►
Description
Etobicoke York Community Council, meeting 22, May 2, 2017 - Part 3 of 3
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=11914
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMIzXoeATzY
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yNIGhCAxlc
A
Okay,
seeing
we
have
Corman
calling
this
meeting
back
to
order
we're
here
for
ey
22.1
request
for
directions:
report
29:15,
2917,
Fleur,
Street,
West,
zoning,
bylaw,
amendment
application.
So
the
number
of
speakers,
when
you
hook
to
the
mic,
please
state
your
name.
You
know
5
mins,
to
speak
and
then
we'll
ask
you
questions
and
then,
after
all,
the
questions
from
you
will
forget
and
staff
will
ask
questions
staff
and
then
we
will
speak
and
vote
at
the
end
so
to
move
things
along
on
time.
Our
first
speaker.
C
A
D
D
When
we
had
this
November
meeting
where
the
developer
was
getting
together
with
us
and
talking
to
us
about
this
proposed
development,
I
was
excited
I,
like
the
idea
that
other
people
will
get
the
opportunity
that
I
had
to
get
to
know
the
community
through
living
in
a
condo.
It's
a
more
approachable
way
to
live.
D
It's
a
more
kind
of
accessible
way
to
live
in
a
community
and
it
was
through
living
in
that
condo
that
I
wanted
to
ultimately
purchase
a
house
in
the
area
when
I
had
the
opportunity
to
do
so
and
so
I
like
the
idea
that
we
get
other
people
to
join
the
community.
I
was
obviously
concerned.
I
back
right
onto
the
laneway
I
have
two
young
children
they
play
in
that
backyard
every
day
and
so
I
was
concerned
about
idling
cars
in
the
laneway
I
was
concerned
about
traffic
in
the
area.
D
We
don't
have
any
sidewalks
in
our
area.
I
was
concerned
about,
obviously
the
density
of
the
neighborhood,
but
still
hopeful
still
glad
that
we'd
have
this
conversation
with
the
developers.
I
left
that
meeting,
obviously
with
some
concern,
but
still
glad
I
had
the
opportunity
to
have
my
voice
heard
from
the
developers,
as
you
guys
know.
So
in
the
months
that
followed
that
meeting
the
developer
went
straight
to
the
OMB
with
their
9
story
proposal.
D
That
proposal
was
drastically
different
than
what
they'd
presented
to
the
community
in
the
November
meeting
and
what
was
different
was
we
lost
the
opportunity
to
have
that
dialogue?
So,
as
someone
who
literally
has
this
happening
in
his
backyard,
I
feel
like
I
lost
the
opportunity
to
have
that
communication
with
the
developers.
I
feel
like
any
anything
that
I
had
in
terms
of
hopes
that
they
would
be
respectful
of
the
privacy
of
the
people
that
literally
are
backing
directly
onto
the
site
for
people
that
are
directly
affected
by
the
traffic
on
the
Langlade.
D
People
that
have
privacy
concerns.
I
was
hopeful
that
we
would
have
a
Michals,
amicable
solutions
to
these
problems
and
and
once
I'm
going
to
be
able
and
be
that
kind
of
hope
for
was
lost,
and
so,
if
I
could
impart
anything
on.
You
tonight
is
just
that.
I
hope
that
the
reason
that
I'm
standing
in
front
of
you
the
reason
that
I
support
the
assurance
to
the
Avenue
study
in
the
six
story
limit
is
because
I
really
just
have
lost
faith
that
the
developers
will
be
respectful
for
the
people
that
are
directly
affected
by
this.
D
And,
of
course,
we're
entirely
willing
everyone
I've
spoken
to
both
of
my
immediate
neighbors
and
people
in
the
community
associations
that
have
kind
of
spun
up
in
response
to
this.
I'll
share
that
same
sentiment
that
we're
happy
to
have
a
dialogue,
we're
all
in
favor
of
development
to
the
area.
We
want
new
neighbors,
we
want
new
buildings,
we
want
development,
but
we
want
that
development
to
be
responsible.
