►
From YouTube: City Council - October 3, 2019 - Part 1 of 2
Description
City Council, meeting 10, October 3, 2019 - Part 1 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=15356
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IO4atrbDl8
Meeting Navigation:
0:07:36 - Meeting resume
A
B
Speaker
very
beautifully,
madam
Speaker.
Thank
you.
I've
circulated
it
so
that
members
of
council
would
be
able
to
see
it
for
themselves,
but
I
just
wanted
to
formally
confirm
my
receipt
of
a
letter
from
the
Honorable
Todd
Smith,
the
minister
of
Children
and
community
and
social
services,
and
it
pertains
to
a
matter
that
we
were
going
to
be
dealing
with
today
and
I.
Think
deputy
mayor,
Councillor
Thompson
will
deal
with
the
disposition
of
that
matter
for
your
consideration.
But
it
comes
as
very
good
news.
B
They
have
reconsidered
the
decision
they
had
made
with
respect
to
the
transition
child
benefit
which,
as
you
know,
we
had
made
representation
representations
to
them
that
the
removal
of
this
benefit
was
going
to
be
very
bad,
in
particular
for
the
families
who
relied
on
and
the
children
in
particular
and
to
the
point.
Where
was
going
to
put
great
stress
on
our
own,
we
felt
our
own
housing,
shelter
and
social
service
support
system
because
of
them
leaving
this
field.
B
So
I
just
wanted
to
draw
that
to
everyone's
attention
to
make
sure
they
got
a
copy
of
that
letter
and,
as
I
say,
deputy
mayor
Councillor
Thompson
will
a
deal
with
with
the
matter
that
was
to
have
been
in
front
of
us
this
morning,
which,
which
is
no
longer
necessary
to
do.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank.
A
A
Members
of
council,
we
will
not
review
and
confirm
the
order
paper.
There
are
49
items
left
on
the
edge
on
the
agenda,
including
29
member
motions.
Yesterday,
council
decided
to
consider
item
pH
8.1
on
the
review
of
electrical
systems
at
Toronto,
Community
Housing,
update
on
maintenance
and
upgrade
processes
for
electrical
services
as
the
first
item
of
business
this
morning,
council
also
timed
item
e
acts
8.9
on
the
elimination
of
the
transition
child
benefit
as
the
first
item
after
member
motions.
A
This
afternoon,
however,
in
light
of
the
mayor's
announcement
this
morning,
I
understand
that
the
chair
of
economic
and
Community
Development
will
be
placing
a
motion
to
receive
that
item
for
information.
City
Council
will
consider.
Member
motions
at
2:00
p.m.
I
will
now
take
the
release
of
polls.
Please
put
your
name
under
request
to
question
staff.
C
You
very
much,
madam
Speaker
and
good
morning
in
light
of
the
mayor's
positive
comment
and
the
direction
of
the
province
and
the
minister
I
would
like
at
this
time
to
place
a
motion
that
City
Council
receive
the
item
for
information,
and
that
item
is
e^x
8.9,
helping
residents
impacted
by
the
elimination
of
the
transition.
Childcare
benefit.
I.
Don't
need
to
speak
any
further,
madam
Speaker
other
than
to
say
that
this
is
a
great
relief
and
Thank
You
mayor
for
your
leadership
on
this
item,
and
certainly
thank
the
premier
as
well.
C
A
E
A
A
C
C
C
H
A
A
A
K
Counselor
flexure
is
here.
My
first
question
is
to
Deputy:
Chief
am
Jessica
from
trial
fire.
Can
you
describe
the
history
of
the
fire
incidents
and
tcht
buildings
from
a
citywide
perspective
and
the
difference
between
the
frequency
of
fires
between
tcht
and
managed
buildings
and
contracted
outbuildings.
K
L
Through
the
speaker,
so
a
couple
points
so
certainly
in
terms
of
convictions
in
2019,
so
far,
Toronto
Community
Housing
has
been
convicted
in
Provincial
Offences
court
and
fined
over
$200,000.
When
we
broke
that
down
the
fines
for
the
contract,
managed
buildings
were
a
hundred
and
twenty
four
thousand,
as
opposed
to
seventy-six
thousand
for
TCH
managed.
L
We've
noted
a
number
of
our
most
egregious
violations,
some
of
them
candidly,
almost
impacting
the
safety
of
firefighters
over
the
last
year
or
two
have
occurred
in
contract,
manage
billing
and
hence
I,
approached
the
new
president,
CEO
Kevin
Marshman
earlier
the
summer
and
brought
this
to
his
attention.
You
know
for
his
review
and
I
believe
that
the
CEO
has
has
already
done
some
analysis,
so
certainly
the
observations
of
toronto.
Fire
is
there's
a
distinct
difference
for
sure
and.
K
L
Again
through
the
speaker,
false
alarms
continue
to
be.
You
know
an
issue
so
in
2019,
and
the
numbers
are
very,
very
consistent.
So
between
2018
and
2019,
approximately
3,500
to
4,000
false
fire
alarms
have
occurred
in
Toronto,
Community
Housing
buildings
and
when
we
look
at
the
breakdown
between
those
that
are
managed
by
Toronto
Community
Housing
and
those
that
are
contract,
managed.
27
percent
of
those
false
alarms
are
occurring
in
contract.
Manage
billing
the
false
alarm
fees
that
I
can
tell
you
are
up-to-date.
L
As
of
yesterday,
when
we
had
Toronto
Fire
Services
Finance
check
on
average
Toronto
Community
Housing
has
been
paying
Toronto
fire,
approximately
three
million
dollars
a
year
over
the
last
three
years
for
false
fire
alarms.
Unfortunately,
counselor
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
break
down
the
fine
structure
between
TCH
managing
contract,
managed
buildings.
Thank.
K
You
that's
very
helpful.
My
next
question
is
to
MLS
in
your
earlier
report
to
Council
entitled
vital
service
disruptions
and
apartment
buildings.
You
recommended
that
building
owners
and
operators
develop
a
electrical
maintenance
plan.
You
reference,
Z
4,
6,
3
18
electrical
system
standard
and
is
that
the
standard
that
MLS
recommends
residential
building
owners
and
operators
use.
H
K
So
didn't
just
because
this
is
a
pretty
important
issue.
My
next
question
is
to
electrical
safe
safety.
Authority
would
ESA
recommend
that
TC
HC
or
the
city
adopt
the
electrical
standard
maintenance
program
of
Z
4
6
3
18
for
the
maintenance
of
TC
HC
residential
buildings,
because
we're
asking
this
of
privately
owned
buildings?
Should
we
adhere
to
that
same
standard.
H
K
K
M
H
N
N
L
Councillor
actual
structure,
fires
in
2018,
Toronto,
Community
Housing
had
201
and
as
of
today
in
2019,
we've
responded
to
actual
confirmed
structure,
fires
130
again
between
2018
and
2019.
The
those
represent
20
about
22
to
20%,
consistently
occurring
in
the
contract,
managed
buildings
and
then
the
those
total
fires,
so
the
201
and
2018
and
130.
So
far
in
2019
represents
6%
of
all
of
the
total
structure.
Fires.
Toronto
Fire
has
responded
to
citywide.
Yes,.
L
N
All
right-
and
this
is
a
strange
question-
and
you
probably
can't
answer
it
yet,
but
because
it
really
has
to
do
with
large
apartment
owners
in
the
city,
there
are
some
landlords
that
are
fairly
large
and
just
the
percentage
of
fires
based
on
the
number
of
units
that
they
have
have
you
ever
looked
at
that
to
see
Toronto
Community
Housing
is
a
very
large
landlord.
It
has
I
think
mr.
N
Marshman
about
54,000,
actual
apartments
or
units,
so
being
so
large,
it's
not
surprising
that
there's
a
large
percentage,
I'm
just
interested
in
other
large
portfolios,
there's
probably
apartment
building
owners
that
have
maybe
10,000
units,
so
is
that
ratio
of
fires
or
false
alarms
consistent
with
the
number
of
units?
Do
you
know
what
I'm
saying
we're
looking
at
ratios,
not
just
hard
numbers
so.
L
Through
the
speaker
so
counselor
we
haven't
broken
down
to
landlord
by
landlord.
Obviously,
Toronto
Community
Housing
is
the
largest
landlord
and
we
would
expect
a
larger
number
of
incidents.
Certainly,
the
number
of
false
alarms
have
been
consistent,
but
there
really
isn't
a
comparable
landlord
with
the
volume
and
the
size
of
the
portfolio
that
tch
has
it.
I
could.
N
H
C
H
N
N
So
just
trying
to
fire
have
that
type
of
information
I
mean
you
must
know
when
you're
going
back
to
particular
landlord
and
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
gonna,
say
any
names,
but
somebody
I
can't
think
I
think
there's
probably
a
company
that
has
8,000
10,000
units
somewhere
in
the
city
and
I'm
very
interested
in
their
statistics.
Do
you
have
that
so.
L
Through
the
speaker
that
that's
something
we
have
not
done,
we
know
anecdotally,
where
we've
had
challenges
in
the
last
number
of
years.
In
certainly
councillor
in
long
terms,
area
obviously
has
been
one
of
them
in
st.
James
town,
but
we
have
never
done
an
analysis
in
terms
of
every
type
of
different
landlord
in
the
number
of
units
and
the
number
of
violations,
certainly
on
a
building
by
building
perspective,
we
could
pull
that
up.
I.
N
N
A
M
About
just
inspecting
the
condition
of
the
roof,
you
know
for
potential
to
leak,
or
it's
ready
to
fail
that
type
of
stuff,
in
other
words,
trying
to
catch
the
the
potential
for
a
water
leak
over
a
critical
area
ahead
of
time.
I
realize
it
may
be
much
to
ask
an
electrician
to
give
consideration
to
the
roof.
O
M
Are
you?
Are
you
confident
in
the
other?
Preventative
maintenance
programs
are
adequate
enough
to
give
consideration
to
electrical
hazards
that
may
be
generated
through
the
failure
of
another
building
component
via
the
plumbing
system
or
the
roof
or
the
the
windows,
or
just
even
just
vandalism.
Young
people
breaking
open,
covers
of
things
or
wear
and
tear
on
things
or
broken
outlets
that
become
exposed,
so
those
those
physical
type
of
things.
M
O
We
do
have
a
good
PM
program
in
place
throughout
our
portfolio
to
look
at
the
major
systems
as
well
as
we
do
have
building
staff
that
are
there
in
the
buildings
on
a
daily
basis
and
if
they
see
anything,
you
know,
for
example,
vandalism
or
something
like
that.
They
would
report
that
and
then
it
would
be
corrected.
Do.
M
You
have
any
sense
out
of
identified
hazards
over
the
past
or
incidences
or
electrical
fires.
How
many
of
them
may
be
related
to
external
factors,
just
beyond
the
pure
electrical
system
that
you
would
be
inspecting
with
an
electrician,
so
that
type
of
thing
where
water
has
come
in
and
caused
a
short
circuit
or
or
potentially
caused
a
fire,
because
water
leaked
onto
a
transformer.
