's
taken
place
in
downtown
Toronto,
we
have
had
a
parkland
by
law
in
place.
The
dynamic
of
what's
been
happening
is
extremely
higher
densities.
Over
that
period
of
time,
higher
land
values,
the
site
sizes
have
been
being
increasingly
smaller,
so
we've
taken
where
we
could
on
site
parkland,
but
we
increasingly
turn
to
taking
cash
in
lieu
Park.
The
ability
to
keep
up
in
that
land
market
and
acquire
new
new
parks
is
increasingly
challenging.
B
We
have
created
a
number
of
new
parks
in
in
the
last
10
or
15
years,
but
we
simply
cannot
keep
up
to
the
rate
of
growth.
That's
taking
place
so
part
of
the
strategy
that
was
being
considered
by
the
executive
committee
is
to
reset
the
rate
and
reset
the
plan
through
the
parkland
strategy.
So,
on
a
go-forward
basis,
we
have
a
much
more
direct
relationship
between
providing
infrastructure
and
the
growth
that
we're
projecting.
Well.
R
Sounds
amazing
I
mean
it's
a
I
think
we're
20
years
too
late,
but
so
then
help
me
understand
something
how
much
land
is
left
in
the
vicinity.
I
mean
we
can
only
collect
parkland
dedication,
section
37
for
certain
areas
around
the
community.
How
much
area
around
this
community
or
around
real
deck
Park
is
available
for
development,
and
what
is
the
estimate
that
we're
gonna
generate
from
any
additional
levies?
The.
B
R
So
that's
a
pretty
big
area.
Are
you
sure
that
there
aren't
going
to
be
communities
where
thousands
of
these
units
are
gonna
be
placed
saying
I,
don't
want
to
walk
all
the
way
to
rail
to
park?
I
want
a
farm
right
outside
my
my
building,
I
mean
how
do
we
force
people
in
this
broad
development
area
to
say
all
your
money's
going
to
rail
duck
Park,
especially
with
with
policies
and
I,
think.
B
Going
to
be
a
number
of
strategies,
we're
going
to
have
to
redo
existing
parts,
we're
doing
that
now
with
virzi
Park
and
barber
and
Scott
Park,
for
example,
we're
going
to
have
to
continue
to
acquire
small
on-site
parks,
but
they
will
be
more
like
vest
pocket
parks,
pocket
parks,
we're
going
to
have
to
invest
in
green
connections
that
make
it
easy
for
people
to
get
to
from
where
they
live
to
where
the
parks
facilities
are.
Finally,
through
this
analysis,
we've
really
determined.
This
is
the
only
lost
opportunity
to
build
a
large
functional,
open
space.
B
R
Know
I
certainly
don't
disagree
with
the
notion
that
it's
desperately
needed
I'm
just
concerned
that
now
that
the
developers
have
all
left
that
area
taxpayers
are
left,
you
know
holding
the
bag
for
this
park.
So
do
you
know
what
we
collected
in
the
last
10-15
years
for
a
consolidated
green
space
for
this
area?
R
Do
we
have
a
number
and
how
many
units
that
composed
of
and
are
we
gonna,
get
anywhere
close
to
that
I?
Just
I'm,
not
convinced
that
developments
through
a
broad
area
of
the
city
are
gonna,
just
say:
yep,
no
problem
I'll,
give
you
parkland
dedication
for
rail
deck
or
I'll,
give
you
my
10%
for
land
allocation,
the
rail
deck
and
in
dollar
value,
and
don't
worry
about
the
residents
that
have
to
walk
their
dogs
or
their
children
I'm.
Just
not
convinced
that
that's
gonna
work,
okay,.
T
Though,
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
and
we
did
report
out
on
the
cash
in
lieu
balances
last
spring
through
to
Council,
so
over
the
last
ten
years,
the
city
has
collected
roughly
483
million
dollars
in
cash
in
lieu
from
residential
development
and
during
the
same
period
we
spent
roughly
two
hundred
and
sixty
million
dollars.
So
you
can
see
the
balances
and
roughly
where
the
money
has
been
spent
as
well
so
going
forward
and
through
working
with
planning.
We
are
projecting
what
those
balances
would
be
with
the
residential
development
that
we
have
in
the
Thank
You.
F
P
Madam
Speaker,
we're
aware
of
an
application
made
by
an
agent
called
Pitts
I
believe
that
the
company
is
called
craft
called
the
orchid
development
they've
made
an
application,
it's
being
reviewed
by
City
Planning,
for
a
development
on
this
rail
deck
area,
which
would
include
a
number
of
condominium
towers
and
a
park.
That's
what
we're
aware
of
it
presumably
involves
some
sort
of
conditional
deal
with
the
Toronto
terminal
railroad
for
roles,
but
we've
not
seen
the
nature
of
that
arrangement
and.
F
P
P
F
F
In
terms
of
I,
don't
see
anywhere
in
the
report
that
speak
specifically
to
costs
of
operating
it's
a
relatively
large
park,
obviously
21
acres
costs
of
operating
we've
got
also
consider
that
in
any
decision,
I
think
we
make
going
forward.
What
will
it
cost
to
maintain
a
park
like
that?
You
have
any
estimates,
any
yeah,
even
from
the
point
of
view
of
of
policing,
given
that
our
police
resources
are
are
so
very,
very
lean
today
that
they're
more
on
a
reactive
mode
in
policing
and
not
proactive.
F
T
3
mm
speaker,
the
actual
design
of
the
components
that
will
be
on
the
park
have
yet
to
be
determined,
so
the
operating
cost
will
be
determined
by
the
actual
design
of
the
park.
We're
also
looking
at
a
number
of
innovative
operations
models
and
governance
models
similar
to
those
that
have
been
pursued
to
some
of
the
other
landmark
parks
in
the
u.s.,
such
as
Millennium,
Park
and
and
the
Beltline.
So
there's
a
number
of
different
approaches.
We
don't
have
an
estimate
around
the
operating
costs.
At
this
point
you.
F
Know
I
understand
that
and
is
what
I've
read
in
the
report,
but
would
it
be
prudent
to
maybe
make
an
attempt,
given
that
you
already
know
the
size
of
the
park,
I
know
that
the
design
will
factor
into
coming
up
with
more
precise
costs
in
terms
of
how
going
forward
and
the
operating
itself,
but
an
estimate,
I
think,
would
be
wise.
You
know,
that's
that's,
like
you
know,
buying
a
major
buying
your
own
personal
property
and
not
knowing
what
it's
going
to
cost
you
to
operate.
T
T
You
very
much
madam
Speaker
I
just
wondered
if
anyone
was
here
from
public
health,
no
thought
maybe
parks
can
answer
I.
Just
my
question
is
what
is
the
connection
between
health
and
well-being
and
access
to
nature
through
you,
madam
Speaker
I'm,
not
speaking
for
public
health,
but
there
have
been
many
studies
and
research
that
has
been
done
that
connects
nature
to
well-being
and
certainly
parks
and
leisure
time,
too
mental
health
and
well-being
and
what
you
need
to
get
out
to
a
park.
T
What
is
the
industry
standard
for
a
walkability
factor
to
greenspace
Andrea,
madam
Speaker,
through
the
initial
work
that
we've
done
on
the
parkland
strategy?
Phase
1
5
to
10
minutes
walkable
to
green
space
is
a
average
that
we've
seen
in
some
other
large
urban
centers
that
we're
focusing
on
and
we're
working
on
that
kind
of
tally,
number
figure
for
Toronto
right,
that's
correct,
okay
and
last
question:
when
comparing
green
space
across
the
city,
how
does
the
downtown
fair,
as
through
you,
madam
speaker,
as
mr.
Linton,
has
noted
downtown?
T
D
You,
madam
Speaker
I'm
gonna,
follow
up
on
a
question
I
raised
at
Executive
Committee
when
development
applications
come
through
my
desk,
the
planning
staff
press
hard
to
do
parkland
on-site,
which
would
then
negate
cash
and
low.
Yet
the
vision
here
seems
to
be
pushing
for
cash
in
lieu,
so
we
can
raise
a
big
pot
of
money
to
pay
for
this
project.
I
sense,
a
disconnect
between
the
planning
department
and
the
Parks
Department.
Am
I
miss
reading
the.
B
Situation,
a
three-
speaker,
actually,
we've
been
working
very
closely
with
the
parks,
forestry
and
recreation
over
the
last
couple
of
years
to
develop
unified
strategies
to
support
growth.