D
We
just
want
some
assurance
from
the
developer
that
they're
going
to
respect
our
privacy
they're,
going
to
respect
the
inherent
problems
that
come
with
increased
density,
the
increased
traffic,
the
increased
pedestrian
safety
concerns
and
right
now
that
assurance
is
lacking,
and
so
that's
why
I
think
you
have
this
kind
of
this
response
from
the
community
that
you
can
see
all
these
people
kind
of
gathered
behind
me.
This
is
why
I
mean
ultimately
I
feel
like
we've
lost
our
voice,
and
so
that's
why
I
think
you've
got
this
passionate
response.
D
That's
certainly
been
my
feeling
that,
aside
from
that
November
meeting,
there
really
has
been
no
kind
of
form
of
communication
between
us
and
the
developer,
and
it's
kind
of
it's
it's
a
difficult
thing,
especially
like
I,
said
it's
literally
in
my
backyard
and
I
feel
like
I
have
no
say
as
to
what
goes
on
in
terms
of
what
impacts
us,
and
so
that's
why
I
was
motivated
to
speak
here
tonight.
Thank
you
again
for
the
opportunity,
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions,
but
that
you
might
ask
for
me
as
well.
Thank.
D
A
E
E
E
E
All
these
modern
a
grew
up
on
the
fax
machine.
So
anyway
we
have
medical
freak
to
the
west
and
we
have
the
Humber
River
and
the
Parkland
cemetery
to
the
east
and
everything
is
locked
in
from
the
north
by
the
CPR
tract
and
the
traffic
in
this
area
is
funneled.
If
you
go
to
Norseman
from
about
2:30
3
o'clock
in
the
afternoon
during
rush
hour,
sorry,
where
did
we?
Where
did
I
lose
yeah?
Sorry,
ok,
Norseman
Norseman!
E
During
rush
hour,
everything
is
funneled
across
the
bridge
over
medical
creek
and
you
can
stand
there
in
front
of
the
old
folks,
the
senior
citizens
residents
and
you
can
see
cars
up
over
the
bridge
as
far
as
the
eye
can
see-
and
this
continues
on
for
rush
hour.
It's
it's
a
gridlocked
area
if
you
come
up
Park,
Lawn,
Road
to
Prince,
Edward
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
E
E
So
I
think
the
whole
thing
is
is
out
of
kilter
and
it
ignores
the
overall
gridlocked
nature
of
our
community,
we're
locked
in
and
there's
a
very
serious
limit
on
any
future
development.
We
can
live
up
to
six
storeys
and
we
can
live
within
the
zoning,
but
there's
a
problem
going
beyond
that.
The
next
thing
there's
a
discussion
of
the
subway
and
the
subway
is
there,
but
the
subway
comes
in
and
it's
full
today
it's
full
standing
room
only
and
we
have.
E
E
I'm
up?
Okay,
sorry,
good
for
you,
okay,
there's
a
discussion
as
well
about
the
parking
he
says
we
can.
We
had
he's
not
putting
in
commercial
parking
because
we're
going
to
they're
going
to
they're,
saying
that
they're
going
to
use
the
green
pea
parking,
which
is
there
for
the
part
for
commuters
to
the
subway,
not
for
the
commercial
buildings
and
also
there's
no
handicap
parking
Thank.
F
Evening,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
for
seeing
your
city
and
ours
review
this
matter
with
the
help
of
various
area
residents.
I
echo
the
concerns
that
this
building
is
inappropriate
for
its
selected
location.
It
has
been
30.
This
has
been
30
put
forward
by
City
Planning
staff
and
their
report
concerning
this
application
and
be
put
forward
by
presenters.
Before
and
after
me,
I
wish
to
draw
attention
to
the
gross
floor
area
multiple,
because
I
want
outline
to
you
that
the
gfa
violation
is
at
the
core
of
the
problems.
F
With
this
plan,
the
bylaw
zoning
for
the
subject,
land
indicates
three
times
lock
coverage.