E
E
M
F
A
P
L
P
P
E
The
I
think
the
you
know
just
just
give
me
one.
Second,
oh
look
at
Jim's
notes.
I
think
it
was
roughly
in
the
in
that
22
percent
range
in
terms
of
fires
in
contract,
managing
of
the
six
percent
and
roughly
the
contract
managed
building
percentage
of
the
total
portfolio.
The
number
of
Suites
is
about
21
percent
21.
P
P
E
P
L
Through
the
speaker-
yes,
so
specifically
in
Toronto,
Community
Housing,
which
is
poses
some
unique
challenges
with
in
terms
of
fire
cause,
so
the
three
leading
causes
of
fire
in
Toronto,
Community
Housing
buildings
are
intentionally
set,
fires,
careless,
smoking
and
then
unattended
candles,
which
is
actually
sort
of
the
opposite
compared
to
the
rest
of
the
citywide.
So
certainly
you
know
there.
They
have
a
significant
challenge
with
persons
that
are
intentionally
setting
fires
in
their
buildings.
L
Now
the
good
news
is
over
the
last
number
of
years
with
the
investment
council
is
made
and
the
priorities
that
Chief
peg
has
put
on
Toronto
Community
Housing.
Those
are
trending
downwards
counselors.
So
so
we
are
absolutely
seeing
a
turn
of
the
curve
right
now
in
terms
of
those
types
of
fires
at
and
the
causes
in
those
buildings.
P
What
I
want
to
so
we
charge
many
housing
hired
I,
believe
it
wasn't
a
fire
life
safety
officer
at
one
point
in
time
and
then
we're
looking
at
the
causes
of
fires
in
the
building,
and
how
do
we
work
with
our
fire
service
to
kind
of
mitigate
these
issues?
How
much
headway
has
an
individual
made?
It's.
E
P
E
The
fire
life
safety
team
would
be
working
not
only
with
with
the
capital
planning
department,
the
facilities
management
department,
but
other
departments
within
it,
and
so
how
that
has
manifested
itself.
You
know
it
is
my
understanding
that
all
of
our
buildings
are
to
code
some.
You
know
the
code
is
actually
attached
to
the
date,
the
building
it
was
built,
and
so
as
a
process.
We
are
bringing
all
buildings
up
through
this
10
year,
capital
plan
to
the
the
more
current
standards
and,
in
fact,
within
the
I,
think
it's
been
in
the
st.
James
town
area.
E
L
Through
the
speaker
intentionally
set,
fires
are
the
leading
cause
of
fires
in
Toronto,
Community
Housing
buildings,
but
I
do
not
have
a
percentage
breakdown
compared
to
the
other
two,
but,
unlike
any
other
sort
of
area
in
the
City
of
Toronto,
it
is
a
unique
problem
that
we've
been
working
with.
You
know
Kevin
on
and
Ann's
TCH
staff,
but
it
is
absolutely
unique
to
that
that
building
stock,
that
it
is
a
leading
cause
of
fires
for
those
buildings,
is.
O
L
The
speaker,
there's
no
other
landlord
or
program
or
a
building
stock
area
that
we
have
been
able
to
identify
we're
intentionally
set
fires
is
the
leading
cause
generally,
it's
unattended
cooking,
its
unattended
candles
and
it's
careless
smoking.
But
this
is
a
unique
problem
to
that.
To
that
subset-
and
you
know,
we've
brought
it
to
their
attention
and
we've
been
working
not
only
with
Toronto
Community
Housing,
but
certainly
with
Toronto
Police
as
well,
because
you
know,
as
certainly
you
know,
it
is
a
criminal
offense.
A
C
You
very
much,
madam
Speaker,
just
a
couple
of
quick
questions.
Around
additional
costs.
I
heard
comments
made
with
respect
to
fines,
but
when
fires
occur,
there's
a
additional
disruptive
disruption.
So
how
do
you
prepare
for
that?
For
example,
if
you
have
a
fire
in
our
specific
floor,
do
you
move
the
resident
to
another
location?
Do
you
bring
buses
in
and
what
are
the
additional
costs
associated
with
those
elements.
E
Through
the
speaker,
councillor
I,
don't
have
the
cost
number
of
those
specifically
readily
available
to
me,
but
I
can
certainly
provide
that
information
to
you.
Certainly,
the
what
we
do
do
is
if
the
if
a
floor
needs
to
be
evacuated.
In
some
cases
the
fire
is
confined
to
the
unit
and
the
floor
is
fine.
E
So
it's
the
single
resident,
that's
impacted
in
other
cases,
as
you
can
imagine,
it
could
be
the
floor
or
multiple
floors
and
we
would
rehouse
those
individuals
so,
depending
on
the
time
of
day
and
exactly
the
the
plans
in
place,
you
know
it
would
perhaps
start
with
buses.
You
know
immediately,
but
then
we
would
get
them
into
some
some
form
of
shelter,
typically
at
a
at
a
nearby
hotel.
At.
N
This
is
just
I
have
another
one,
but
I'll
do
it
at
committee.
This
is
just
really
because
TCH
C
has
so
many
apartments,
54
55,000,
unlike
any
other
landlord,
we
do
need
to
have
some
comparators
not
for
the
numbers,
because
201
fires
is
TCH
C,
that
is
of
the
portfolio.
A
certain
percentage
I
think
it's
helpful
to
know
with
other
larger
landlords
how
that
compares
there
are
and
that
nobody
has
50
odd
thousand
units
in
their
portfolio,
but
some
may
have
8
10.
N
So
that
is
our
comparator
with
percentages,
not
numbers
and
I
do
think,
because
there's
such
large
numbers
it's
important
to
understand
the
percentages
and
see
how
far,
if
or
how,
if
TCH
C,
is
such
an
outlier
for
percentages,
because
it
looks
like
a
very,
very
large
number
I'm.
Also
interested
and
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
prepare
this
motion.
It
came
out
of
one
of
the
things
that
chief
has
said.
Our
deputy
has
said,
which
is
the
number
of
intentionally
set
fires,
so
I
am
going
to
guess.
N
I
could
be
wrong,
but
I'm
gonna,
guess
that
they're
concentrated
in
certain
areas
of
the
city
and
in
particular
clusters
or
buildings,
where
there
are
more
than
a
few
vulnerable
tenants.
I,
don't
know
if
I'm
right,
but
I
will
be
asking
that
question
at
committee.
So
mr.
Jessop
is
always
so
great
because
he
always
prepares
everything
ahead
of
time.
N
So
that
is
I
think
if
we
know
that,
then
in
our
tenants
first
plan,
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
looked
at
and
been
clear
we
want
to
accomplish,
is
handling
vulnerable
tenants
in
a
certain
way
and
have
a
plan
for
buildings
where
there
are
vulnerable,
tenants,
concentrated
and
I.
Think
if
that
lines
up
with
buildings,
then
we
have
a
really
good
empirical
empirical
bit
of
knowledge
that
we
have
these
problem
buildings.
N
We
know
maybe
one
councillor
Wang
Tam
has
has
identified
one,
but
maybe
there's
more,
and
then
that
needs
to
be
that
conversation
with
the
city
and
TCH
C,
because
obviously
it's
just
not
a
normal
Landlord
and
Tenant
type
situation.
So
this
is
just
one
of
the
the
the
ways
that
we
can
see
where
we
have
issues
and
I
do
know
that
there
are
particular
buildings
where
those
things
happen.
So
this
is
an
important
conversation.
N
I
want
I
want
to
know
if,
in
the
percentage
of
fires
per
building
that
per
portfolio,
if
TCH
C
is
average
or
if
TCH
C
is
way
over
or
if
TCH
C
is
under,
but
we
don't
know
until
we
know
how
that
stacks
up
against
other
landlords
that
have
a
large
number
of
buildings,
so
I
think
that's
important
for
any
further
discussions
as
well
and
I
just
want
to
thank
the
deputy,
mister,
Marshman
and
everyone
else
for
that
information.
Thank
you.
K
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
Madam
Speaker
I
do
have
a
motion
and
the
clerk's
will
put
that
on.
The
screen
is
that
the
City
Council
as
a
sole
shareholder,
direct
TCH,
see
board
of
directors
to
direct
the
president
and
CEO
to
adopt
no
later
than
March
31st
2020,
the
Canadian
standards,
Association
Zed,
4-6-3,
18,
maintenance
of
electrical
systems
or
an
equivalent
of
as
electrical
maintenance
standard
for
TCH,
see
buildings,
both
internally
managed
by
T,
C,
HC
and
those
that
are
contracted
out.
Madam
Speaker,
by
way
of
just
again
a
background.
K
Earlier
this
year,
City
Council
adopted
a
report
that
actually
gave
MLSE
the
powers
to
amend
the
rent
safe
program
and
that's
through
the
vital
service
disruptions
in
apartment
buildings
and
and
specifically
in
that
report,
it
referenced
this
particular
standard
of
what
we
wanted.
Building
owners
building
managers
to
actually
adhere
to
in
terms
of
the
electrical
system,
standard
of
maintenance-
and
this
is
not
necessarily
that
was-
is
something
that
was
devised
without
context.
It
actually
comes
from
the
Canadian,
the
Canadian
standards
Association,
which
actually
developed
this
and
actually
is
adopted
throughout
the
world.
K
So
it's
very
clear
about
what
maintenance
means
under
that
particular
standard.
There's
no
ambiguity
and
it's
a
very
comprehensive
approach
to
electrical
maintenance.
The
great
thing
of
it
is
is
that
THC
managed
buildings
already
have
an
electrical
program
and
they
actually
are
working
towards
something
that
it's
equivalent
or
are
very
close
to,
maybe
not
meeting
every
single
standard
within
the
CSA,
but
TCH
C
is
making
great
strides
with
their
internally
managed
buildings.
The
challenge,
of
course,
is
THC
externally
third-party
contracted
out
buildings
are
not
adhere
to
that
same
standard.
K
So
when
you
are
a
TCH,
C,
reddit
resident,
you
get
one
level
of
service
and
standard
if
you're
living
within
a
TCH
C
manage
building,
and
if
you
actually
happen
to
live
in
a
third-party
managed
building,
it
means
that
that
electrical
system
may
not
be
as
well
serviced
and
maintained
as
a
TCH
C
managed
building.
So
there
are,
there
are
a
couple
things
for
us
to
to
determine
from
this.
K
Is
that
if
you
have
two
standards
of
electrical
maintenance
with
one's
particular
landlord,
that
seems
grossly
unfair,
not
to
mention
the
fact
that
tenants
who
are
living
in
THC
third
party
management
buildings
who
do
not
have
the
same
regiment
of
electrical
system?
Maintenance
is
at
further
risk.
The
problem
here
is
that
the
risk
comes
with
significant
costs,
and
the
cost
would
be
just
by
way
of
example,
when
6:50
parliament
had
their
catastrophic
failure
of
their
electrical
system.
We
know
that
that
system
was
not
and
well-managed.