We
know
that
ninety
percent
of
the
sites
downtown
or
less
than
one
hectare
and
it's
increasingly
difficult
to
get
a
parkland
on-site.
The
sites
that
are
under
redevelopment
in
other
parts
of
the
city
are
typically
larger
and
they
do
afford
more
opportunities
to
acquire
parkland
on-site
through
the
development
review
process.
D
P
P
Sir
and
we've
actually
been
very
deliberate
in
our
reporting
to
want
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
that
we
need
to
engage
the
development
community
in
a
proactive
way.
We're
setting
up
mechanisms
to
do
that.
That
would
take
into
account
this
development
charges
and
other
factors
that
influence
their
bottom
line.
But
we
also
have
a
bottom
line
as
a
city
provide
parks
like
this,
and
we
believe
we've
got
to
come
to
an
agreement
with
them
on
a
suitable
financing
strategy.
For
all
of
that,
so.
D
T
D
T
M
M
Next
to
it
there
was
a
Toyota
dealership,
I,
don't
know
the
size
of
that
I,
don't
know
the
I,
don't
know
what
the
final
price
was,
but
I
would
imagine
it
it's
it's
along
those
lines.
The
report
says
the
typical
accurate
land
acquisition
costs
were
free
and
unencumbered
properties
range
between
95
and
a
hundred
fifteen
million
dollars
an
acre.
So
my
question
is:
why
hasn't
staff
in
the
past
been
looking
for
some
of
these
opportunities
to
buy
land
at
much
much
less
than
the
reported
costs
of
land?
Now
a.
B
Three-Minute
speaker
I
would
just
note,
with
the
globe
mill
site
the
specifics
of
that
development,
which
did
include
the
Toyota
site,
ultimately
included.
Both
a
small
on-site
park
and
acquisition
of
off-site
Park.
Only
the
total
and
and
about
40
I
think
it
was
about
forty.
Five
percent
of
the
site
was
publicly
accessible,
open
space,
so
the
nature
of
that
development
afforded
a
particular
opportunity
to
get
a
certain
kind
of
open
space,
and
we
look
for
off-site
park
in
that
instance
to
connect
to
a
park
system
to
the
north
of
the
site.
So
so.
P
I've
been
diligently,
try
to
acquire
on
a
site
by
site
basis,
but
we
like
to
focus
for
a
large
park
like
this
to
focus
our
efforts.
In
fact,
we
fall
behind
and
actually
taking
the
money
that
we
collected
and
translating
it
into
land
and,
as
a
result,
we've
lost
that
up.
We
lost
that
opportunity
to
buy
things
at
that
those
prices,
and
now
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
have
a
place
to
put
our
money
in
a
concerted
effort.
So.
M
Well,
I
would
just
be
clear:
I
fully
support
this
plan,
I
think
it
I
think
it's
brilliant,
but
when
I
look
when
I
look
at
a
site
like
The,
Globe
and
Mail
site
right
there
at
at
front
and
Spadina
I,
don't
know
why
the
city
didn't
say
you
know
what
maybe
we
should
just
buy
the
whole
thing
up
and
and
convert
it
into
a
park.
Was
that
Evert
was
it
it
was,
and
and
I
would
also
like
to
know
if
we
have
an
understanding
of
how
much
unencumbered
land
is
still
down
in
the
downtown
core.
B
B
M
B
Is
three
speaker?
There
is
nothing
like
that
in
the
city
we
have
large
development
sites
where
we're
taking
on
site
Park,
for
example,
lower
young
LCBO,
there's
a
large
site,
a
large
part
coming
with
that,
but
it's
around
2
acres
at
the
end
of
the
day,
even
for
a
site
like
that,
that's
about
the
size
of
Park
that
you
end
up
getting
it's
very,
very
difficult
and
challenging
to
assemble
that
kind
of
park
space
as.
M
P
Speaker
I
disagree.
I,
actually
think
that
the
better
number
is
the
staff
number
for
the
rail
deck.
Given
what
we've
we've
seen
and
the
way
it's
constructed.
It's
not
a
particularly
complicated
piece
of
engineering
and
all
we
see
in
the
land
market
right
now
is
prices
that
continue
to
go
up,
but,
more
importantly,
to
get
this
kind
of
site
this
site.
This
is
the
site
for
it.
There's
no
other
site
right,
and
it's
really.
P
I
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
sort
of
reorder
the
the
way
we're
we're.
Looking
at
this,
we
are
looking
at
both
the
the
zoning
item
today
and
the
feasibility
study
for
the
park.
That's
that's
been
proposed.
We're
asking
questions
about
both
right
now,
so
in
terms
of
the
zoning,
this
is
not
unheard
of.
Is
it
if
you
it's
not
a
matter
of
the
counselors
saying
I
would
like
a
big
park,
and
so
you
look
for
where
to
put
one,
we
do
want
to
have
some
sort
of
large
feature
in
the
downtown
core.
B
We
do
madam
Speaker.
This
is
actually
an
official
plan
amendment
just
to
be
clear
right.
The
the
process
has
been
to
review
the
planning
framework
in
the
area,
which
happens
to
be
the
various
railway
lands
plans
that
were
approved
decades
ago,
and
to
consider
the
appropriate
use
of
what
is
now
a
rail
corridor
somewhat
unsightly,
but
a
highly
essential
rail
corridor
and
the
opportunity
that
it
presents
in
a
contextual
way,
in
a
way,
a
great
great
opportunity,
given
the
size
of
it
to
to
get
way
ahead
of
the
game
that
we
know
will
never
win.
I
So
is
it
fair,
then,
to
get
to
to
characterize
that
the
debate
we're
about
to
have
is
really
about?
Is
it
not?
It's
really
about
planning
and
visioning
versus
waiting
for
versus
reacting.
We
could
just
wait
an
application
by
application
reaction
by
reaction,
we'll
end
up
sealing
the
fate
of
what
happens
here.
This
is
about
planning
in
advance.
What
we
want
to
happen
there,
regardless
of
whether
we
have
the
billion
dollars
in
our
pocket
right
now
or
even
the
hundred
and
fifteen
million.
Is
that
not
the
case
if.
B
That's
the
case:
we've
done
a
parks
and
public
realm
plan
through
the
tea
or
court
process.
We've
done
a
lot
of
work
in
the
last
15
years,
but
the
plan
is
to
knit
it
all
together.
Part
of
this
is
creating
what
we
call
the
stitch
which
is
bringing
together
a
number
of
public
facilities,
tourism
assets
across
the
south
part
of
the
downtown.
This
is
ideally
situated
that
will
bring
really
a
a
forecourt
to
all
of
those
great
public
facilities
and
create
a
seamless
connection,
both
north-south
and
east-west.
I
And
and
so
the
fact
that
it's
aspirational
shouldn't
shouldn't,
stop
us
from
going
ahead
with,
with
with
doing
the
the
the
zoning
in
advance
it
doesn't,
it
doesn't
actually
picture
them,
but
but
during
the
meeting
during
the
presentation,
other
cities
were
were
given
as
an
example
of
having
this
aspirational
planning
happened
well
in
advance
of
execution.
Could
you
name
some
of
those
for
us
now
for
the
for
the
benefit
of
the
public
that
are
more
likely
to
see
it
here
today.
Well,.
B
The
I've
already
noted
the
examples
in
Chicago,
which
is
roughly
equivalent
size.
Chicago
has
long
had
a
principle
of
of
creating
public
access
to
its
waterfront.
It's
generally
exists
on
its
waterfront,
but
it
also
exists
above
a
rail
and
road
facility.
So
it's
a
it's
a
very
interesting
example
of
how
this
is
done.
There
are
other
cities
such
as
Melbourne
that
has
built
over.
I
E
Yes,
thank
you
very
much,
madam
Speaker.
It's
really
just
one
question.
If
we
change
the
section
42
contribution,
will
that
will
that
if
we
increase
what's
required,
will
that
result
in
greater
resources
for
communities
across
the
city?
Yes,
so
more
money
for
parks
in
Scarborough,
more
money
for
parks
in
Etobicoke
for
North
York.
That.
E
A
H
H
H
P
P
We've
seen
we've
seen
other
examples,
so
we
know
what
some
other
examples
look
like.
I
would
not
advise
you
any
number
in
front
of
the
public,
because
I
both
ultimates
a
negotiation
that
we
have
to
have
with
the
owners
of
the
air
rights,
and
so
we
are
knowledgeable,
there's
a
there's,
an
allowance
in
the
contingency
for
this,
and
so
no
I
won't
be
able
to
give
you
a
specific
number.