That
was
the
jfa
set
out
by
the
city
bylaw
when
the
applicant
purchased
the
property
and
as
it
was
four
years
prior,
the
applicant
wishes
to
profit
greatly
by
obtaining
the
ability
to
build
using
a
GSA
at
four
point:
nine
six,
a
66%
violation
of
the
bylaw
and,
as
we
know,
the
jfa
applied,
does
not
account
for
the
oversized
balconies
in
the
proposed
plans.
The
balconies
were
included,
the
gfa
would
be
would
be
further
violated.
F
It
means
that
to
construct
such
a
building,
the
applicant
must
request
outside
amenity
bylaw
requirements
to
be
ignored,
must
request
required
by
law,
setbacks
to
be
ignored.
The
building
would
crowd
the
sidewalk
in
the
front,
and
it
is
asking
for
not
a
square
meter
of
lawn
to
be
provided
anywhere,
although
that
is
to
build
the
valuable
and
bylaw
Radek
ating
gfa
for
this
building.
The
avenue
guideline
floor,
height,
ignoring
clearly
certainly
contributes
to
the
floating
of
the
by
law
established
GFA.
F
We
can
compare
this
building
to
the
condo
structure
at
clones
wave
on
the
queen's
way
west
of
Islington
there.
The
buildings
were
set
back
five
meters
from
the
sidewalk
and
16
meters
from
the
rear
rear
lane
way.
This
allows
for
a
versatile,
mini
private
park
behind
the
building
for
residents
to
relax
and
stroll,
and
also,
very
importantly,
to
release
a
relief
area
for
the
dogs
of
the
resident.
Those
condo
structures
provide
an
aesthetic
appearance
for
passing
drivers
area
of
residents,
as
well
as
a
very
livable
environment
for
the
residents
of
the
building.
F
The
gfa
being
requested
today
in
this
building
does
not
allow
for
that.
The
potential
new
residents
will
be
without
green
space
of
any
kind.
The
owners
of
pet
dogs
will
be
forced
to
be
the
bane
of
the
community
as
their
pet
waste
piles
on
the
hard
surface
sidewalks
in
front
in
the
rear
lane
way
corridor.
As
I
mentioned,
I
would
like
to
comment
how
dangerous
the
narrow,
narrow,
one-way
heavily
used
lane
way
will
be
for
pedestrians
at
night,
just
on
the
lane
way.
Safety
issue
aside.
F
This
proposal
should
be
feared
for
its
probable
cause,
a
ssin
of
grievous,
grievous
injury.
The
developer,
through
their
signage
wishes
to
encourage
potential
purchasers
to
believe
that
the
very
large
green
space
is
only
a
hundred
metres
away.
However,
that
green
space
is
a
privately
owned,
parkland
Cemetery,
which
will
surely
prohibit
soiling
dog
walkers,
provided
provided
by
this
building
than
anywhere
else
parkland,
will
probably
find
it
necessary
to
borrow
all
casual
walkers
and
that
that
will
be
a
real
loss
to
the
community.
F
It
is
recognized
that
since
potential
residents
are
located
near
the
subway
entrance
that
some
will
not
require
a
car,
so
the
building
is
is
as
plan
is,
providing
significantly
fewer
parking
spaces
and
residential
units.
87
spaces
for
126
units
that
will
work
in
downtown
areas
such
as
blur
and
Bathurst
developments,
but
here
the
closest
grocery
store
is
two
miles
away.
The
closest
hardware
store
is
five
miles
away
soon,
each
and
every
resident
will
require
a
car.
31%
of
the
residents
will
not
have
a
parking
space.
39
cars
will
be
left
to
drift.
F
The
question
then
becomes:
where
will
they
park?
The
applicant?
The
application
to
council
and
now
to
OMB
must
be
recognized
for
what
it
is.
It's
a
cash
grab.
It's
allowed
that
is
allowed
by
a
greatly
intensified
gfa
allowed
by
eliminating
the
outdoor
any
space
that
that
the
bylaws
require
and
allowed
for
by
limited
parking
facilities
in
the
building.