K
We
know
that
the
equipment
was
outdated
and
we
know
that
if
this
particular
standard
from
recommended
by
ESA
was
was
on
the
table
and
adopted
by
them,
then
they
would
have.
They
would
have
had
some
better
chance
of
actually
ensuring
that
their
their
residents
were
gonna
be
safe,
but
instead
the
cost
is
significant
and
I
can
tell
you
that
the
city
has
already
incurred
about
four
million
dollars
worth
of
costs,
to
help
manage
the
exact
uation,
the
emergency
response
and
and
and
therefore
so
in.
K
In
that
case,
by
way
of
adhering
to
a
standard
that
would
be
agreed
to
by
the
Electrical
Safety
Authority.
That's
been
set
forward
by
the
Canadian
standards
Association,
we
would
be
averting
some
of
those
costs
and
some
of
those
costs
would
be
around
displacements
around
the
loss
of
housing,
the
interruption
and
disruptions
to
job
the
interruptions
and
disruptions
to
his
family
life,
including
the
fact
that
the
kids
had
to
be
hauled
out
of
school.
K
There
was
the
the
TCH
see
burdens
of
having
to
then
reach
out
to
try
to
TTC
buses
to
bring
them
in
for
for
for
shelters,
temporary
use.
The
ongoing
hotel
calls
the
ongoing
cost
of
shelter
of
replacements,
the
mental
health
costs
and
then
just
the
hakka
the
costs.
Overall,
if
650
Parliament
is
going
to
adhere
to
this
standard,
that's
recommended
in
the
vital
service
disruption
report
that
was
adopted
by
this
council.
The
very
least
we
could
do
is
make
sure
that
we,
as
a
shareholder
of
TCH,
see,
can
do
exactly
the
same
thing.
K
We
have
to
meet
the
standard
and
that's
why
the
the
recommendation
says
that
we're
gonna
try
to
meet
that
standard
or
adopt
the
standard.
Something
that's
comparable,
TCH
see
already
is
trying
to
do
that
with
their
own
managed
buildings,
but
unfortunately,
unfortunately,
those
third-party
contracted
buildings.
They
are
sort
of
floating
out
there
without
the
same
type
of
without
the
same
type
of
oversight.
Thank
you
very
much.
F
K
My
staff
have
been
and
communicated
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
have
a
lineup
of
staff
who
are
here
from
TCH
C,
as
well
as
Toronto,
Fire
and
ESA
MLS.
One
of
the
reasons
why
all
the
gentlemen
are
here
today
is
because
we
specifically
have
been
in
communication
of
their
offices,
letting
them
know
that
this
was
the
the
intention.
So
some
of
the
questions
I
actually
had
asked
today
was
was
largely
derived
from
those
conversations.
So
so
to
answer
your
question.
K
Yes,
this
was
actually
discussed
at
the
committee
when
we
raised
the
matter
at
the
first
point
in
time.
It
was
also
discussed
in
the
previous
vital
service
disruptions
report
that
came
before
council
and
and
THC
is
striving
to
meet
a
particular
standard,
but
they're
not
there
yet,
and
because
the
previous
report
said
to
third
to
private,
managed
buildings
we'd
like
you
to
try
to
meet
the
standard,
and
we
haven't
specifically
said
that
TCH
C,
so
I'm
trying
to
align
the
two.
Hopefully
that
answers
your
question.
F
Right
well
well,
I'm
just
wondering
about
the
date,
because
it's
it's
October
so
I'm
wondering
if
they
did,
they
suggest
the
date
you
know
I'm
asking.
Did
they
suggest
it?
Do
they
think
it's
achievable?
Is
it
enforceable
in
the
case
of
the
private
contractors,
under
their
current
contract,
those
sorts
of
things
so
there's
been
ironed.
K
Out
so
we
we
were
really
clear
to
just
say
that
all
they
would
do
is
to
adopt
the
standard,
not
necessarily
roll
out
with
operations
implementation.
We
were
gonna
leave
that
to
TCC
and
how
that
was
going
to
work
out.
To
be
quite
honest,
so
we
would
make
and
and
and
give
them
six
months
to
review
on
how
that
rollout
would
be,
but
they
would
try
to
adopt
the
standard
by
that
time,
so
so
not
to
have
every
building
fully
inspected.
That's
not
what
we're
asking
is
to
simply
drive
to
the
same
standard.
K
F
K
Is
my
hope,
there's
I
don't
expect
anyone
to
have
all
the
buildings
inspected?
That
would
just
that
would
not
make
any
sense,
but
it's
simply
to
adopt
that's
to
adopt
that
standard
or
an
equivalent
to
that
standard.
The
one
thing
I
do
know
is
that
TCC
has
an
electrical
preventative
maintenance
program,
but
they
they
as
far
as
I,
can
tell
that
program
meets
two
of
the
four
pillars
and
the
ESA
standard
and
the
CSA
recommended
Center
has
four
components.
The
TC
HC
electrical
program
has
two.
B
B
My
concern
about
this
is
that
I
think
it
is
the
worst
and
I've
said
it
in
this
chamber
before
it
is
the
worst
corporate
governance
for
us
to
have
a
board
that
we
take
great
care
in
appointing
of
a
Housing
Corporation
and
then
to
direct
them
in
a
very
granular
fashion.
Like
this
and
and
some
of
the
words
you
were
using
just
a
moment
ago,
I
would
have
had
much
less
trouble
with,
in
the
context
of
saying,
for
example,
I
think
you
said
here
a
moment
ago
about
an
equivalent
standard.
B
If
there
was
such
a
thing-
and
that's
not
mentioned
here,
you
said
that
you
want
you
actually
have
the
wording
in
the
motion
as
through.
You
might
have
to
take
care
of
saying
that
we
direct
the
Housing
Corporation
board
to
direct
this
executive
officer
to
adopt
and
I
just
for
me
sitting
here
is
one
member
of
council.
I
have
no
idea
what
this
standard
provides
for.
You,
you
do
and
I
commend
you
for
the
fact
you've
done
the
work,
and
you
know
how
much
I
share
your
concern
about
the
650
Parliament
in
aftermath.
B
So
I
just
asked
you
whether
you
might
like
to
just
change
the
wording
a
little
bit
to
make
it
clear.
We
would
like
to
see
that
done.
We
would
like
to
have
a
report
back
not
in
six
months
or
but
maybe
even
in
30
days
as
to
the
implications
of
adopting
the
standard
or
whether
there
is
an
equivalent.
Would
you
consider
that,
because
I
would
feel
better
that
we
were
asking
them
to
get
back
to
us
on
this
as
opposed
to
telling
them
that
this
is
it?
K
Thank
you
very
much
mr.
mayor
I.
Think
that,
and
and
for
by
way
of
clarification,
the
the
first
portion
of
the
motion
was
actually
copied
directly
from
previous
reports
from
Council.
So
we
were
trying
to
determine.
Do
we
direct?
Do
we
request
and
it
was
actually
copied
from
previous
language
that
was
generated
from
this
particular
governing
body.
So
if
it's
actually
easier
and
more
palatable,
I
can
change
the
the
first
word.
It's
sort
of
I
can
change
the
direction
to
request,
because
it
was
something
that
we
were.
K
We
were
a
little
bit
unclear
about
internally
in
the
office,
but
we
copied
from
a
previous
motion.
So
so,
therefore,
if
I
just
mend
my
own
motion
by
way
of
a
request
from
the
mayor
that
City
Council
has
sole
proprietor
shareholder
request,
the
Toronto
Community
Housing
Board
of
Directors
to
direct
the
president
to
do
this
body
of
work.
That
would
be,
and
they
can
report
back
internally
and.
B
And
it's
just
if
I
may,
madam
Speaker,
maybe
suggestion
I'm
very
happy.
You
should
put
a
time
limit
on
them
to
report
back
to
us
on
that,
so
that
we're
not
having
this
go
off
into
the
ether,
because
I
share
your
concern.
If
it's
good
enough
for
650
Parliament,
it's
good
enough
for
our
own
buildings.
Some
kind
of
standards
like
this
but
I'd
feel
good.
If
we
had
a
report
back
from
them
on
what
the
response
was
to
this
request
that
you're
making
I'd
be
very
happy
with
that
myself,
I
was.
K
I
was
actually
just
gonna,
let
THC
sorted
out
internally,
so
therefore
we
didn't
get
into
all
the
the
management
of
it
afterwards.
To
be
quite
honest,
we
were
just
gonna:
ask
you
to
do
this
and
then
I
would
I
would
imagine.
The
Board
of
Directors
would
then
walk
you
through
with
the
the
expertise
of
your
staff.
Afterwards,
if
there
is
a
desire
to
report
back
to
this
body,
I
I
think
that
would
be
fine
as
well
or
at
least
go
back
to
the
committee
with
it.
K
F
Well,
thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
I
I'm
glad
I
asked
that
those
questions,
because
we're
into
that
we're
into
that
moment,
I
shared
the
mayor's
unease.
Do
we
want
to
start
running
a
board
or
are
we
the
shareholder
and
once
a
year
we
might
give
them
guidance,
so
I'm
glad
I
clarified,
because
I
adopt
by
March
31st?
Does
that
mean
you
know,
hammer
comes
down
to
every
contract
and
then
the
financial
impact
from
each
contract
holder
comes
back,
but
in
fact
what
we're
doing
is
is
especially
with
the
friendly
amendment.
F
What
we're
doing
is
asking
the
board
to
set
a
standard
and
begin
that
work
and
and
I
have
no
problem
with
that.
On
that
score,
we're
still
leaving
the
board
empowered
and
it's
important
that
we
leave
them
empowered
because
they
have
a
staff
to
manage.
They
have
a
corporation
to
manage
and
we
don't
want
to
begin
from
a
discussion
here
to
begin
to
erode
their
ability
to
manage
and
so
asking
that
question
I'm
I'm
comforted.
F
I
do
want
to
say
that
I
think
we
can
be
brave
and
have
these
conversations
right
now,
because
we
have
all
those
dollars.
There
is
good
news
on
the
horizon
in
terms
of
state
of
good
repair.
Tch
see
we
have
a
partner
in
the
federal
government
right
now,
repairs
is
starting
to
to
amp
up
and,
most
importantly,
it
starts
with
our
own
investment,
our
own
ramping
up
of
abusing
City
dollars
to
get
state
of
good
repair
under
control.
F
Madam
Speaker
I
think
if
we,
if
we
look
at
setting
a
fire,
that's
going
to
cause
damage
as
a
crime,
then
a
discussion
we
had
yesterday,
where
it
came
up
what
you
do
in
terms
of
police
and
resources,
what
you
spend
in
the
way
of
supports
to
communities
and
what
you
spend
in
terms
of
the
broken
window
theory
it
has.
It
has
a
role
to
play
in
in
what
we're
looking
at
what
is
the
broken
window?
It's
a
criminological
theory.
F
It's
a
theory
that
states
at
visible
signs
of
crime,
antisocial,
behavior
and
disorder
create
an
urban
environment
that
encourages
further
crime
and
disorder,
and
it
can
include
very
serious
crimes,
crimes
that
cause
people
in
the
200
unit
account
to
have
to
be
evicted.