R
R
A
H
P
Madam
Speaker
attached
to
the
report,
is
a
series
of
reports,
one
of
the
one.
It's
an
engineering
construction
feasibility
study.
It
looked
at
the
engineering,
the
practicality
of
putting
active
columns
in
the
middle
of
an
active
rail
line.
The
cost
of
the
the
structure
supports
the
the
width
and
the
depth
of
the
spans
that
go
across
in
the
various
locations.
That's
I
commend
it
to
you.
It's
got
some
fairly
detailed
information.
H
P
H
T
H
P
Madam
Speaker
very
good
question
we
have
some
existing
dollars
have
been
collected
for
this
purpose.
We
haven't
allocated
a
significant
amount
of
money.
There
we
own
1.5
in
the
6.3
hectare
site.
We
have
future
DCs,
we
have
future
section:
42,
parkland
dedication,
cash
in
lieu
monies,
section
37
and
there's
discussion
in
the
report
about
an
area
rate
or
other
mechanisms
that
we
might
use
in
the
area.
And,
finally,
we
think
it
would
be
an
excellent
candidate
for
provincial
and
federal
support
and
go
forward
basis,
but.
H
H
P
H
K
P
K
Would
it
be
fair
to
say
that,
essentially,
for
one
665,
we
are
manufacturing
or
inventing
a
park
yeah
we're
we're
creating
a
park
from
nothing
like
it?
Is
it's
not
going
to
be
on
typical
land?
It's
on
estrada
we're
creating
a
surface
out
of
nowhere,
so
we're
manufacturing
a
park,
and
we
ever
do
anything
like
that
before.
Yes,.
K
P
K
One
thing
I
note,
though,
is
that
rail
deck
has
a
northern
edge
and
a
southern
edge.
The
northern
edge
predominantly
appears
to
be
ours,
and
the
southern
edge
looks
likes
to
be
a
collection
of
condominiums.
Do
you
have
some
sense
of
security
or
optimism
about
the
ability
to
reinforce
the
south
wall
of
this
rail
deck?
K
P
P
K
It's
the
last
question:
it's
I'm
intrigued
by
the
structure
of
this
and
how
we're
gonna
phase
it.
It
looks
like
we
have
to
do
a
lot
of
work
below
the
surface
of
the
plane
of
the
surface.
We've
got
to
build
these
columns
and
built
foundations
and
foundation.
Walls
is
the
plan
to
do
that
in
small
pieces,
or
are
we
gonna
try
to
get
all
that
civil
work
done
down
in
the
rail
corridor,
because
it's
very
disruptive
to
the
operations
and
then
add
these
deck
pieces
over
time?
I
know:
there's
two
phases
contemplated
there.
K
P
So,
madam,
madam
Speaker,
the
the
principal
place
that
we
think
it
could
start
is
the
Spadina
front,
RR
station
that
area
and
we
and
we
launched
it-
could
then
extend
it
to
the
south
side.
So
that's
what
we
said
is
phase
one
likely
and
you'd
have
all
that
column.
Placement
we've
got
a
serious
set
of
announces
for
that
work
to
be
done,
but
we
should
be
getting
those
column
placements
in
as
quickly
as
possible.
They
would
be
advantageous
to
us
in
the
future.
K
Maybe
a
better
way
to
characterize
the
question:
are
we
front-end
loading
a
lot
of
the
civil
work?
Are
we
going
to
see
returns
on
this
investment
in
increments
right
away?
So
we
don't
have
to
do
a
whole
bunch
of
invisible
civil
work
to
finally
get
the
surfaces
that
we
want,
or
are
we
going
to
see
them
coming
into
place
over
time?
Are.
P
J
Thank
you,
speaker,
and
I
will
begin
first
of
all
by
thanking
our
city
of
toronto
staff
across
departments
who
have
spent
from
parks
to
city
planning,
to
real
estate,
to
build
Toronto
and
others.
An
exceptional
amount
of
time
and
due
diligence
on
this
project
and
I
want
to
thank
them.
Our
parks
and
Environment
chair
councillor
McMahon
has
been
a
staunch
attendee
of
meetings
and
more
20
in
recent
months
on
this
project
and,
of
course,
meritorious
leadership
and
his
vision
on
a
citywide
project.
Here,
I
want
to
acknowledge
his
leadership.
J
J
In
the
meantime,
we
have
not
built
parkland
to
keep
up,
we
just
haven't,
and
so,
if
you
want
to
build
a
livable
neighborhood,
you
have
to
invest
in
the
parks
and
the
community
amenities
to
make
it
actually
livable
I
thought
councillor
DG
a
know
had
an
excellent
line
of
questioning,
which
was
given
all
the
development
of
this
taken
place
in
downtown.
Why
haven't
we
done
this
up
until
now
and
council
they
did.
Channel
was
right.
We
should
have
done
it
already.
J
So
let's
do
it
now,
but
this
is
not
just
about
livability
and
dealing
with
growing
population
and
a
working
population
in
downtown.
This
is
about
a
city-wide
instance
destination.
It
is
about
a
citywide
objective,
and
that
is
we
build
these
central
projects,
not
just
for
regions.
The
CN
Tower
was
not
built
in
and
is
not
called
the
downtown
Tower.
J
The
the
Toronto
Zoo
was
not
built
for
or
called
the
Scarborough
zoo,
their
Toronto
destinations,
and
so
too
is
rail
deck
park
adjacent
to
the
Rogers
Center
in
the
CN
Tower
and
the
aquarium
to
have
a
new
21
Acre
Central
Park.
There
will
be
a
destination
yes
for
residents
of
the
city,
but
tourists
and
visitors
as
well,
and
this
isn't
a
radical
concept.
It's
not
a
pie
in
the
sky
idea,
New
York
City
when
they
built
the
High
Line.
J
It
quickly
became
the
second
most
popular
tourist
destination
in
all
of
New
York
in
Chicago,
when
they
built
Millennium,
Park
and
people
scoffed.
Everybody
said
to
the
mayor
at
the
time:
don't
do
it
don't
do
it?
It's
gonna
cost
too
much.
Well,
the
mayor
at
the
time
put
his
head
down,
got
it
done
and
guess
what
Millennium
Park
is
now
the
sixth
most
popular
tourist
destination
in
the
entire
United
States,
with
15
million
annual
visitors?
And
so
when
you
invest
in
the
future,
you
get
a
better
future.
J
That's
what
this
is,
and
so
the
question
I
get
asked.
A
lot
is,
actually
can
you
actually
pay
for?
It
is
funding
going
to
happen
and
so
to
that
the
principle
here,
which
is
an
important
one,
starts
for
the
premise
of
growth
pays
for
growth
and
in
doing
so,
it's
worth
getting
into
the
details
because
it
actually
lifts
up
the
entire
city.
Section
42
RPAC
park
acquisition
funds
we
are
under
collecting
because
of
the
cap
on
10%
of
the
land
value.
J
When
we
build
a
condo
in
downtown
at
270
units
or
570
units,
we
get
about
the
same
amount
of
money,
and
so
when
we
under
collect
and
park
acquisition,
we
all
across
the
city
fail
and
here's
how
john
Libby
has
explained
that
when
we
bring
forward
tÃo
core
and
a
parkland
strategy
with
it,
we
will
also
be
proposing
to
increase
the
rates
of
section
42.
Is
that
good
for
downtown?
J
It
is
because
50%
of
section
42
stays
in
the
war
25%
to
the
district
and
25%
to
the
city
as
a
whole,
which
means
that
when
you
increase
the
section
42
rates
in
downtown
Toronto
to
pay
for
this
project,
you
increase
the
amount
of
money
to
pay
for
Park
projects
right
across
the
city.
It
is
a
rising
tide
that
lifts
all
boats.
When
you
do
it
right
and
so
is
city
building
about
the
future.
It
should
be.
J
You
have
to
imagine
that
future
before
you
build
it
and
50
years
from
now,
when
we're
sitting
in
rail
deck,
Park
I,
don't
think
anybody's
gonna
sit
out
there
and
say
gee
I
wish
we
built
nine
more
towers.
If
you
go
to
Central
Park
in
New,
York
City
today,
I,
don't
think
anybody's
sitting
in
there
saying
gee
I
wish
we
built
20
towers
here.
I
know
it's
a
big
project
but
city
building
costs,
money
and.
O
Out
you
are
gonna
move
that
the
City
Council
direct,
that
no
funds
be
spent
on
rail
deck
Park
until
city
staff
have
done
a
review
of
all
city
parks
and
identified
and
eliminated
any
deficiencies
and
I
and
the
reason
I
move.