F
We
owe
it
to
the
new
to
our
new
community
neighbors
that
they
should
enjoy
the
area
as
much
as
we
do.
New
neighbors
do
not
deserve
to
be
resident
in
a
faulty
building
such
as
the
one
proposed
community
count.
This
is
not
the
building
for
the
site.
The
city
planning
staff
has
stayed
to
that.
Clearly,
with
with
this
recognition,
this
proposed
building
is
substantially
not
in
keeping
with
attendance
of
good
planning
and
good
community
living
Thank
You.
F
A
F
A
G
G
You
councillor
grant
I
know
we
have
a
shot
clock
in
La
Crosse,
but
this
is
low
longer.
First
I'd
like
to
thank
city
council
members
and
staff
for
holding
this
meeting
in
the
evening
and
allowing
more
people
to
attend,
also
like
to
thank
those
of
you
who
voted
in
the
thirty
four
to
five
February
2012
vote
for
the
removal
of
provincial
oversight
when
it
comes
to
planning
in
our
city.
I
know,
council
has
ordered
several
times
to
move
Toronto
from
the
jurisdiction
of
the
OMB
I
agree
with
your
colleague,
councillor
Jay
Robinson
statement
quote.
G
In
my
opinion.
It's
really
devastating.
Our
neighbourhoods,
Toronto
no
longer
defines
our
neighborhoods
I
want
to
thank
each
and
every
one
of
you
for
standing
up
for
the
neighborhoods
of
Toronto.
In
your
capacities,
councillors
I
saw
this
firsthand
as
a
volunteer
on
the
Kingsway
residents
against
poor
planning
executive
when
the
only
overruled
the
elected
Toronto
council,
Council
and
their
staff
recommendations,
since
that
time
have
been
asked
to
share
a
2008
experience
with
people
who
are
concerned
about
over
development
and
poor
planning
in
their
neighborhoods
I
chaired
the
founding
meaning
of
the
Glenn
Hegar
residents
Association.
G
In
councilor
holidays
Ward
and
have
been
providing
insight
and
experience
with
the
newly
formed
skc,
a
sunny,
Lee,
Kings,
Lake
Community
Association
I
live
about
four
and
a
half
kilometres
from
the
Kings
Way
medical
building,
but
our
company
has
some
office
space
that
we
rent
immediately
beside
2915
blur
street,
so
I
know
it
well
and
the
surrounding
neighborhood
very
well.
The
buildings
on
blur
Street
West
between
Prince
Edward
Mimico
Creek,
are
either
one
or
two
storeys
in
height
and
the
little
doubling
the
building
height
to
three
or
four
storeys
would
impact
the
community.
G
The
sign
language,
Community
Association,
recognizes
the
name
to
increase
density
and
intensification
in
appropriate
areas,
in
other
words,
were
on
side
in
agreement
with
the
city
staff
report
and
only
ask
that
a
reference,
six
storeys
18
meters
from
the
King's
labor
urban
guidelines.
This
is
why
the
two
six
storey
buildings
along
that
section,
the
Regency
and
the
award-winning
Montgomery
building-
did
not
meet
opposition
or
strong
opposition
when
they
were
proposed.
That
said,
development
should
be
done
in
a
manner.
That's
consistent
with
the
city's
established
guidelines
in
the
Official
Plan.
G
That's
why
we
appreciate
the
staff
report
and
its
references
mainly
planning
staff,
opposed
this
application
in
its
current
form,
as
it
does
not
confirm
to
the
policies
of
the
Official
Plan
LP.
In
a
nutshell,
the
report
states
a
lot
of
weather,
our
neighbors
believe
the
proposed
height
scale
and
density
of
the
proposal
is
not
appropriate
within
the
existing
plant
context
for
this
segment
of
where
Street
West
and
the
adjacent
neighborhoods.