Well,
if
we
have
no
respect
for
these
properties,
if
you're
a
young
person
and
you're
living
in
a
place
that,
from
the
time
you
you
came
home
to
it
from
the
hospital
as
a
newborn
baby,
you
just
don't
see
any
respect
for
that
property
being
afforded
by
its
owners
and
its
landlords.
F
You
don't
really
have
any
respect
for
that
property.
The
the
conditions
you're
living
in
seem
criminal
and
so
criminal
behavior
becomes
the
norm.
So
there's
a
broken
window
theory
going
on
here
and
I
think
it
extends
to
setting
a
fire
over
a
building.
That
seems
as
if
no
one
cares
about
it.
So
setting
a
standard
adopting
a
standard
seems
like
the
thing
to
do.
We
need
to
make
it
clear,
I
hope
the
board
takes
up
this
request
and
it
is
a
request,
but
they
need
to
begin
to
make
clear.
We
are
setting
a
new
standard.
F
We
are
making
new
investments.
Multiple
governments
are
making
new
investments.
We
do
care
about
this
facility.
It
is
not
going
to
be
so
neglected
that
you
just
might
as
well
set
it
ablaze,
that's
not
going
to
be
the
way
forward
and
so
that
that
standard
may
well
be
the
thing
that
sets
on
a
chart.
Of
course,
such
that
setting
a
fire
on
purpose
really
would
be
setting
a
fire
on
something
that
really
is
a
home
and
and
I
think
you'll
see
that
number
go
down.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
F
E
A
F
Don't
know
did
I
catch
center
table
by
surprise
area,
so
it's
simply
a
simple
motion.
The
City
Council
requests,
the
fire
chief
and
general
manager,
Toronto
Fire
Services,
to
report
back
to
City
Council
in
advance
of
the
commencement
of
the
2021
budget
process
with
recommended
strategies
as
a
result
of
the
toronto
fire
services,
transformation
plan
and
commission
on
fire
accreditation,
international,
related
review
initiatives
to
enhance
overall
service
delivery
and
address
emerging
and
forecasted
risks
and
needs
of
the
growing
city.
Madam
speaker,
just
a
quick
explanation.
F
This
is,
in
fact,
what
is
in
the
contents
of
the
report
that
we
considered
an
economic
development.
It's
simply
this.
We
had
asked
for
this
very
report
to
be
here
in
time
for
the
2020
budget
process
and
we
received
a
report.
Updating
us
and
the
only
recommendation
is
to
receive
all
I'm
doing
is
taking
the
content
of
the
report
in
which
the
fire
chief
says
to
us
I'd
like
to
report
back
before
the
next
year.
That's
a
big
step.
F
I
think
it
should
be
in
the
form
of
a
recommendation
so
that
it
becomes
something
that
we're
tracking
by
date
and
looking
for
that
report,
rather
than
just
burying
it
in
the
content
of
her
report,
it's
up
to
Council
to
decide
if
they
want
to
defer
something
for
an
entire
year,
so
I'm
just
making.
What
is
the
con
reporter
recommendation
of
counsel?
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank
you.
A
I
I
It
says
on
the
front
page
of
this:
it
tracks
our
earnings.
I
won't
do
I
have
to
read
the
motion,
its
pretty
long
motion.
Everyone
has
it
in
front
of
you.
The
only
different
is
there's
a
revised
motion
that
gives
a
little
bit
more
time
to
the
CFO
until
January,
29th
and
30th
council
meeting,
just
because
I
give
her
give
her
a
little
bit
more
time
to
put
together
the
investments
and
consult
with
the
necessary
partners.
I
I
am
I,
checked
what
I
looked
at
this
report
and
in
a
some
it's
actually
just
noted
to
me
by
a
counselor
holiday
that
our
returns
are
actually
below
what
was
expected
in
the
three-point-something
range
2.7
and
3.
3
percent
annualised
know
that
the
Toronto
atmospheric
fund,
which
is
an
endowment,
has
an
investment
board,
have
very
very
strong
ESG
policies
to
their
investment
they're
up
at
14%
this
past
year.
I
If
you
didn't
support
that,
because
it
was
included
in
there,
you
can't
you
can't
turn
down
the
fact
that
you
can
actually
make
more
money
by
investing
in
climate
solutions
and
and
reducing
the
exposure
and
the
risk
associated
with
with
with
climate
change.
So
I'd
hope
you
support
the
motion
again.
It
is
a
referral.
I'm
not
trying
to
change
the
investment
policy
at
this
time,
I
thought.
Perhaps
we
could
be
provided
with
the
evidence
at
our
next
a
future
opportunity
and
make
the
change
then
so
I
hope
you'll
support.
My
my
amendment.
A
I
N
J
I
A
F
J
J
J
J
J
You,
madam
Speaker,
so
the
motion
is
before
you
and
it's
really
your
report
back
annually
on
Ward,
specific
and
divisional
II,
specific
updates,
so
I
want
to
start
by
thanking
staff
for
their
great
work
on
this
comprehensive
strategy
and
I
have
a
small
amendment
just
to
strengthen,
strengthen
really
the
implementation
of
the
bio
diversity
strategy.
I
also
think
I
believe
the
chair,
a
councillor
Pasternak
and
councillor
McKelvey,
also
have
motions
on
this
and
I
hope
that
you'll
support
them.
J
My
motion
seeks
really
for
their
relevant
divisions
to
provide
an
overview
of
updates
and
successes
on
the
word
specific
and
divisional
a
specific
basis
in
their
annual
report.
So
everybody
knows
that
various
divisions
and
bodies
or
agencies
are
involved
in
this
and
so
ward
15.
We
are
very
fortunate
in
Ward,
V
15.
We
have
a
number
of
ravine
areas,
very
crucial
areas
to
our
neighborhoods
communities
and,
quite
frankly,
the
entire
city,
and
so
this
will
hopefully
ensure
a
multi-divisional
approach
on
implementing
this
strategy
and
improving
our
natural
and
ravine
areas.
H
We're
at
a
point
where
we
have
multiple
great,
very
important
environmental
strategies
for
the
city
and
a
lot
of
them
are
interrelated
and
so
I
just
think
that
it
makes
sense
that
we
report
back
on
the
biodiversity
strategy
at
the
same
time
as
the
very
much
related
ravine
strategy
and
I
very
much
like
and
would
like
to
thank
councillor
Robinson
for
her
amendment
as
well.
That
is
looking
at
breaking
it
down
to
the
ward
level.
H
I
didn't
take
this
as
far
as
I'd
like
to
I
would
like
us
to
get
to
a
point
where
we
have
a
scorecard
that
tracks
all
the
actions
and
that
that
is
also
reported
back
annually
and
I
was
thinking.
It
could
be
a
waste.
You
know
red,
yellow
green,
to
show
where
we
are
at
with
those
actions,
but
I
do
think
that
councillor
Layton
had
a
really
good
idea
that
we
should
report
back
with.
I
Thank
you
very
much.
My
name's
jugar
I,
don't
have
a
motion.
I
just
wanted
to
rise
to
speak
to
this
item,
because
in
2015
I
was
councilor
that
put
forward
the
motion
that
kind
of
initiated
this,
and
it
happened
in
a
really
interesting
way
and
and
I
just
wanted
to
our
policies.
All
they
kind
of
have
a
story
behind
them.
I
think
when
normally
it's
a
phone
call
from
a
constituent,
maybe
a
couple.
We
see
a
pattern.
We
say
you
know
what
this
is
systemic.
I
I
People
for
our
water
and
environmental
resources
at
a
halt
region
came
to
my
office
and
said
you
know
what
the
UN
has
has
has
declared
this
the
decade
of
biodiversity,
but
no
municipalities
are
actually
stepping
up
and
implementing
biodiversity
plants
to
ensure
that
the
animals,
the
trees,
the
species
within
their
jurisdictions
are
being
are
being
respected
or
that
their
their
health
is
being
monitored
and
and
improved
and
I
thought.
Well,
you
know
what
we've
got
so
many
great
divisions.
We've
got
such
such
great
plans
on
the
on
the
books.
I
There's
no
reason
why
we
couldn't
loop
them
all
together
in
a
cost
appropriate
way
and
ensure
that,
in
our
own
activities
that
that
we
weren't
watching
out
for
for
for
biodiversity
in
the
selection
of
tree
species
and
our
development
application
and
review.
And
then
what
really
kicked
me
or
pushed
me
into
action
was
my
my
my
partner,
my
wife
came
home
one
day
and
she's
a
she's,
a
birder
in
this
city.
I
She
likes
to
watch
and
and
listen
to
bird
calls
and
IID
birds,
and
she
came
to
me
and
said
you
know
what
Mike
they're
they're
tearing
down
an
old
an
old
chimney
in
the
East
End
that
we
know
is,
is
housing
for
chimney,
Swifts
and
endangered
species
in
in
the
province
and-
and
she
said
who
catches
that
like
like.
Why
are
you
letting
letting
them
tear
it
down?
I
I
But
we
don't
when
it's
a
gray
field
or
a
brown
field,
and
so
that
is
just
one
of
the
small
things
that
I
think
we
could
easily
change.
That
would
help
that
would
help
protect
the
the
diversity
of
species
that
we
have
within
the
city
and,
in
fact,
make
improvements,
and
just
just
this
year
we
opened
as
a
result
of
some
phone
calls
to
M&R
to
to
monitor
some
of
these
chimneys
that
were
coming
down.
I
They've
actually
started
to
build
these
fake
chimneys
in
such
a
way
when,
when
the
other
chimneys
are
coming
down
in
order
to
protect
the
habitat
in
those
particular
locations,
so
that's
just
a
small
example
and
I
just
think.
It's
an
interesting
kind
of
way
that
that
policy
comes
into
this
chamber
in
this
world.
It
comes
from
this.
I
The
conversations
we
have
with
friends
the
phone
calls
from
our
constituents
and,
in
this
case,
a
conversation
over
dinner
with
with
my
partner
and
I,
think
that
that
we
should
all
remember
that
that
they're
there
there
are
backstories
to
some
of
this,
that
that
can
help
inform
how
we
do
and
make
policy
in
the
city.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
Q
E
You
thank
you.
Madam
Speaker
I
have
a
motion.
The
City
Council
directed
general
manager
parks,
forcing
recreation
to
report
back
to
the
infrastructure,
Environment
Committee
and
it
builds
on
councillor
McKelvey's
motion
to
align
biodiversity
strategy,
ravine
strategy
and
the
recently
released
Toronto
regional
Conservation
Authority
trail
strategy,
which
we
were
working
on
on
Friday
I.
Just
want
to
thank
my
colleagues
for
the
commitment
to
this
endeavor
councillor.
Robinson
comes
from
McKelvey,
councillor,
Layton
and,
of
course,
I
think
councillor,
Bradford's
gonna
be
speaking
next,
as
most
of
you
know,
we
have
a
biodiversity
plan.