That
is
obvious.
There's
a
lot
of
deficiencies
in
every
one
of
our
wards.
We
have
been
told
for
years
that
we
don't
have
enough
money
to
build
a
playground,
let
alone
even
in
some
cases,
replace
swing,
sets
and
and
now
we're
looking
at
spending
three
billion
dollars.
O
That's
what
they'll
tell
me,
and
so
I
stand
here
saying
to
you
three
billion
dollars.
Are
we
serious-
and
some
of
you
are
actually
going
to
vote
for
this,
knowing
that
there's
also
people
with
air
rights
on
this
site
and
we've
got
to
we've
got
a
legal
matter
at
hand,
and
we
have
to
deal
with
the
equation
of
of
courts
and
get
a
deal
with
the
equation
of
the
rights
of
other
people,
and
we
are
sitting
here
saying
how
wonderful
this
is
going
to
be.
O
O
How
many
times
have
we
stood
up
here,
trying
to
find
the
money
to
be
able
to
deal
with
the
deterioration
of
the
gardener?
How
many
times
have
we
as
constituents
as
councillors,
had
meetings
to
deal
with
the
roads
that
we
have
that
aren't
being
repaired,
because
we
can't
find
the
capital
money?
How
many
times
have
your
constituents
said
that
our
parks
need
addressing
that?
We
can't
cut
the
grass?
O
O
We've
got
three
billion
dollars
to
build
a
brand
new
poodle
park
for
the
City
of
Toronto
I'm
glad
people
are
going
to
have
a
place
where
their
dogs
can
go
and
do
whatever
they
need
to
do,
but
in
my
particular
community,
not
only
don't
we
have
enough
parks,
but
the
ones
we
do
have
are
not
being
tended
to.
So
for
me
to
stand
up
and
support.
O
This
has
got
to
be
the
stupidest
thing
that
I
could
be
doing
as
a
politician
and
I
hope
that
people
are
taking
note
of
this,
because
I
have
a
feeling
that
this
is
going
to
be
much
larger
in
in
in
in
the
next
election
that
you
can
ever
imagine
I,
don't
believe
this
is
going
to
be
be
something
that's
going
to
get
built.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
squashed,
and
the
unfortunate
part
of
this
is
that
we're
given
direction
to
actually
start
spending.
Some
of
this
money.
O
So
give
me
the
option:
my
community
doesn't
want
to
pay
for
this
and
every
time
there
is
a
development
we
don't
get
it.
We
don't
get
anywhere
near
the
amount
of
money
in
in
transfer
payments
for
any
of
the
developments
be
at
section,
37
45
give
it
whatever
name
you
want
it.
We
don't
get
it
and
the
cash
in
lieu
money.
We
have
got
a
split
with
yes,
the
downtown
part
of
the
city,
because
now
we're
asking
for
all
of
that
money
to
be
dipped
into
councillor
cressie.
O
I
I
But
that
is
not
what
is
before
you
and
to
go
out
into
your
communities
and
score
political
points.
By
calling
this
a
poodle
park
worth
more
than
the
report
says
that
it
would
be
worth
based
on
an
estimate
that
is
at
only
5%
of
the
design
and
that
we're
proceeding
with
that
holus
Bhalla,
that's
what's
irresponsible,
and
and
it's
odd,
because
we're
we're
talking
about
a
transit
project,
something
that
is
part
of
the
vision
of
the
city,
we're
fine
with
your
responsibility
and
misinformation
and
an
escalating
costs.
I
Now
you're
looking
at
two
items,
we're
about
to
vote
on
the
zoning
of
this
and
to
end
the
adoption
and
and
the
acceptance
that
the
feasibility
study
says
that
we
should
continue
to
study
whether
or
not
we
can
in
fact
put
this
park
in
place.
And
it
says
that
we
should
zone
today
to
make
it
clear
to
the
development
community
that
this
is
what
we
want.
On
top
of
our
rail
lands
in
this
particular
place,
this
is
what
we
want
to
look
at
being
here,
and
that
is,
as
mr.
I
I
We
have
joined
other
world-class
cities
in
making
sure
that,
in
that
very
financial
service
sector
core
and
whatever,
is
the
financial
driver
of
your
core
city.
We've
chosen
to
mix
residents
with
that
exciting
business
core
we're
not
alone
in
that
all
the
best
things
in
the
world
do
that,
and
so
they
have
to
inject
into
that
core,
that
central
business
district
of
quality
of
life
quotient
and
you
have
to
start
well
in
advance
if
you're
going
to
achieve
it.
I
That's
all
that's
happening
here,
and
so
the
buzz
that
you
want
to
create
around
your
city
that
is
happening
in
places
like
Melbourne,
that
that
happened.
People
have
forgotten
how
very
much
one
foot
on
a
banana
hill,
New
York
City,
was
at
one
time
people
have
forgotten
because
of
the
vision
that
led
to
such
things
as
as
as
the
High
Line,
whatever
the
model
you
use
to
get
it
there.
I
I
H
Madam
Speaker
I
have
asked
stuff
a
couple
of
questions
and
they
got
my
answers
and
one
of
the
answers
and
I
had
miscalculated.
I
had
calculated
76
million
dollars
for
an
acre,
they
told
me
was
over
80.
We
also
heard
from
staff
that
with
80
million
dollars
you
can
certainly
build
to
community
centers.
So
madam
Speaker
we're
looking
at
roughly
20
acres
times,
80
million
comes
out
1.6.
This
is
money
that
we're
going
to
have
to
raise
through
our
tax
base.
H
This
is
money
that
in
40
Ward's
we
can
put
to
community
centers
community
centers
that
are
the
top-of-the-line
community
centers
that
can
have
a
swimming
pool
community
centers
that
can
have
meeting
rooms
community
centers
that
can
it
can
be
there
to
look
after
our
seniors
and
there
and
to
look
after
the
whole
community
in
my
ward,
I
only
have
one
community
center
and
that
community
center
is
not
as
the
community
center
that
40
million
dollars
will
buy.
In
my
ward,
I
have
a
community
center
st.
Paul's
I
mean
that
Lamoreaux
that's
for
25
years.
H
Finding
it
kind
of
hard
I'd
rather
take
the
one
point:
six
six
billion
dollars
and
used
it
towards
start
tumbling
across
Shepherd
subway.
In
order
to
look
after
the
residents
of
Scarborough
north
of
the
401
that
certainly
have
been
forgotten
and
treated
as
second-class
citizens.
So
this
goes
back
to
the
point
of
pitting
downtown
against
the
suburbs,
and
if
we
were
to
spend
this
kind
of
money,
I'm
wondering
how
much
money
are
we
gonna
spend
in
the
suburbs.
H
This
is
looking
after
two
wards
that,
indeed,
could
be
part
of
the
the
hub
of
the
City
of
Toronto
part
of
the
economic
engine
that
runs
Canada,
but
certainly
it's
not
owned
goes
towards.
But
it's
the
whole
City
of
Toronto.
If
you're
going
to
say
that
the
City
of
Toronto
is
an
economic
engine
that
drives
Canada,
then
all
the
parts
of
the
City
of
Toronto
should
be
treated
equally.
H
I
have
not
heard
one
point:
six
six
billion
dollars
being
used,
my
word
in
and
councillor
Kelly's,
Ward's
or
councillor
Chile's
word
or
councillor
mapless
or
anybody
else's.
So
the
question
does
rise.
Why
are
we
going
to
spend
the
one
point?
Six
six
billion
dollars
to
downtown
when
the
air
rights
are
certainly
not
ours.
There
is
a
contravention.
If
there's
there's
all
kinds
of
situations
happening
down
there.
We
are
told
that
a
builder
senator
homes
and
craft
homes
have
acquired
the
air
rights.
We're
told
they're,
not
they've
approached
the
city.
H
They
were
not
given
a
clear
answer:
we're
not
meeting
with
them,
we're
not
telling
them
anything
and
all
of
a
sudden
where
we're
going
straight
down
this
road.
We're
gonna
spend
one
point:
six
six
billion
dollars
a
couple
of
months
ago
was
one
point
one.
So
we
had
a
half
a
billion
within
half
a
year.
So
if
we're
going
to
think
about
this
exponentially,
every
half
a
year
we're
going
to
be
adding
an
extra
half
a
billion
dollars
by
the
time,
we're
finished
that
bill
could
be,
three
billion,
could
be
five
billion.
H
It
even
could
be
higher.
So
therefore,
madam
Speaker
I'm
finding
it
very
hard
to
support
something
like
this.