G
In
closing
it's
not
about
one
building
less
than
five
hundred
meters
away
from
this
proposal,
there's
a
proposal
that
was
originally
slated
for
six
storeys
and
it's
taken
a
wait-and-see
attitude
to
how
this
one's
handled.
Now
what
trend
starts
when
you
connect
two
points
of
data,
the
rules
are
six
stories:
18
meters
in
height,
all
we're
asking
is
for
the
developer
to
follow
the
rules
and
respect
the
Official
Plan
and
to
respect
the
neighborhood.
We
want
to
avoid
a
new
trend
of
exceeding
six
storeys
and
18
meters.
G
It's
the
cumulative
impact
of
developments
on
blur
street
that
concerns
the
neighbor.
This
neighbors.
This
isn't
just
a
one-off
as
resonance.
We
recognize
the
need
for
intensification
in
appropriate
areas.
That
said,
it
should
be
done
consistent
with
the
city's
established
guidelines.
We
all
see
going
to
beyond
six
stories
as
exploiting
the
desire
to
get
greater
density,
and
it
would
be
contrary
to
what
we
see
is
good
plain.
G
We
believe
that
the
elected
city
councillors
are
best
suited
to
determine
what's
best
for
the
community
if
all
the
city,
if
all
the
City
Council's
doing,
is
upholding
their
official
plan,
then
there
should
be
nothing
to
be
appealed.
As
the
city
staff
report
concludes,
the
proposed
development
does
not
conform
to
the
Official
Plan
policies
relating
to
the
height
the
massing
shadowing
in
transition.
Among
other
matters,
the
sunny
League
Kingsway
Community
Association
thanks
city
staff
for
their
report,
I'm,
going
to
appreciate
your
leadership
as
councillors,
and
support
and
leadership
at
the
yellow
and
beat.
G
Strong
opposition,
so
there's
the
the
Montgomery
I
know
you
sometimes
frequent
the
Starbucks
on
Bloor
across
them,
the
LCBO
but
there's
another
Starbucks,
and
that
beautiful
building
on
Montgomery
Montgomery.
Yes,
that
that's
right
across
the
knot!
Starbucks
is
the
it's
six
stories:
award-winning,
yes
and
then
you've
got
the
Regency
on
the
corner.
Councillor
in
the
corner
of
Roy
York
and
were
Street
would
be
the
other
one
that.
G
Right,
that's
right!
That's
the
trend
that
has
been
established.
It's
been
based
on
the
Official
Plan
and
a
lot
of
our
neighbors
think
even
three
or
four
stories
would
be
would
be
high,
but
we
want
to
recognize
what's
happening
in
the
City
of
Toronto
and
the
province,
so
we're
trying
to
be
realistic.
So
that's
why
we're
on
side
with
the
city
city
plan
all.
G
That's
right,
so
a
local
residents
associations
had
to
me
first.
Fifty
people
then
then
close
to
150
a
local
petition
of
about
700
signatures.
300
comments,
I
mean
I'm,
just
a
layperson,
as
you
know,
have
insurance
and
pension
business.
But
I
did
this
once
before
10
years
ago,
and
I
really
think
that
the
the
playing
field
is
unlevel
for
residence
groups,
for
city,
councilors
and
and
and
the
cards
seem
to
be
held
in
favor
of
the
developers.
So
as
a
volunteer.
H
G
That's
one
of
the
reasons
I
think
the
group
in
councilor
holidays
award
the
the
group
that
Glenn
Hegar
residents
associated
met
with
me.
We
went
to
that
process
10
years
ago
and
so
I
have
a
bit
of
a
strategy,
a
game
plan.
We
raised
one
hundred
and
forty
thousand
dollars
the
last
time
we
did
this
ten
years
ago,
and
so
the
next
step
after
getting
city
support,
I
think
the
community
wants
to
see
their
City
Council
supporting
City
South
councillor.
So
I
think.
H
Going
to
ask
you
a
question
and
it's
a
way
of
giving
you
information.
Are
you
aware
that
the
city
just
won
a
judgment
at
the
interior
municipal
board,
with
respect
to
st.