E
But
it's
very
important
that,
as
we
move
forward
with
these
initiatives,
that
we
make
sure
that
all
the
strategies
are
aligned,
if
we're
going
to
have
a
trail
strategy
and
a
trail
strategy
means
that
we
will
be
sending
tens
of
thousands
of
people
through
our
various
ravines
I
think
the
philosophy
is
to
enjoy
our
ravines,
but
also
protect
them
as
well.
If
you're
going
to
have
a
strategy,
you
also
need
to
align
that
with
the
ravine
strategy
and
the
biodiversity
strategy,
so
that
everybody
respects
the
natural
environment,
but
at
the
same
time
enjoys
it.
E
I
think
that
once
these,
these
strategies
become
more
mature,
we're
gonna
see
very
exciting
opportunities
for
hiking
and
walking
in
our
different
woods
across
the
city.
We're
gonna
see
enormous
potential
to
to
be
able
to
explore
the
great
ravines
that
in
many
ways
are
a
barrier
to
exploring
now.
So
this
is
great
for
the
environment.
This
is.
This
is
great
for
the
local
residents.
E
This
is
great
for
the
City
of
Toronto
and
I
think
in
the
years
to
come,
as
we
protect
our
ravine
system
as
we
respect
our
diverse
biodiversity
and
as
we
leverage
our
trail
system,
we
will
be
able
to
see
that
you,
don't
you
don't
have
to
you.
Don't
have
to
go
up
north
to
enjoy
the
beauty
of
the
great
outdoors
here
in
Toronto
you
can.
You
can
explore
it
in
your
own
local
neighborhoods,
with
safe,
accessible
trails
and,
at
the
same
time
protect
the
natural
habitat
in
the
natural
environment.
Thank
you
very
much.
E
P
P
He
did
up
front
on
us
and
encouraging
the
city
to
actually
think
about
these
sort
of
things.
It's
councillor,
Pasternak
noted.
We
now
have
this
great
opportunity
for
alignment.
We
have
a
ravine
strategy.
We
have
a
resilience
strategy,
we're
doing
flood
protection
in
the
dawn.
We
had
a
very
important
conversation
about
climate
change
yesterday
and
recognising
the
importance
of
that
and
our
actions
going
forward
here.
At
the
city
this
plays
into
that
perfectly
and
is
something
that
we
need
to
continue
to
keep
at
the
forefront
when
we're
making
our
decisions
across
all
of
these
fronts.
P
A
Q
Q
So
in
in
trying
to
enforce
a
situation
where
you
have
home
builders,
not
protecting
the
city,
trees
or
damaging
city
trees,
three
speaker
that's
correct
and
we
can
recover
those
costs,
whether
it's
proactive
enforcement,
where
we
find
violations
or
wet
its
complaint
driven
either
one.
We
can
that's
correct,
so
there
should
be
no
impediment
to
protecting
trees
from
a
cost
point
of
view
through.
R
Q
Q
So
we
have
those
four
different
tools
in
our
Arsenal
correct,
that's
correct
so
between
having
the
the
dollars
and
the
tools
to
protect
city
trees,
the
only
reason
that
we
should
have
trees
going
unprotected
and
thus
not
doing
something
about
that
would
be
a
need
to
fine-tune
our
strategies
combined
tools
make
sure
we
have
their
proper
resources
at
play.
We
should
given
what
we
have.
There
should
not
be
very
many
instances
where
city
trees
are
not
protected.
Would
that
be
correct
through.
R
Q
You
and
all
acknowledged
those
improvements,
and
we
had
a
productive
conversation
last
week
so
and
I
take
it
from
that.
You
would
sort
of
welcome
the
opportunity
to
perhaps
do
this
report
with
that
to
provide
sort
of
a
more
accurate,
larger
picture,
but
also
to
look
at
how
we
can
learn
from
the
data
and
make
improvements
to
our
system.
Three.
A
K
Q
You
I
have
a
motion
request
after
report
to
the
January,
9th
2020
infrastructure
environment
committee
meeting,
with
the
report
outlining
for
2018
in
the
first
three
quarters
of
2019
the
number
of
proactive
inspections,
the
number
of
sites
where
complaint,
driven
inspections
took
place
and
infractions
were
observed.
The
number
of
inspection
fees
charged
on
first
and
second
visits
the
number
of
orders
to
comply
issue,
the
number
of
stop
order
or
occur
orders
issued
the
number
of
part
three
summons,
issued
and,
most
importantly,
recommendations
on
how
these
tools
can
be
better
utilized
for
tree
protection.
Q
So,
as
we
just
heard
in
response
to
the
questions,
money
shouldn't
be
an
issue
because
we're
able
to
recover
our
costs
through
an
inspection
fee.
We
also
have
four
tools:
the
inspection
fees
orders
to
comply,
stop
work,
orders
and
the
laying
of
charges.
So
we
have
the
resources.
We
have
the
tools
and
the
only
thing
that's
missing
is
how
to
coordinate
all
of
those
things
make
sure
we
have
enough
staff
and
that
they
all
have
the
correct,
marching
orders.
Q
Q
But
there
are
still
many
instances
and
we
all
have
them,
especially
those
of
us
that
have
a
large
amount
of
new
home
construction
where
it
is
the
home
builders
just
considered
the
trees
and
inconvenience
and
they
frankly
don't
care
if
they
get
a
seven
hundred
and
something
dollars
to
get
it's
a
cost
of
doing
business,
they're,
building
homes
and
Willowdale
that
will
sell
for
anywhere
between
two
and
a
half
and
four
million.
So
they're
not
really
concerned
about
a
$700
fine.
Q
Unless
we
keep
going
back
and
then
if
they
haven't
fixed
the
problem
a
day
or
two
later,
they
get
another
fine
and
then
they
get
a
stop
work
order
and
then,
if
they
severely
damaged
or
killed
the
trees
or
the
trees
suddenly
disappear
in
the
middle
of
the
night.
They
also
get
charges
laid
against
them.
So
we
are
doing
a
much
better
job,
but
we
need
to
do
a
much
better
job.
Still.
Q
You
know
we
go
to
great
pains,
both
the
staff
and
as
a
council
to
protect
city
trees
when
homeowners
come
in
and
want
to
remove
a
tree
or
damaged
a
tree,
but
we
are
considerably
less
diligent
and
effective
at
protecting
city
trees
from
home
builders.
So
I'm
heartened
by
the
staff
response
that
there
is
room
for
improvement
and
they
seem
to
have
some
ideas
on
how
to
do
that
and
I
look
forward
to
getting
the
report
back
on
exactly
how
that
could
happen.
C
A
J
You,
madam
Speaker
I,
have
motions
I'd
like
to
move
and
they're
on
the
screen
and
I
want
to
thank
councillor
Fillion
for
his
motions,
which
are
excellent
and
should
help
the
process.
My
emotions
actually
I,
think
augment,
is
and
support
his
and
really
item
two
gives
us
additional
information
in
our
reporting
out,
which
I
think
is
important.
J
My
ward
I'm
sure
your
awards
have
not
really
really
repaired
from
the
ice
storm
in
2013
and
that's
why
I
formed
a
little
committee
in
the
former
wor
25,
now
word
15
to
look
at
these
issues
and
we
put
forward
a
number
of
motions,
I,
remember
working
closely
with
now
retired
Arthur
Beauregard
on
this,
and
that
was
a
very
pleasant
experience.
Working
with
him
and
yes,
there
has
been
improvements,
I
moved
a
number
of
motions
to
improve
investigation
processes
and
reduce
the
number
of
trees
that
were
being
removed,
but
I'm
a
bit
discouraged
by
this.
J
What
we're
hearing
today
and
so
that's
why
I'm
moving
these
motions,
because
we
just
have
to
make
sure
this
is
a
priority.
Certainly,
in
my
word,
along
with
councillor
Phil
Ian's,
there's
so
much
infill
and
construction
and
renovations
and
clearly,
as
he
just
stated,
that's
completely.
Trees
are
being
completely
disregarded
in
these
processes,
so
proper
planning
and
care
are
needed
to
preserve
trees
on
building
sites
and
I'm
hoping
this.
These
motions
were
presented
today
will
help
with
that.
As
I
said,
I
was
discouraged
to
hear
the
response.
J
Time
from
urban
forestry
was
on
average
five
days,
I,
don't
think
that's
acceptable
and
given
the
urgent
nature
of
the
tree
violation,
complaints,
I
think
it's
imperative.
Urban
forestry
staff
are
able
to
respond
quickly
and
completely
treatment
from
construction
damage
is
also
limited.
So
it's
vital
that
once
the
bylaw
contravene
contravention
has
been
reported
that
the
compliance
and
enforcement
unit
must
act
in
a
timely
fashion
to
prevent
and
protect
the
tree
from
injury.
So
I'd
like
to
see
more
more
proactive
action
really
being
considered
as
part
of
the
tree
building
permit
process
and
I
know.
J
Urban
forestry
I'm
certainly
very
aware
they're
doing
an
excellent
job,
and
things
have
improved
dramatically
on
the
tree
related
matters,
but
I'd
like
to
see
this.
This
bylaw
tightened
up
even
further,
because
I
could
give
you
many
examples
and
I
won't
because
they
expose
residents
but
many
examples
where
we're
losing
trees
unnecessarily
and
it's
simply
a
line
item
in
in
people's
budgets
and
that's
got
to
stop
they.
They
are
vital
to
the
future
of
our
city,
trees.
J
H
Madam
Speaker
I
want
to
express
my
my
support
of
my
gratitude
to
both
counselors
Fillion
and
Robinson
for
their
leadership
on
this
important
issue.
This
absolutely
reflects
a
priority
of
the
residents
of
Toronto,
st.
Paul's
and,
on
behalf
of
our
community
I,
just
want
to
express
my
appreciation
to
the
both
of
them
for
really
putting
a
focus
on
this
priority
and
ensuring
that
that
is
a
part
of
what
we're
going
to
do.
So.
Thank
you.
A
S
S
I'd
like
to
ask
staff
to
clarify
what
the
policy
is
for
the
removal
of
a
tree
request
to
remove
a
city
tree
as
a
result
of
an
application
granted
to
a
builder
developer
to
you
know
to
build
on
that
site.
What
is
the
role
of
the
urban
forestry?
What
is
the
role
of
building
to
grant
that
permit
and
what
happens
to
the
tree?
Sir.
R
You,
madam
Speaker,
it's
a
comp,
there's
a
complex
answer
to
that.
However,
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
answer
it
in
a
high
level.
Essentially,
if
a
committee
of
adjustments
or
T
lab
a
grants,
a
permit
for
consent
of
a
property
and
there's
a
tree
involved,
if
the
trees
on
private
property,
then
that
ruling
exceeds
the
bylaw.
If
the
trees
on
city
property,
then
city
can
refuse
again
still
refuse
the
permit.
R
The
only
way
a
permit
could
be
issued
is
if
the
city
staff,
under
the
direction
on
the
general
manager
and
the
local
councillor
agree
on
the
removal
local
councillor
can
needs
to
authorize
the
replacement
plan.