When
my
residents,
it
takes
them
1.1
hour
and
15
minutes
to
come
downtown
when
staff
are
coming
to
me
and
saying
councilor
were
we
cannot
build
we're
gonna,
get
it
built
you're
go
station,
but
we're
not
going
to
get
your
parking
beside
it.
I
do
not
have
other
means
of
people
to
come
downtown
except
TTC,
and
now
the
gold
train
and
TTC
takes
you
one
and
a
half
hours,
one
1.15
to
one
and
a
half.
H
H
Well,
counselor,
you
like
it
or
not,
they're
still
your
constituents.
There
are
north
of
the
401
and
unless
your
people
live
in
another
place
that
mine
do
we
share
the
constituency
based
in
that
constituency
base
is
saying:
why
are
we
spending
1.6
six
billion
dollars
downtown?
Are
we
children
of
our
lesser
God
and
madam
Speaker
since
I've
come
to
this
place?
They've
been
treated
as
such?
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Q
I
A
Q
B
Q
To
start
off
by
saying,
I
love
the
idea
of
the
of
the
rail
park.
I
really
do
members
of
council
have
a
have
have
to
choose
between
two
basic
options:
you're,
either
an
accountant
or
a
visionary
and
I
think
to
build
a
great
city.
You
have
to
have
a
vision-
and
you
know
just
as
I'm
willing
to
spend
billions
of
dollars
in
Scarborough
for
the
vision
of
Subway's
there
and
everywhere
else
across
the
city
I'm
delighted
to
support
spending
billions
of
dollars
for
the
rail
deck
park.
Q
Q
What
they
didn't
get
what's
that
in
today's
world
and
tomorrow's
as
well
with
that
intense
competition
between
urban
regions
to
attract
the
best
people
and
lots
of
money,
you've
got
to
project
a
cool
brand
and
that's
what
sugar
Beach
did
and
the
number
of
photographs
that
were
taken
of
that
Beach
that
were
shown
worldwide
was
fabulous
and
when
you
close
your
eyes
and
just
feel
what
park
downtown
would
mean
to
this
city
in
attracting
people
and
keeping
people
I
think
that
it's
money
frankly
on
the
long
run,
that's
worth
investing
now.
There's
nothing
in
this.
Q
I
A
You
this
briefly,
you
know
each
member
of
Council
have
projects
in
their
ward
that
they
need
years
ago
in
City
of
York.
I
didn't
have
a
community
center,
so
I
fought
for
this
council
voted
for
the
budget.
We
built
a
community
center
because
we
needed
one
in
my
community
and
I'm
sure
councilor
mama,
ladies,
will
come
forward
shortly
and
wanting
money
for
a
project
in
this
Ward
and
I.
A
But
I
just
want
to
just
mention,
FYI
and,
and
the
deputy
city
manager
did
mention
it.
I
have
a
real
dick
park
in
my
ward
in
Weston.
It's
not
21
acres,
it's
a
small
rail
deck
park,
but
it's
in
Weston
and
it
was
paid
for
by
Metrolinx.
It
was
a
partnership
with
the
school
board
and
we
are
going
to
what
we're
going
to
build
a
playground.
An
off-leash
dog
park
in
the
community
garden-
and
you
know-
and
my
community
is
so
excited
about
and
has
been
built.
A
S
Madam
madam
Deputy
Speaker,
so
I
want
to
stand
in
support
of
moving
forward
with
exploring
how
we
can
build
rail
deck.
Park
and
I
want
to
acknowledge
the
leadership
of
both
mayor
Tory
and
the
local
counselor
counselor
Cressy
for
making
sure
that
as
obstacles
are
in
our
way
that
they
work
together
on
trying
to
resolve,
trying
to
figure
out
a
way
through
them.
As
we
said,
I
think
by
councillor
Kelley.
This
is
not
simple.
S
This
is
not
a
slam
dunk
and
we
we
don't
have
the
funds
and
we
don't
have
even
the
full
rights
to
the
property.
That
being
said,
though,
the
vision
is
based
on
evidence.
We
know
that
there
is
already
enormous
intensification
in
the
Corps,
and
we
know,
based
on
staff
reports,
that
there
is
an
enormous
deficiency
in
access
to
parkland
in
that
area.
S
We
also
know
for
a
fact
that
there
is
projected
further
intensification
beyond
imagination
in
that
area,
so
the
people
who
live
there
currently
need
more
access
to
park
space,
but
also
the
future
Torontonians
are
going
to
be
living
in
that
community
or
those
who
might
live
from
up
live
currently
in
other
areas.
Who
might
move
to
that
area?
S
Need
access
to
park
land
too,
so
I
wanted
to
just
express
my
support
for
what
I
think
is
visionary
and
something
that
all
of
Toronto
can
be
proud
of,
but
speaking
of
of
Toronto,
we
heard
a
lecture
earlier
from
councillor
Mammalia
about.
We
shouldn't
be
doing
this,
even
though
we're
not
spend
appending
today,
because
there
are
parks
that
need
attention
in
the
city.
But
it's
not
an
either/or
question.
Yes,
we
need
to
improve
our
parks
throughout
the
city.
S
It's
one
thing:
if
you
agree
or
disagree
with
rail
deck
Park,
but
I
call
it
poodle,
Park
I,
don't
know
if
it
looks
bad
on
the
poodles
or
him,
but
it's
bad.
This
is
also
a
member
who's
talked
about
wasting
money.
Well,
let
me
just
read
you
something.
This
is
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
alleging
anything
I'm.
Just
reading
something
here
from
cbc.ca
that
cancer
mammal
eating
on
a
four-day
trip
to
Ottawa
chose
to
stay
at
the
Chateau
Laurier.
M
M
Colleague
is
not
here
to
defend
himself
and
I
and
I
and
I.
Well,
he's
not
he's
not
right
here
in
the
chamber
to
defend
himself
and
I
and
I'd
like
you
to
rule
his
comments
out
of
order
and
maybe
ask
him
to
withdrawal
them
because
I'm
he's
not
speaking
to
them,
he's
not
speaking
to
the
issue
at
hand,
which
is
the
rail
deck
park,
I
think
we're
all
concerned.
We
prefer
to
be
just
stuck
to
the
issue
at
hand.
There.
H
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Madam
Speaker
I'm.
Looking
for
your
guidance,
I
think
the
the
thing
in
question
is
the
railways
park
at
the
rail
deck
park
and
we
speak
into
that
we're
not
speaking
about
what
somebody
spent
outside
the
outside
of
the
city,
business,
we're
not
speaking
about
something
else.
That
says
if,
if
the
member
has
comments
specifically
to
that,
I
would
say
to
you
that
he
has
to
stick
to
that
and
not
take
on
other
colleagues
what
they've
done
and
what
they
haven't
done
or
what
they
said
or
what
they
haven't
said.
H
A
O
I,
while
I'm
entertained
by
by
councillor
Matt
low
and
his
version
of
what
is
responsible
or
not,
there's
a
clear
difference
between
an
FCM
conference
in
which
a
hotel
costs
a
significant
amount,
the
money,
that's
the
hotel's,
they
choose
two
three
billion
dollars
for
a
poodle
park,
and
so,
if
you
want
to,
if
you
want
counselor
model
through
the
chair
to
compare
a
conference,
that
I
was
at
and
the
cost
of
a
hotel
that
the
FCM
chooses
as
one
of
their
venues
over
a
three
billion
dollar
poodle
park
go
for
it
go
for
it.
Okay,.
A
A
H
S
Just
because
council
may
support
moving
forward
with
and
again
I'd
like
to
support
a
seven
stop
LRT
in
in
Scarborough.
The
mayor
would
like
a
one
stop
subway,
but
I
believe
we
both
care
about
Scarborough
just
because
councillor
cressie
and
the
mayor
and
others
would
like
to
see
a
rail
deck
park,
be
manifested
doesn't
mean
that
they
don't
care
about
a
park
in
councilor,
mammal,
Edie's
ward,
so
to
suggest
otherwise
not
only
is
unhelpful.
It's
wrong.
S
It
doesn't
help
us
and
it
doesn't
help
the
people
in
councilor
crises
Ward
who
may
one
day
decide
to
live
in
councilor
memory.
Ladies
Ward
or
counselor
do
channels
forward
or
anywhere
else,
and
vice
versa,
in
other
words,
we're
all
Torontonians.
We
all
rely
on
the
same
transit
system.
We
all
enjoy
and
use
our
parks,
and
we
all
recognize
that
we
need
to
use
evidence
and
facts
to
support
where
we
make
investments
today.