Stephen's
court
in
291
and
to
89
the
King's
way
and
they
work
with
the
Humber
Valley
residents
Association
and
got
a
very
favorable
judgment?
Are
you
aware
of
that?
No.
G
I've
been
music
to
our
ears,
because
we
know
that
that's
not
at
least
this
on
the
scoreboard,
when
it
comes
to
residents
groups
against
own
beefs
on
very
happy
to
hear
that
we
have
our
R
group
councillor
the
King's
way
residents
associate
for
the
the
earlier
group
that
I
was
on
the
executive
of
Kings
way
residents
against
poor
planning.
We
were
ahead
of
the
Humber
town
group
and
we
actually
met
with
some
of
their
executives
shared
some
notes.
G
I
You
mentioned
the
local
Peabody
right,
yeah,
so
you're
aware
that
this
application,
even
with
the
local
pure
body
which
is
in
effect
tomorrow,
that
only
applies
to
minor
variances.
It
wouldn't
apply
to
an
application
like
this.
That
would
this
would
still
go
to
the
entire
municipal
board.
Absolutely.
G
I
G
J
Evening,
thank
you.
I'm
Fiona
Campbell,
the
president
of
the
Kingsway
Park,
ratepayers
incorporated,
which
has
been
serving
the
interests
of
residents
in
the
Kings
away,
Sonny
Lee
district
now
for
over
50
years
in
reviewing
the
documents
pertaining
to
2915
29:17
Bloor.
It
is
interesting
to
note
that
the
newcomer
to
this
district
really
doesn't
seem
to
feel
that
asking
for
a
substantial
concession
from
surrounding
neighbors
warrants
any
kind
of
conciliatory
or
generous
gesture,
no
extra
trees
or
fencing
to
screen
the
neighbors
to
the
south.
J
No
extra
plantings
on
Bloor,
just
a
snappy
little
notice,
served
on
one
and
all
to
prepare
for
a
costly
off
to
the
OMB,
trailing
long
lines
of
expensive
lawyers,
planners
and
distressed
residents.
This
adversarial
approach
to
redevelopment
is
wrong.
It
absolutely
ignores
the
millions
of
taxpayer
dollars
that
have
been
spent
developing
bylaws
and
guidelines
to
keep
neighbors
civil
exceptions.
To
these
carefully
designed
rules
should
be
based
on
absolute
need,
not
on
a
subjective,
want.
J
The
shopping
district
along
Blair
was
built
in
1933
by
home
Smith,
with
restrictions
to
ensure
the
area
did
not
develop
into
a
motley
unrelated
architecture
about
20
years
ago.
The
ratepayers,
with
help
from
former
councillor
Blake
Ginn
ahem,
challenged
the
application
at
the
southeast
corner
of
Royal,
York
and
Bloor
to
the
OMB.
The
building
limit
was
in
fact,
four
storeys.
Then,
and
despite
our
robust
argument,
the
developer
managed
to
win
his
six
storeys,
because
this
was
a
significant
corner
calling
for
greater
height
and
substance,
or
so
he
said.
J
Had
he
been
mid
blocks,
the
result
might
well
have
them
different.
The
subsequent
containment
of
the
six
storey
building
at
montgomery
Ambler
was
also
influenced
by
the
ratepayers
who
persuaded
that
developer.
If
he's
owned,
the
houses
acquired
behind
that
site
into
the
larger
parcel,
he
would
face
a
guaranteed
trip
to
the
OMB
and
a
fierce
fight.
As
a
result,
a
rear
garden
was
installed.
The
building
was
moved
back
from
flora
street
graced
with
a
double
avenue
of
trees
now
so
greatly
admired
today,
but
the
writing
was
on
the
wall.
J
At
that
time,
the
ratepayers
and
planning
department
immediately
convened
stakeholders
and
meetings
that
resulted
in
the
Kings
waive
law
revenue
study
as
a
reference
point
for
the
future,
which
is
now
here
today.
We're
not
here
today
asking
for
any
special
treatment,
we're
here
asking
you
to
support
the
work.