At
that
point,
we
can
authorize
removal
of
that
tree.
Does
that
answer
your
question?
Yes,.
S
In
part,
but
what
happens
you
know,
as
was
illustrated
north,
your
community
council,
the
person
urban
forestry
said
while
they
couldn't
comment
on
the
removal
of
the
city
tree,
because
al
pat
or
t
lab
community
just
had
made
a
decision
to
give
them
a
permit.
Therefore,
they,
as
a
matter
of
practice,
do
not
comment
on
whether
the
tree
should
be
protected
or
not.
Can
you
comment
on
that
dramatic.
R
Speaker
again,
every
situation
has
taken
at
its
own
merit.
If
we're
gonna
speak
of
those
particulars,
we
could
speak
offline,
but
what
happens?
Is
staff
will
consider
whether
or
not
once
in
this
case,
in
similar
cases,
they
deny
the
permit?
They
make
a
recommendation.
A
committee
of
adjustments
to
refuse
the
the
application
to
the
the
damage
to
the
tree
committee
of
adjustments
then
agrees
with
city
staff
and
denies
a
permit.
They
appeal
to
the
appeal
board,
which
is
a
designated
board
by
this
council,
that
appeal
board.
R
Then
grants
overturns
the
committee
of
adjustment
staff
that
are
in
a
conflicting
position.
They
have
a
granted
permit
for
in
this
area
consent
of
a
property,
but
if
they
refuse
the
removal
of
the
tree,
then
there's
no
access
into
the
driveway
into
their
garage.
They
normally
can
be
worked
out
with
the
local
councillor
in
the
case,
where
staff
feel
that
there's
gonna
be
ongoing
tension,
which
has
been
the
case
in
the
past.
It
goes
on
for
several
years
ongoing
tension
over
this
small
tree
and
a
house
has
been
developed
where
they
have
no
access
staff.
R
R
They
shall
allow
council,
in
its
wisdom,
thorny,
to
decide
whether
that
consent
should
take
place
or
the
tree
should
stay.
So
this
is
what's
in
front
of
Council
today,
whether
you
decide
to
keep
the
tree
and
the
the
which
would
impact
the
development
or
allow
the
development
to
take
place
and
have
the
true
removed
and
receive
the
compensation
that
should
equal
itself
out.
Does
that
answer
your
question?
Yes,.
Q
Q
So
in
this
I'll
go
to
this
instance,
just
because
it's
before
us,
so
we
have
a
situation
where
we
have
a
healthy
tree.
Urban
forestry
staff
take
the
position
it's
a
healthy
tree.
It
should
not
be
removed
and
they
take
that
position
prior
to
the
planting
decisions,
then
outside
bodies
which
have
no
jurisdiction
over
city
trees
or
an
outside
body
that
has
no
jurisdiction
over
city
trees
decides
to
approve
the
development.
You
then
have
urban
forestry
change
its
position
and
say:
oh
well.
Q
R
Through
you,
madam
Speaker,
the
the
direction
I
have
given
staff
is
that
that
shouldn't
happen.
However,
it's
not
to
say
that
it
may
not
happen
in
the
future.
We
would
work
with
the
local
councillor
and
determine
what's
best
what's
in
the
best
interest
for
the
community
and
their
urban
forests.
So
you
know
right
in
this
particular
case.
We
could
have
gone
both
ways.
R
Q
G
You
know,
for
the
most
part,
stuck
in
the
middle
of
conflicting
approvals
and
appeals
processes
through
other
bodies
around
the
actual
development.
That's
going
forward,
so
I
think
staff
use
their
best
judgment
in
trying
to
make
the
best
decision,
both
from
the
protection
of
trees
perspective
by
allowing
for
the
removal
of
the
tree,
yet
ensuring
that
the
appropriate
replacement
fees
and
plantings
are
required,
and
you
know
with
the
development
which
has
already
gone
through
committee
adjustment
and
the
appeals
process.
So,
as
mr.
Doyle
has
indicated,
these
are
not
easy
decisions
to
make
all
with
conflicting.
G
Q
On
I,
just
what
minute
that's
left
so
I,
don't
understand
that
so
you'll
have
to
help
me
with
it.
Urban
forest
trees
job
is
to
protect
trees
right
they.
So
why
would
if
they're,
if
there's
a
tree,
an
urban
forestry
says
it
should
be
protected?
Why
would
that
opinion
change,
because
someone
else
who
have
no
jurisdiction
over
that
tree
says
we're
going
to
approve
a
development.
I
agree.
G
Urban
forestry
is
to
protect
trees,
but
we
also
have
to
ensure
that
we're
working
with
the
processes
across
the
city
to
support
whatever
you
know,
processes
are
moving
forward.
I
think
staff
did
their
best
judgment
in
this
particular
case
and
in
this
particular
case
it
wasn't
a
decision
that
the
local
counselor
or
the
constituents
agreed
with
and
as
mr.
Doyle
has
indicated,
contrary
to
that,
it
certainly
counsels
discretion
to
reverse
that
decision.
Thank.
M
M
So
I
guess
we're
going
to
be
in
a
situation
here
where
there's
some
approvals
for
a
development
to
take
place,
consent
and
and
the
changing
of
a
home,
and
now
we're
dealing
with
the
right-of-way
immediately
in
front
of
the
property,
and
in
order
for
this
to
hat
for
this
development
to
happen
as
plan
and
as
approved
this
tree
is
there
and
City
Council
because
of
our
bylaws
would
have
to
authorize
the
removal
of
the
tree
if
we
turn
it
down.
Where
does
that
leave
the
owner
of
the
property?
What
what
could
they
do?
M
G
M
M
Right
there's
many
ways
to
resolve
it,
but
potentially
that
could
be
one
of
them.
Is
that
it?
You
know
another
body
would
have
to
go
and
then
make
the
decision,
such
as
the
course
it's
okay,
three
amount
of
speakers
to
the
to
the
the
chief
planner,
just
so
I
understand
a
little
bit
of
the
background.
I
see
that
there's
a
t
lab
appeal
and
then
before
that
there
was
a
committee
of
adjustment
application
for
some
development
and
for
a
consent
from
a
planning
perspective
did
were
there
any
objections
from
the
city
or,
conversely,
is
this?
T
The
speaker,
I,
don't
I,
do
not
have
that
information
in
front
of
me.
What
I
can
tell
you
is
that
the
when
the
matter
would
go
to
committee
of
adjustment
for
that,
both
the
consent
and
any
associated
minor
variances.
That
would
be
required
to
facilitate
the
development
at
that
point
in
time
the
application
would
be
reviewed
by
planning
and
urban
forestry,
and
if
there
were
issues,
those
issues
would
have
been
brought
to
the
attention
of
the
committee
of
adjustment.
In
the
first
instance,
the
committee
would
make
its
decision
and
then
subsequently
on
appeal.
T
The
T
lab
would
consider
those
matters
as
well.
So
I
don't
have
the
background.
Specifically,
all
I
can
tell
you
is
that
the
t
lab
having
duly
considered
it
approved
both
the
consent
and
the
minor
variance
applications
and
what's
been
outlined,
is
on
a
single
lot
here,
where
there's
a
land
division,
the
the
conflict
that
then
we
came
to
because
there
has
to
be
a
driveway
to
service
the
two
new
buildings
in
the
driveway
and
the
tree
location.
T
The
existing
city
tree
location
are
in
conflict
and
there
evidently
was
not
enough
space
to
reconcile
those
two
competing
objectives.
Ideally
in
a
new
development,
you
would
want
to
position
the
driveway
in
a
way
that
would
avoid
the
city
tree
and
everybody
is
happy
everything
else
assuming
or
in
this
case
I
assume
we
would
lose
the
city
tree,
but
replace
it
with.
Perhaps
my
street
trees
to
mitigate
the
impact
of
losing
the
tree
right.
M
M
I
don't
mean
to
put
you
on
the
spot,
so,
but
but
theoretically,
if
staff
have
an
objection
to
you
know
consent
or
something
going
on
to
the
committee
of
adjustment,
the
normal
vehicle
is
that
you,
a
report
would
be
prepared
and
we
could
probably
do
a
search
and
find
it.
But
neither
your
nor
I
could
find
that.
That's.
M
And
then,
just
out
of
principle,
the
committee
of
adjustment
and
the
tea
lab:
are
they
not
delegations
of
authority
from
Council
conceptually
rather
than
us,
making
the
decision
all
these
matters?
We
delegate
it
to
these
bodies
and
these
bodies
have
gone
through
the
process
and
they've
made
decisions.
That's.
T
J
J
R
To
you,
madam
Speaker,
when
they
apply
for
a
building
permit
at
that
point,
when
the
issue
the
building
permit
with
their
drawings,
they
give
them
a
tree
decoration.
That's
when
the
homeowner
or
the
applicant
is
aware
that
they
have
to
declare
whether
a
trees
in
conflict
and
that
information
on
that
decoration
is
to
to
converse
with
with
forestry.
R
R
R
Therefore,
they
can't
withhold
the
permit
because
trees
are
not
applicable
law,
so
all
they
can
do
is
in
very
great
cooperation,
as
they
clearly
identify
that
the
city
has
bylaws
respecting
trees
and
that
this
permit
is
conditioned
on
them,
satisfying
urban
forestry
and
that's
where
we
get
into
the
position
of
negotiating
footprints.
It's
when
they
don't
satisfy.
That's
when
we
go
in
through
the
position
of
enforcement.
R
Tree
madam
Speaker
I
would
direct
all
of
that.
Those
questions
to
buildings,
because
it's
really
up
to
the
building
department,
whether
or
not
they
can
circulate
prior
to
us
like
the
committee
of
adjustment,
would
but
we're
not
applicable
law.
So
it
would
really
be
the
chief
building
officer
that
would
answer
those
questions.
A
S
To
answer
the
question
about
what
can
we
do
to
clarify
this
whole
issue,
because
certainly
people
are
being
reasonable,
I
think
and
knowing
that
a
builder
in
this
case
wanted
to
sever
a
lot,
the
city
lot
and
they
wanted
driveways,
and
it
shouldn't
be
an
automatic
that
she,
because
you
want
a
driveway
or
two
driveways
and
sever
a
lot
that
you
should
be
able
to
go
to
committee
of
adjustment,
go
to
another
tribunal
and
override
our
tree
protection.
Bylaw!
S
S
But
it's
all
about
saying
that
cutting
down
city
trees
to
accommodate
development
has
to
be
given
some
really
serious
thought,
and
it
shouldn't
be
just
because
committee
of
adjustment
made
a
decision
that
all
of
a
sudden
urban
forestry
steps
aside,
because
we
certainly
know
I
mean
in
my
ward
I
get
about
15
committee
of
adjustment
meetings
every
two
weeks.
We
cannot
keep
up
with
the
rubber
stamping
of
all
this
infill
development.
It
takes
place
up
and
down
every
street
by
the
committee
of
adjustment.