T
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
so
I'm
just
over
here,
because
I'm
gonna
use
the
overhead
in
a
minute,
but
I
will
just
say
from
my
experience.
Working
with
our
dynamic
Park
staff,
I've
never
had
a
problem
getting
things
done
in
my
parks.
In
fact,
in
the
seven
short
years
I've
been
here
that
we've
had
I
worked
well
with
them.
T
They've
worked
great
together
with
me
to
improve,
make
an
improvement
in
every
single
one
of
my
parks
in
my
ward,
because
that
was
something
we
did
together
so
I'm,
not
sure
why
it
takes
another
counselor
who's
been
in
for
17
years
and
unable
to
get
the
grass
cut
or
a
swing
set
or
other
improvements.
So
I'm
really
surprised
at
that,
but
I
just
want
to
talk
about.
Why
why
we
need
rail,
deck,
Park
and
I'll.
T
We
other
cities
are
doing
in
other
world-class
cities,
so
you
have
Mel
our
sorry
Melbourne
in
Chicago
we
know
Millennium,
Park,
Boston,
Texas,
sorry,
Dallas,
Texas
and
Munich
and
Toronto
next.
So
it's
not
some
off-the-wall
idea,
random
idea.
It
has
been
done
successfully
in
other
cities
and
will
be
done
in
Toronto.
You
know
we're
always
talking
about
the
the
suburbs
coming
up
short
with
every
single
thing.
T
Well,
the
suburbs
do
not
come
up
short
with
with
nature
with
green,
so
we
want
to
talk
about
equity,
and
this
is
why
we
should
do
rail
deck
park,
equity
of
green
space
and
and
how
downtown
errs
are
actually
deprived
of
parkland
and
there's
your
there's.
Your
comparison,
in
fact,
escargot
is,
is
much
higher
than
the
the
average
of
amount
of
green
space
per
per
resident,
and
so
I
just
want
you
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
realize
it's
not
again.
It's
not
a
divisive
suburbs
against
the
downtown
argument
it
is.
T
It
is
green
space
benefits
everyone,
as
we
know,
mentally
physically
and
spiritually.
Access
to
nature
improves,
improves
your
quality
of
life
and
and
your
happiness.
So
it's
not
anything
untoward
against
the
suburbs
and
as
far
as
the
money
that
issue
as
to
why
it's
not
we're
looking
at
other
all
kinds
of
creative
outside
the
box.
T
F
You
speaker,
one
of
the
earlier
speakers
on
this
item,
mentioned
that
all
parts
of
the
city
should
be
treated
equally
and
I.
Agree
100%.
You
know,
as
the
councillor
who
probably
represents.
Maybe
the
greenest
ward
in
this
city
I
stand
up
and
support
100%
rail
deck
Park.
You
know
my
son
moved
downtown
this
summer
to
one
King
Street
West
and
he
said
to
me
two
things:
daddy
says:
I
love
it
downtown,
it's
so
vibrant,
there's
so
much
to
do.
F
A
C
F
You
know
after
we
will
be
dealt
with
strategy,
we'll
be
paying
towards
financing
this
park,
and
every
resident
in
Toronto
deserves
to
have
good
space
and
when
a
councillor
stands
up
and
categorizes
it
as
that
you're
going
to
lose
all
your
money
to
be
to
us
to
be
put
to
us
the
real
deck
park.
It
is
this
ingenious
and
attention-getting
attention-getting
okay,
and
he
was
right
he's
trying
to
get
attention.
F
Okay
and
I
think
my
colleague
here
keeps
mention
in
my
name
that
I
need
things
in
my
area.
Yes,
the
only
things
in
our
area,
but
she
has
LEM
repop,
which
is
a
nice
Park
in
the
area
with
a
kiss'
town
in
it.
Okay,
beautiful
kids,
town
and
LEM
rural
community
center
I
have
a
district
park
in
my
area
called
Milliken
Park.
All
of
us
do
most
of
us
in
the
sub
of
doom.
It's
not
a
suburb
downtown
divided.
F
N
You
speaker,
I'm,
rising
to
speak
in
favor
of
the
recommendations
before
us.
I
do
support
the
creation
of
green
space
recreational
spaces
in
any
areas
of
the
city
that
are
part
and
efficient.
This
part
of
town
in
the
downtown
it's
parkland
efficient
tremendously
as
the
area's
gentrifying
as
water
parts
of
the
city
as
well.
There
is
a
need
for
more
green
space.
Recreational
space,
the
Union
Station
rail
corridor,
presents
an
opportunity
of
a
lifetime
and
and
I
think
this
is
what
he
means.
N
N
The
same
thing
can
be
said
in
other
parts
of
the
city
that
we
are
parkland
deficient.
For
example,
in
my
own
community,
but
I'm
speaker
and
members
of
the
council
were
seventeen
Davenport
is
very
parkland.
Efficient
and
I've
been
asking
our
city
staff
for
years
to
help
us
to
acquire
some
land
either
through
the
hydro
land
corridor
is
that
we
have
plenty
of
space
that
can
be
acquired
at
very
little
cost
through
lease
agreements.
N
By
doing
so,
we
are
bringing
some
life
and
vitality
to
these
communities
that
need
so
much
and
what's
the
cost,
just
the
operational
costs
as
simple
as
that
now
there
is
no
question
that,
with
this
proposed
part
that
we're
talking
in
a
downtown
that's
going
to
bring
tremendous
benefits
not
only
to
the
local
residents
there,
but
as
I
mentioned
before,
to
tourists
and
city
in
general,
and
this
is
an
opportunity
of
a
lifetime.
A
city's,
a
city
staff
has
knowledge.
N
This
once-in-a-generation
opportunity
that
we
shouldn't
miss
I
know
that
this
Park
has
other
lands
that
have
the
potential
of
creating
what
we
really
need
and
people
treasure
will
increase
the
quality
of
life,
health
and
sustainability
of
ultra
truant.
In
this
case,
in
the
downtown
of
our
beautiful
city.
That's
one
of
the
reasons
that
I
do
support
wholeheartedly
what's
before
us.
Thank
you
very
good.
N
G
You
Spearman
speaker
Speaker
I,
rise
in
support
of
the
item
in
front
of
us
to
advance
the
stage
to
work
plan
for
rail
deck
park.
As
a
member
of
council
who
represents
an
area,
that's
outside
of
the
downtown
core.
I
just
wanted
to
draw
your
attention
to
the
fact
that
I've
had
discussions
with
my
residents
about
rail
deck
Park
and
in
fact
that
the
conversation
was.
Why
do
we
need
it?
Why
do
we
want
to
spend
money
on
it?
It's
no
good
to
me.
G
G
You
know
in
recommendation
number
three
talks
about
how
we're
looking
at
raising
funds
to
support.
Obviously,
the
development
of
rail
deck
park,
whether
or
not
at
the
end
of
the
day
we'll
be
named
rail
debt
park.
I,
don't
know,
but
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
that
we
have
seen
council
Mary,
Margaret
McMahon
has
actually
put
on
the
screen
what
other
cities
around
the
world
are
doing
if
this
city
and
if
members
of
council
are
in
fact
inclined
to
develop
and
doing
what's
best
for
the
city.
G
This
is
one
of
those
initiative
that
we
have
to
stand
behind,
because
it
has
huge
ramifications
of
benefits.
Yes,
it
does
have
an
issue
with
respect
to
costs
and
the
question
is
always:
we
don't
have
the
money.
Where
does
the
money
come
from?
We
bought.
We
made
plans
to
to
buy
light
rail
vehicles
when
we
had
no
funds,
but
we've
actually
got
the
vehicle
some
of
there
on
the
street,
some
of
them
we're
waiting
for
we've
made
a
lot
of
plans
with
respect
to
not
having
the
resources
readily
available.
G
Fact
of
the
matter
is
that,
if
everything
that
we
did
here
was
done
based
on
the
absolute
certainty
and
assurance
that
we
had
all
of
the
money's
in
the
bank-
and
we
can
just
put
the
shovel
on
the
ground
quite
frankly,
that
would
be
an
amazing
opportunity,
but
we
know
that
we
deal
with
scarce
resources
and
so
on.
We
have
a
tangible,
solid
plan
in
order
to
go
forward
with
staffs
working
on
it.
G
The
mayor's
leadership
has
been
invaluable
to
this
whole
particular
process
and
as
someone
who
represents
an
area,
that's
outside
of
the
downtown
I
can
assure
you
that
my
residents
will
benefit.