They
basically
like
official
plans
secondary
plan,
I,
don't
think
I've.
S
Any
community
adjustments
ever
looks
at
them.
They
always
the
developers
in
fellers
seem
to
get
everything
they
want.
So
for
us
to
as
counselors
at
the
community
to
depend
on
the
committee
of
adjustment
to
protect
our
trees.
Forget
about
it.
They
won't.
You
know
they're,
building
too
lot
lines
the
monster
homes,
their
wall,
a
wall
with
indoor
swimming
pools,
cutting
down
trees,
fences
walls
in
the
back.
S
So
let's
keep
some
control
over
our
ability
to
protect
city
trees
from
automatic
removal
by
a
unelected
body's
decision,
whether
it
be
all
those
I've
listed
before
so
that's
what's
at
stake
here.
I
know
people
say
it's
just
the
tree
and
who
cares,
but
it
is
an
important
principle
of
us
being
able
to
ensure
our
urban
forestry
experts
and
they're
in
a
tight
spot.
As
you
know,
our
staff
mentioned
they're
caught
between
a
rock
and
a
hard
place
or
whatever
it
is.
S
I,
don't
know
where
there
ever
has
been
stopped
building
anywhere
in
the
city
anymore.
So
this
is
about
standing
up
and
saying
listen.
We
need
some
kind
of
integrity
in
our
process
to
make
sure
the
durbin
forestry
has
a
significant
role,
no
matter
what
the
committee
of
adjustments
rules
and
all
the
other
tribunals
which
overrule
everything
we
do
around
here.
Thank
you.
Thank.
Q
Thank
you
well,
first
of
all,
I
support
councillor
Cole-
and
this
is
in
his
ward
in
preserving
this
tree.
I
will
concede
that
there
is
another
argument
to
be
made
at
a
contrary
argument,
which
councillor
Holliday
I'm
sure
will
give
I
much
prefer
to
take
the
argument
in
favor
of
preserving
the
tree.
But
what
I'm
really
concerned
about
here
is
the
the
issue
of
the
position
of
urban
forestry.
Q
When
you
know
several
years
back,
I
went
up
to
a
very
tall
spot
to
look
over
Willowdale
and
it
was
really
remarkable
how
you
could
basically
delineate
Willowdale
without
having
a
map
just
from
the
tree
canopy.
It
was
this
huge
area
of
green
and
when
you
looked
further
in
just
about
any
direction,
you
didn't.
You
didn't
see
that
anymore.
There
was
so
there
was
something
really
special
about
the
trees
and
Willowdale.
Q
If
you
look
from
the
same
place
now,
you
don't
see
anything
like
the
same
tree
canopy
and
that
is
in
part
because
of
ageing
trees
and
having
to
plant
new
ones
where
some
have
fallen
over
in
a
storm
or
whatever.
But
it
is
more
of
the
case
because
of
new
home
construction
and
trees
not
being
protected
during
new
home
construction
and
those
trees,
eventually,
either
us
giving
permission
to
remove
them
or
or
they're
so
damaged
that
they
end
up
dying
and
and
getting
removed.
Q
So
it's
a
really
significant
problem
in
all
parts
of
the
city
where
we
have
a
lot
of
home
construction
or
a
major
major
home
renovation,
and
what
bothers
me
with
this
one
is
the
call
that
urban
forestry
made.
In
my
view,
urban
forestry
should
be
sticking
up
for
the
tree
canopy
because
of
urban
forestry
doesn't
who's
going
to.
We
know
that
the
committee
of
adjustment-
doesn't
we
know
that
the
tea
lab?
Doesn't
we
sure,
as
heck
know
that
the
builders
don't
the
trees
are
just
in
their
way?
Q
M
You,
madam
Speaker
I,
wonder
if
council
would
agree
to
name
the
tree
left
tenant
maple,
because
it's
a
good
little
soldier
and
that's
really
the
position
this
tree
is
being
put
in
it's
being
put
to
the
front
lines
by
Council.
This
is
a
really
interesting
discussion
today.
I
didn't
anticipate
it,
but
what
we've
got
before
us
is
somebody
that
want
to
develop
a
property
and
whether
I
agree
with
what
they've
done
with
it
or
not.
It
doesn't
matter,
it's
gone
through
commutative
adjustment
and
then
through
T
lab
and
those
are
our
delegates.
M
Why
we
wouldn't
follow
through
with
the
removal
of
a
tree
is
not
logical,
and
so
you
know,
if
you
did
the
mental
exercise
forward.
If
a
neighbourhood
said
you
know,
look
we're
tired
of
the
consents
councillor,
we
don't
want
anything
else
built
in
the
neighbourhood.
Isn't
it
as
the
answer
just
go
plant
a
whole
pile
of
trees
in
the
right-of-way
and
just
sort
of
stop
development
so
that
at
least
we
have
that
lever?
M
You
know
the
right
way
to
do.
This
would
be
to
pass
very
rigorous,
bylaws
and
zoning
bylaws.
That
says,
you
know
we
can't
do
this
anymore
and
to
hold
the
line
from
that
perspective
as
a
councillor,
but
as
a
council
but
I
don't
sense.
This
council
has
the
appetite
to
do
that
and
so
we're
in
this
process
of
these
development
applications
following
the
process
that
they
go
through
so
I'm
not
going
to
support
this
out
of
principle,
it's
not
for
lack
of
sensitivity
of
the
local
councillor.
M
J
You,
madam
Speaker
I'll,
just
be
36
30
seconds
on
this,
but
I
think
it's
important
I
think
we
all
think
it's
important
so
I
have
to
say
that
no
one
is
in
a
better
position
to
understand
what's
happening
in
the
tree
camp
and
camp
canopy
across
the
city,
but
particularly
our
specific
words.
No
one
is
in
a
better
position
than
city
councillors.
We
know
what's
happening
currently
in
our
Ward's
related
to
the
tree
canopy.
J
So
I
just
think
it's
so
important
that
we
we
listen
to
the
local
city
councillors
on
this
issue,
because
they're
in
the
best
position
to
advise
us
and
I,
also
think,
as
a
big-picture
item,
I'll
put
the
chief
building
official
on
notice
that
I
will
be
coming
to
speak
to
you
about
really
the
process
of
circulating.
The
tree
declaration
to
urban
forestry
for
the
review
of
tree
related
matters
prior
to
the
issuance
of
a
building
permit,
so
I
will
be
looking
at
that
issue
more
thoroughly
on.
H
A
H
You
I
was
just
I
was
just
saying
that
I'll
say
as
much
as
I
can,
without
speaking
directly
to
the
confidential
attachment,
but
what?
What
is
in
the
public
version
that
for
many
years
as
we
all
know,
we
have
been
we've
been
achieving
agreements
with
developers
to
contribute
funds
to
our
quality
of
life,
whether
it
be
through
section,
37
or
section
42
of
the
Planning
Act
and
those
days
we
understand,
may
not
go
on
for
much
longer
and
it's
incredibly
important.
H
I
would
submit
that
every
penny
that
we
are
able
to
contribute
to
our
communities,
to
infrastructure,
to
parks,
to
social
services
that
we
that
we
do
and
that's
their
job
and
that's
what
we
wanted
on
behalf
of
our
neighborhoods
and
no
developer
should
act
as
a
scofflaw.
At
the
end
of
the
day.
If
there's
an
agreement,
then
you
should
honor
that
agreement
and
I
believe
that
most
developers
want
to
be
honorable
to
that
agreement.
H
If
we
deferred
for
one
month,
then
then
support
the
the
recommendation
today
and
and
I
and
I
should
just
make
it
very
clear.
There
is
no
loss
in
doing
that.
In
other
words,
all
of
you
have
read:
I
expect
the
confidential
attachment.
So
you
know
that
whether
we
do
that
now
or
do
that
next
month,
it
doesn't
actually
matter
like
it
makes
no
difference
at
all.
H
But
if
you
give
it
one
month,
I'm
giving
you
my
assurance,
not
that
I
know
that
we
will
be
successful,
but
I
think
that
there
are
opportunities
with
some
of
the
some
of
the
subjects
of
our
concern
to
to
improve
our
financial
condition.
I'm
speaking.
That
way,
only
because
I'm
trying
to
talk
around
the
confidence
attachments.
So
please
understand,
but
if
you
could
have
a
little
faith
in
what
I'm
suggesting
to
you,
I
would
appreciate
your
support.
H
F
S
H
J
A
D
L
D
D
Yes,
the
original
plan
had
a
three
metre
setback,
we're
now
at
a
five
metre
setback
on
plan.
So
I
don't
know
if
you
know
all
the
specifics
about
this,
but
this
of
being
on
negligent
I
think
everybody
knows,
is
the
potential
future
of
the
Eglinton
East
LRT
and
there's
been
some
back-and-forth
with
the
with
the
applicant
on
the
setback.
D
Some
upwards
of
you
know:
five
meters,
8
meters,
12
meters,
haven't
really
been
able
to
get
a
specific
number
down,
but
on
Eglinton
it's
about
do
you
know
how
the
width
of
Eglinton
is
on
that
portion
of
Eglinton
all
the
way
down
to
I
think
Victoria
Park,
where
the
LRT
is
being
made
young.
You
know
the
width
of
that.
The
the
widths
of
the
I.
D
Yeah,
it's
about
36
minutes.
There's
six
lanes
on
on
Eglinton.
Some
of
the
conversations
with
the
applicant
planning
have
been
you
know,
requesting
upwards
of
a
12
metre
setback.
Do
you
know
of
any
other
setbacks
along
Eglinton
on
the
LRT
portion
that
we're
building
now,
where
there's
been
demands
or
requests
for
anything
more
than
you
know,
say:
5
meters,
that's
presently
yeah,
because.
T
Through
the
speaker,
I'm
advised
that
staff-
and
this
is
in
the
context
of
the
EI
not
being
completed
yet
for
the
Eglinton
East
LRT,
but
I've
been
advised
that
staff
have
been
speaking
to
the
applicant
about
an
eight
and
a
half
metre
setback
and
the
applicants
proposal
at
least
along
Eglin,
provides
for
a
5
metre
setback.
It
is
difficult
to
conclude
that
kind
of
discussion
when
the
EI
has
not
been
completed
and
you
counselor
are
pointing
out.
You
know
the
variability
in
the
conversation,
but
my
last
information
from
staff
is.
T
D
T
I
can
only
provide
through
the
speaker
the
context
that
we
would
complete
an
EA
on
on
Eglinton
for
that
LRT
facility,
ultimately,
and
that
would
provide
the
basis
for
us,
including
in
our
official
plan,
a
widening
requirement
and
then
development
that
proceeds
along
Eglinton
would
be
required
to
provide
that
dedication.
And
that
is
the
way
the
city
you
know
aligns
its
transportation
planning
with
its
land
use
development
planning.