We
have
not
even
began
to
explore
the
full
economic
impact
that
will
be
created
by
having
this
innovative
a
park,
utilizing
technology
and
design
and
so
on.
There'll
be
immense
benefit
that
will
come
to
the
residents
of
Toronto
I,
submit
to
you
speaker
that
our
job
isn't
to
be
parochial.
G
Our
job
is
to
build
the
city
to
bring
things
together
and
look
at
its
best
interest.
What
do
we
do
for
that?
Next
generation?
We
have
an
area
that
is
really
a
bit
of
a
blight
on
Toronto
that
we
have
an
opportunity
really
to
to
engage
it
to
basically
bring
a
sense
of
Renaissance
and
renewal
in
this
area.
We
have
a
plan
to
do
that.
G
We
ought
not
to
simply
talk
about
the
fact
that
well
I,
don't
have
a
rail
deck
park,
so
council
Cressy
can't
have
a
rail
deck
park
and
I
don't
have
this
and
I
don't
have
that,
so
you
can't
have
it
either.
That
is
not
the
reasons
why
we're
here?
The
reasons
why
we're
here
are
to
make
good
effective
decisions
in
the
best
interests
of
this
city.
There's
economic
benefit,
there's
social
benefits.
G
I
can
tell
you
speaker
when
I
lived
at
Harbourfront
many
years
ago,
I
used
to
walk
around
with
my
young
son
and
push
him
in
his
stroller
people
from
across
the
city
would
go
to
Harbourfront,
because
really
that
was
their
vacation
spot.
That
was
their
cottage
in
the
city.
The
contribution
that
the
city
continues
to
make
to
harborfront
is
the
benefits
to
all
residents,
not
just
the
residents
from
the
immediate
waterfront
area.
G
I
use
that
as
a
minor
example
with
respect
to
rail
deck
park,
having
travel
and
having
done
a
lot
of
work
and
economic
development
for
this
city
on
behalf
of
an
economical,
you
see
around
the
world
what
other
cities
are
doing?
If
we
are
a
world-class
city
and
if
we
aspire
to
be
such
we
ought
to
be
innovative,
we
ought
to
be
progressive.
This
is
a
progressive
innovated
aspect
of
our
advancement
in
our
development
and
I.
F
F
So
it
very
important
for
us
to
keep
that
in
mind
and
to
be
able
to
be
respectful
that
a
family-friendly,
downtown
is
is
a
must
for
us
as
we
move
forward
and
so
I'm
in
strong
support
of
this
and
I.
Think
if
you
want
to
build
a
strong
generation
of
citizens
residents
in
the
City
of
Toronto,
we
have
to
be
able
to
provide
a
wholesome
experience
for
our
children.
The
second
thing
I
want
to
kind
of
caution,
though,
is
that
I
know
a
councillor.
F
Christy
mentioned
CN
tower
and
Turner
Zoo
as
examples
those
aren't
perfectly
the
most
affordable
or
accessible
places.
So
I
would
like
to
see
this
even
one
step
further,
because
I
know
that
in
my
area
there
is
turn
on
zoo,
but
a
lot
of
my
residents
haven't
even
stepped
in
to
turn
our
zoo
I
know
there
are
a
lot
of
Toronto
nians
who
haven't
been
to
anywhere
on
top
of
the
CN
Tower.
So
I
think
this
has
to
be
an
equalizer.
F
If
you
vision
this,
if
you
are
trying
to
vision
a
park
in
the
downtown,
it
has
to
be
an
equalizer,
it
has
to
be
a
place
that
is
affordable.
It
has
to
be
a
place,
that's
accessible
in
all
forms
of
the
way
and
to
be
as
much
as
possible
in
public
hands.
So
I
know
they
have
a
lot
of
conversations
around
downtown
versus
Scarborough.
F
Support
initiative
like
rail,
Lake
Park,
feel,
like
our
version
of
our
cries
of
our
realities,
are
not
attended
to
as
much,
but
that
is
the
frustration
some
of
us
have,
but
that
doesn't
take
away
from
the
fact
we
stand
here
and
support
a
visionary
project
like
this,
because
vision
is
what
is
important,
so
I
hope
when
we
talk
about
transit
planning,
when
we
talk
about
housing
planning,
there
is
a
vision
that
is
attested
to
it.
Not
just
kind
of
talking
about
this
is
too
much
money.
F
This
is
too
much
money
because
sometimes
we
see
some
of
the
most
progressive
voices
complaining
about
a
lot
of
money
being
spent
on
things
that
we
need
to
be
spent
on.
So
I
would
caution
with
that
and
say
you
know.
This
is
why
player
of
support
to
rail
jackpot.
This
is
a
visionary
thing
in
our
city.
This
is
gonna,
be
a
great
equalizer
for
people
who
need
to
grow
their
families
in
downtown
in
a
wholesome,
environmentally
friendly
atmosphere
and
I'm.
Looking
forward
to
seeing
this
flourish
in
the
coming
years.
Thank
you.
Thank.
R
Thank
you,
Speaker
I,
just
begin
quickly
by
echoing
I
guess
most
councillors
in
here,
but
you
know,
steal
a
page
from
councillor
Kelly's
book
you
know.
Definitely
our
city
would
benefit
from
a
project
like
this.
It
should
not
be
about
the
suburbs
and
the
downtown
core.
This
would
be
an
amazing
opportunity
for
not
only
those
that
live
here
in
all
corners
of
the
city,
but
for
those
that
come
there's
no
doubt
about
it.
But
what
we're
trying
to
address
here
is
how
we're
gonna
pay
for
it
and
I.
R
Think
it's
upon
us
to
be
honest
about
it.
You
know.
The
fact
of
the
matter
is
that
the
train
has
left
the
station.
Okay,
the
this
type
of
a
plan
when
that
kind
of
intensification
came
this
downtown
core
starting
15
years
ago.
That's
when
this
plan
should
have
been
put
into
place,
so
you've
got
developers
now
that
are
long
gone
with
the
money
and
we're
trying
to
put
together
some
kind
of
formula,
because
we
don't
want
to
say
that
the
taxpayer
in
this
city
is
gonna
pay
for
the
majority
of
the
park.
R
That's
the
fact:
they're
gonna
pay
for
the
majority
of
the
park.
I
think
we
need
to
be
honest
with
people.
It's
not
saying
that
we
don't
need
it.
We
do
I'm
happy
that
the
the
current
our
current
mayor
brought
this
forward
because
it's
something
we
need,
but
but
we
failed
in
this
council
chamber
20
years
ago,
when
a
vision
wasn't
brought
forward
and
the
the
ultimate
result
is
gonna,
be
that
the
taxpayers
across
the
entire
city
are
gonna
pay
for
this.
R
When
I
look
at
the
recommendations,
where
section
42
cash
in
lieu
collected
from
development
and
activity
be
applied
towards
project
costs
in
a
way
that
that's
not
negatively
affect
the
impact
on
parkland
revenue
generated
from
other
areas
of
the
city.
Good
luck!
How
does
that
work?
So
I'm
I'm
hopeful,
but
I'm
I
have
a
lot
of
doubt
about
that.
R
You
know
phased
approach
for
implementation.
The
construction
rail
deck
park
does
that
make
it
more
expensive.
What
I
really
like
is.
It
is
number
seven-
and
this
is
probably
the
the
biggest
structural
problem
in
our
city
when
it
comes
to
building
out
infrastructure.
Why
we're
deficient
in
all
aspects
of
infrastructure,
not
just
in
parkland
in
the
city
and
number
seven?
R
It
says:
city
council
requests
a
province
of
Ontario
to
amend
the
development
charges
Act
of
1997
and
to
make
necessary
regulation
in
order
to
exempt
rail
day
park
from
all
these
different
types
of
service
levels
that
this
this
horrible
development
Chargers
Act
stipulates.
We
must
adhere
to
that's
the
problem
right
there,
the
province
when
they
reviewed
the
development
charges
act
over
the
last
few
years.
I
was
there
on
behalf
of
counsel,
to
depute,
on
the
needs
of
this
city,
told
us
to
take
a
hike
okay.
R
So
it's
it's
good
that
it's
in
there,
but
it's
the
province
who
refuses
to
ensure
that
development,
or
in
developers
paid
for
the
infrastructure
they
need
to
bring
people
into
the
city.
It's
not
working,
it's
very
broken
and
until
they
step
up
and
I
remember
when
I
depute
it
on
behalf
of
this
council
and
I
said
that
developers
are
not
paying
their
fair
share.
That
increasing
the
price
of
development
charges
would
not
increase
the
price
of
homes.
R
I,
remember
I,
guess
he's
now
the
the
minister
of
housing,
who
was
there
on
behalf
of
the
on
behalf
of
the
province
that
looked
at
me
and
said,
but
isn't
Toronto,
have
the
lowest
tax
jurisdiction
in
all
the
GTA?
And
that's
really
you
know
it
paints
a
real
picture
with
the
provinces
thinking
so
just
because
we're
the
lowest
tax
citizen,
the
developer
shouldn't,
have
to
pay.
We
should
just
raise
our
taxes,
so,
let's,
let's
understand
the
rail
that
park
is,
is
a
must.
It
has
to
happen.
R
Great
cities
have
infrastructure
like
this,
but
we're
gonna
pay
for
it,
because
the
developers
are
long
gone,
the
ones
that
are
coming
now
if
we
increase
development
charges
or
cash
in
lieu,
it's
because
they're
already
paying
too
low
and
we've
got
all
kinds
of
needs
across
this
city.
We
just
need
to
be
honest
with
people
I'll
be
supporting
this,
but
I'll
be
looking
really
really
closely
at
how
we're
really
gonna
pay
for
this
in
the
coming
years.
Thank
you.
Thank.
D
Very
much
madam
Speaker
and
I
found
this
to
be
a
very
interesting
and
constructive
debate.
I
think
pretty
well
without
exception
and
I
appreciate
that
I
think
we
all
do,
and
it
probably
shows
this
council
at
its
best
I'll,
come
back
to
the
matter
of
something
that
has
been
described
as
a
dog
when,
in
fact,
I
think
it
is
a
shining
example
of
what
we
should
be
doing
here.
But
I
want
to
begin
by
thanking
our
staff.
This
is
something
that's
been
sort
of.
D
The
idea
has
been
kind
of
floating
around
for
a
while,
and
all
I
did
was
to
kind
of
say:
look,
let's
really
do
some
work
on
this
and
take
it
seriously
and,
of
course,
the
work
that
has
to
get
done,
gets
done
by
staff
in
the
city
and
I.
Think
they've
done
a
great
job,
bringing
it
this
far
and
starting
to
bring
it
to
life
as
an
idea
with
some
of
the
facts
becoming
better
known
to
us
now
and
there's
lots
more,
of
course,
to
be
done.
D
I
I
have
the
I
have
both
the
luxury
and
the
obligation
and
my
job
of
looking
at
everything
from
the
standpoint
of
the
entire
city.
I,
don't
have
a
smaller
part
of
the
city
that
I
represent.
I
represent
everybody,
every
single
neighborhood
that
all
of
you
represented
as
individuals
and
and
and
I,
can
tell
you
what
a
privilege
and
a
joy
that
it
is
and
I
find
that
when
I
go
across
the
city
as
I
do
a
lot
to
a
lot
of
different
events.
D
People
actually
take
much
more
of
a
kind
of
all
for
one
and
one
for
all
approach
than
we
think
and
those
who
come
here
and
say
my
people
don't
want
this.
For
the
city,
don't
want
things
that
are
good,
I,
think
don't
fully
represent,
or
maybe
they're
just
listening
to
people
to
tell
them
what
they
want
to
hear.
I.
Think
people
understand
the
fact
that
the
quality
of
life
in
the
city
as
a
whole
is
what
is
going
to
define
us.
D
York
is
good
for
Etobicoke
and
I
actually
believe.
Most
of
the
people
collectively
represent
I
represent
them
all
and
in
the
the
privileged
position
I
have,
but
that's
the
way
they
feel
too.
Sometimes
it
takes
some
persuading.
It
takes
certainly
a
degree
of
responsibility
to
to
sort
of
acknowledge
that
something
that's
going
to
help
your
neighbor
is
something
that's
good
for
you,
I,
remember,
I,
don't
know
how
many
of
you
remember.
D
The
the
documentary
called
sicko,
which
was
about
the
health
care
system,
was
one
of
those
Michael
Moore
documentaries,
and
he
was
on
a
golf
cart
with
a
Canadian
doctor
and
he
was
trying
to
make
the
case,
of
course,
that
our
health
care
system
is
better
and
he
turns
the
darker
he
says
now.
He
says
people
that
live
here.
D
They
pay
their
health
premiums
and
don't
think
it
upset
when
they
don't
have
any
health
problems
and
the
guy
down
the
street
has
a
you
know,
quadruple
bypass
and
it
cost
the
system
a
fortune
and
the
doctor
I
was
I
was
very
proud
to
be
Canadian.
As
the
doctor
just
turned
him
and
said:
no,
don't
you
understand.
D
That's
the
whole
idea
that
we
do
these
things
together
and
that
we
build
up
a
great
country
and
make
sure
we
all
stay
healthy
and
it's
the
same
with
building
parks
and
building
transit
and
and
looking
after
people
who
need
a
shelter
and
so
I.
Just
think
this
is
a
project
will
at
one
on
the
same
time.
D
Be
yes,
something
that
is
going
to
remedy
a
deficiency
that
exists
in
the
downtown
with
respect
to
parkland,
and
you
know,
council,
D
channels,
right
I
mean
that
a
lot
that
was
allowed
to
happen
over
a
long
period
of
time,
not
deliberately
by
people
who
said,
let's
sit
around
and
make
sure
there's
no
parks
downtown,
but
we
somehow
managed
to
pass
the
developments
easier
than
we
managed
to
approve
the
parks.
And,
secondly,
it
is
going
to
be
an
iconic
Park
for
people
across
the
city.
D
They
will
come
and
visit
it
by
the
thousands
and
by
the
millions,
as
they
do
look
no
further
than
London
and
New,
York
and
and
other
cities.
You
could
name
a
whole
bunch
of
cities
where
these
great
public
attractions
attract
people
from
all
over
those
cities
because
they
want
to
be
there
to
enjoy
it
and
then,
finally,
of
course,
this
is
going
to
be
a
park
that
is
going
to
attract
people
from
all
over
the
world.
D
It's
going
to
be
iconic
because,
further
to
their
comments
of
counselor
Shannon
we're
going
to
do
it
right
and
we're
gonna.
Do
it
accessible,
we're
gonna,
do
it
that
it
is
just
a
place.
People
want
to
be,
and
so
I
just
think
again.
You
know.
People
who
talk
about
it
being
the
suburbs
versus
downtown
are
are
playing
political
games.
That's
what
they're
doing,
because
this
is
about
the
city
as
a
whole
and
everybody
benefiting
it
and
I'd.
Look
at
the
cost,
madam
Speaker
and
I
say
well.
The
cost
versus
buying
parks
in
small
chunks.
D
We've
heard
about
that.
The
cost
of
this
is
no
more
or
even
less,
perhaps
than
the
cost
of
buying
a
whole
bunch
of
little
parks
that
you
could
barely
have.
Three
families
have
a
picnic
in
if
you're
buying
this
land
downtown
or
in
lots
of
parts
of
the
city
and,
of
course,
then
there's
the
cost
relative
to
doing
nothing,
which
I
think
is
a
huge
cost
that
nobody
will
thank
us
for
in
25
years
and
I
will
just
ask
two
questions.
D
To
conclude,
madam
speaker
number
one:
what
will
people
be
saying
about
this
in
25
years
and
I
believe
if
one
of
the
tests
that
I
certainly
try
to
apply
to
myself
is
what
are
the
things
we're
doing
today?
That
will
make
sure
we're
one
of
the
most
livable
cities
in
the
world
in
25
years,
because
those
are
the
decisions
we
make
today.
D
C
C
A
D
D
A
A
K
A
A
Can
you
hear
me
okay,
it's
25
to
6
and
we
are
going
to
one
recess
at
6
o'clock.
So
my
recommendation
is:
we
have
a
couple
of
members
motions
that
have
to
be
introduced
and
why
don't
we
see
if
we
can
do
some
quick
items
right,
there's
no
point
of
starting
the
next
item,
because
we've
only
got
20
minutes.
Ok,.
C
A
A
A
A
A
To
move
that,
and
also
just
thank
everyone
for
credible
work
in
getting
us
to
this
point,
including
councillor
Crawford,
who
has
showed
tremendous
leadership
in
consolidating
these
theaters
and
also
to
all
the
economic
development
staff
that
have
made
this
possible.
Okay.
Thank
you.
So,
on
page
five,
vx2
at
twenty
nine
point,
eight
councillor
Fletcher
is
releasing
on
favor
carried.