T
This
development
is
coming
advanced
of
all
of
that,
and
it
poses
a
difficult
challenge
for
the
city,
because
in
approving
the
development
in
its
current
form,
it
will
make
the
installation
of
that
facility,
ultimately
a
little
trickier
I'm,
not
saying
impossible,
but
it
does
make
it
more
challenging
to
install
transit
after
development
takes
place,
and
we
very
much
try
to
put
it
in
the
other
order.
If
you
will
so.
T
Q
T
The
speaker,
we
had
originally
recommended
that
the
application
be
refused
in
July
2018.
That
matter
came
to
counsel
and
counsel,
sent
it
back
to
staff
asking
us
to
come
forward
with
a
bylaw
that
would
permit
the
generally
speaking
the
townhouse
development.
That's
that's
before
us
in
the
application.
Staff,
of
course
maintain
its
view
that
the
application
is
inconsistent
with
the
Official
Plan.
So.
Q
T
Q
T
Q
T
The
speaker,
certainly
in
keeping
with
the
city's
current
official
plan
and
the
new
growth
plan
amendments
from
the
province.
We
should
be
seeking
higher
densities
along
the
transit
lines
in
general
and
then
certainly
in
close
proximity
at
a
transit
stations,
and
there
likely
would
be
one
at
Danforth
and
Eglinton.
Even
higher
densities
in
proximity
of
walking
distance,
500,
800
meters
and
this
this
site
is
right
at
the
corner.
So.
Q
Q
Something
that
was,
let's
say
at
least
twice
as
dense
as
what's
being
proposed,
likely
yes,
and
what
are
the
implications
from
the
for
the
rest
of
the
city?
When
we
are
inconsistent
when
at
some
spots,
we
will
will
just
be
inconsistent,
where
will
approve,
you
know,
double
the
density
that
staff
are
recommending
and
safe
fits
within
our
vision
and
at
other
sites,
less
than
half.
What
does
that
do
to
other
sites
across
the
whole
city
through.
T
The
speaker
it
in
general,
you
know
the
City
Council
passes
an
official
plan,
which
is
a
long
range
planning
vision,
and
we
would
very
much
hope
and
I
think
the
vast
majority
of
times
we're
making
decisions
incremental
decisions
that
advance
the
vision
of
that
plan.
So
over
a
long
period
of
time.
We
we
shape
the
city
in
that
way.
T
T
Say
the
effect
is
the
inconsistency
poses
a
challenge
for
the
long
term
implementation
of
the
vision.
It
will
frustrate
that
that
vision,
you
know,
townhouse
development
in
of
itself
is
density,
but
perhaps
now
we
will
under
develop
other
sites,
because
we've
we've
set
a
tone
for
that
strip
that,
in
our
view,
is
less
than
what
we
could
ideally
accommodate
on
that
on
that
area
in
that
area.
Thank.
Q
O
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
through
you
to
the
to
the
chief
planner
mr.
Lynn
turn,
so
this
proposal
that's
before
us
is
the
second
time
it's
been
here.
The
first
proposal
was
six
blocks
of
four-story
stacked,
townhouses
198
units,
the
current
proposal.
As
I
understand
it
is
five
blocks
of
four-story
townhouses
182
units,
so
the
number
of
units
has
gone
down
and
I
guess
the
floor.
Space
has
gone
by
three
down
by
three
thousand
square
meters.
Almost
that's.
O
T
Is
slightly
less,
as
it
was
pointed
out,
there's
a
public
park.
We
continue
to
have
I
think
when
council
sent
it
back
to
staff.
There
was
an
instruction
to
look
as
closely
as
we
could
at
the
townhouse
guidelines
to
see
that
the
if
we
are
going
to
be
working
with
townhouses,
that
we
we
achieve
the
townhouse
guidelines
and
there
are
still
some
deficiencies
in
this
as
a
townhouse
project
in
terms
of
separation
distances
and
the
the
layout
of
the
site.
It's
a
tricky
site.
O
O
T
O
T
O
T
From
my
through
the
speaker
from
my
previous
comment,
my
experience
with
mid-rise
is:
is
that
you
see
densities
in
the
four
five
and
six
times
a
level
in
a
typical,
mid
rise.
So
I
really
can't
respond
to
what
what
you
heard
of
Community
Council
as
to
why
the
proponent
felt
that
we
could
achieve
that
density.
Okay,.
O
And
the
other
concern
that
was
addressed
across
the
street
from
this
application.
There's
it's
a
large
block
of
townhouses.
My
understanding,
those
townhouses
were
were
build
long
before
we
ever
considered
an
LRT
on
Eglinton
Avenue
East
from
a
planning
perspective.
That's
probably
something
that
we
would
look
at
differently
now,
because
we're
looking
at
have
a
higher
order
of
transit
in
Scarborough.
T
The
townhouse
approach
across
the
city
and
I
can
think
of
a
location
on
Dundas
in
Etobicoke,
where
townhouses
were
built
at
one
point
in
time,
because
that's
what
worked
at
that
point
of
time,
but
we
eventually
took
townhouses
out
of
their
zoning
bylaw,
and
now
we
have
about
four
or
five
mid
rise
developments
happening
there.
So
the
you
know
the
mind
the
mind,
changes
over
time
and
the
climate
of
that
community
changes
and
we
we
hope
to
influence.
You
know
the
direction
that
it
goes
in
with
some
of
these
incremental
approvals.
Thank.
G
F
Madam
Speaker
so
I'm
wondering
if
I
can
just
sort
of
juxtapose
this
against
the
section
of
Scarborough
that
continues
on
for
my
ward
on
Sheppard.
It's
my
understanding
that
the
development
sites
on
the
east
side
of
Victoria
Park,
similar
to
mine
when,
if
they
end
up
in
appeal,
even
if
we're
talking
about
the
Sheppard
expansion
currently
by
Metrolinx,
it's
slated
for
2041
if
we're
lucky,
and
yet
the
applicants
continue
and
appeal
to
use
the
argument.
This
is
a
site
of
future
transit
and
they
get
their
density.
F
T
The
speaker,
I,
don't
believe
it
started
out
as
a
more
dense
application.
I
think
what
what
what's
being
described
in
the
question
is
more
often
the
dynamic
where
we
are
getting
applications
for
density
before
the
transit
is
in
the
offing
or
funded
or
even
in
a
plan,
and
in
those
situations
we,
you
know,
you
will
often
see
approvals
of
recommendations,
but
we
might
accompany
that
with
a
hold,
because
we
know
that
we
really
shouldn't
be
approving
no
building
that
development
until
the
transit
catches
up
right.
T
T
With
the
challenge
here
is
that
certainly
there's
a
there's,
an
expectation
that
these
townhouses
will
sell?
Probably
you
know
we
can
so
the
the
the
product
immediately
right
now
is
a
sellable
product,
but
the
the
disassociation
from
the
long-term
vision,
the
planning
vision
for
the
city.
We
feel
there
should
be
a
tighter
relationship
between
what
what
you
might
be
able
to
buy
or
sell
on
the
market
and
the
direction
in
the
overall
direction.
F
F
How
is
this
before
us
with
not
one
unit
of
affordable
housing
at
a
place
like
Eglinton
Brimley,
that
needs
a
massive
shot
in
the
arm
for
economic
development
needs,
affordable
housing
for
the
people
who
live
not
in
the
swanky
townhomes
across
the
street,
but
north
and
south
of
the
Edmondson
corridor,
and
all
the
way
up
to
Lawrence,
affordable
housing
out
here
is
badly
needed.
Is
it
not
to.
T
The
speaker,
it's
affordable,
housing
is
badly
needed
across
the
entire
city.
The
there
is
not
currently
a
planning
framework
in
place
in
this
local
area,
or
for
that
matter
the
city
does
not
have
the
inclusionary
zoning
power
yet
to
be
able
to
require
a
component
of
the
project
to
be
affordable,
so
we're
locking
that
regulatory
framework
to
impose
that
condition-
and
it
wasn't
achieved
through
the
through
the
more
informal
negotiation
process
so.
F
I
asked
this:
might
this
is
my
last
question
and
we
leave
a
whole
minute
to
answer
it.
You
came
to
council,
your
planners
came
to
counsel
with
the
refusal
report
and
when
you
do
that,
you
sort
of
know
what
probably
will
be
the
next
steps.
What
might
be
owner
do
here?
What
what?
What?
What
does
your
crystal
ball
tell
you
in
your
professional
opinion
in
refusing
it
this
site's
not
going
to
stay
undeveloped,
it's
very
attractive.
It's
not
going
to
stay
undeveloped.
T
F
A
H
And
when
we're
evaluating
potential
transit
lines,
part
of
what
we
evaluate
is
the
forecasted
population
in
the
area.
The
density
in
the
area
so
that
we
can
project
ridership,
that's
correct
and
the
business
case
for
transit
lines
depends
on
the
Official
Plan,
guiding
the
development
to
those
areas
through.
T
H
T
C
T
C
C
T
T
C
You,
you
talked
a
little
bit
about
consistency
and
inconsistent
seasons.
One
are
all
the
planning
decisions
that
are
made
by
yourself
and
your
team
are
all
those
consistent
with
respect
to
the
planning
principles
are
their
amendments
or
their
adjustments
to
those
as
part
of
a
larger
narrative,
both
in
terms
of
input
from
the
community
and
local
councillors,
and
so
on.
So.
T
Through
the
speaker,
we
have
a
policy
led
environment
in
Ontario.
We
have
growth,
plans,
provincial
policy
statements
and
we're
bound
as
planners
to
through
our
official
plan,
to
give
you
advice.
That
is
consistent
right,
as
you
know,
the
breadth
of
consistency,
and
we
can
all
point
to
the
variability
in
that
envelope
that
we're
provided.
C
C
T
T
T
C
C
C
T
C
T
Mean
certainly,
we've
seen
that
transition
across
the
city,
where
we're
introducing
mid-rise
along
our
Main
streets,
and
we
try
to
mold
that
mid
rise,
so
that
it
doesn't
affect
the
impact
it
doesn't
affect
the
community.
This
is
actually
on
the
north
side
of
the
community
to
the
south,
so
it
it
actually
is
a
pretty
straightforward
exercise.
The
site
is
tight,
though,
and
it's
a
challenging
site
which,
whether
you're
building
mid-rise
or
townhouses
thank.
A
F
A
A
K
Yes,
ma'am
speaker,
I
can
release
two
items.
The
first
one
is
on
page
48
point
11:56,
youngstreet,
21,
Melinda,
Street
8
to
30
Wellington,
Street
West,
and
there
is
so
I
could
release
that
item.
Madam
Speaker
and
the
subsequent
reports
to
that.
But
there
is
also
sorry
I
should
I
should
mention.
There's
there's
an
emotion.
Yes,.
K
A
K
Speaker,
I
am
releasing
eight
point:
seven,
zero
alterations
to
a
designated
heritage,
property
and
all
authority
to
enter
into
Heritage
easement
agreement,
199
base,
325
King,
Street,
West
and
fifty-six
Yonge
Street.
There
is
a
technical
amendment
that
staff
are
provided
if
they
can
put
that
on
the
screen,
and
it
literally
is
adding
five
more
words
to
that
particular
clause.