That's
been
done
to
ensure
orderly,
proportionate
updating
and
refreshment
of
an
established
streetscape
sensibly
planned
from
the
outset.
The
mid-rise
guidelines
were
passed
much
later
to
address
broadly
the
needs
of
areas
without
specific
avenue
studies.
J
They
are
not
a
club
to
be
wielded
to
render
our
Avenue
study
meaningless.
Over
sized
buildings
inserted
into
the
current
fabric
will
produce
a
harsh
and
broken
streetscape
for
decades.
The
application
is
incomplete
in
its
nine-story
iteration,
with
supporting
studies
that
only
refer
to
the
8-story
version.
Many
Devils
lurk
in
these
undisclosed
details,
questions
about
the
capacities
of
water,
sewer
and
other
amenities
to
serve
similarly
large
redevelopment,
salong
blower
eerily
dismissed,
is
alarming.
J
At
the
start
of
this,
fresh
surge
of
rebuilding
taxpayers
have
to
know
that
these
matters
are
covered
not
to
be
fixed
later
piecemeal
at
greater
cost.
The
reconfiguration
of
the
interior
whisks
this
building
from
90
to
126
units
and
increase
of
40%
more
units
when
overall
parking
allocations
are
below
what
the
city
calls
for.
J
It
is
clear
that
the
offload
will
fall
squarely
on
the
neighbors,
which
is
inconsiderate
and
negligent
sign,
but
the
most
egregious
element
in
this
application
has
to
be
the
height
ceilings
can
be
raised
and
lower
is
a
planning
stages,
but
asking
for
an
extra
34
feet
of
height
overall
is
not
minor.
It's
greedy
58%
taller
than
the
building
height
of
the
planned
text.
Context
of
the
guidelines
and
zoning
laws
is
brazen.
This
building
protrudes
on
all
sides
into
somebody
else's
space.
It's
too
big
for
the
land
it
stands
upon
and
the
density
increase
is
untenable.
J
The
community,
the
cumulative
effect
of
the
developments
of
this
size,
is
clearly
injurious
for
the
Avenue
study
area.
We
understand
that
guidelines
and
bylaws
can
be
appealed,
but
someone
with
teeth
has
to
decide
what
is
reasonable
and
what
is
blatant,
self-serving
overreach.
This
proposal
cannot
be
rationalized
as
justifiable
intensification
as
promoted
by
the
Official
Plan.
We
backed
councillor
D
channel
100%.
We
ask
that
you
do
so
as
well
for
18
metres
or
six
stories
at
the
OMB.
Thank.
K
K
K
Don't
be
thank
you,
fortunately,
I
am
speaking
after
presentations
from
both
the
Kingsway,
the
psychic,
the
Sonny
Lee
Kings
Way,
Community
Association,
and
the
Kings
Way
Park,
ratepayers
incorporated
both
speakers
referenced.
Many
of
the
documents,
guidelines,
studies
and
bylaws
reference
in
staffs
request
for
Direction
report,
and
it
would
be
pointless
in
a
waste
of
your
time
for
me
to
repeat
what
they
have
already
said:
I'm
not
going
to
do
that.
K
What
I
can
share
with
you
is
that
a
very
large
number
of
our
members
signed
councilor
DCR,
nose
presentation
seeking
to
keep
that
this
development
to
six
stories
and
fully
support
his
motion
at
this
meeting
asking
for
the
same
limit.
They
also
signed
the
residents
petition,
asking
for
the
same
six
story,
limit
or
18
meters
in
our
area,
we're
very
fortunate
in
having
a
successful
six
story:
condo
development,
the
Montgomery,
which
I
heard
mentioned
a
couple
of
minutes
ago.
K
K
I
would
ask
that
council
accept
the
report
from
staff
and
past
councilor
DC
on
OHS
motion
restricting
the
building
to
16
stories
or
18
meters,
as
in
its
current
format,
the
bulk
and
the
massing
of
this
proposed
development
is
totally
out
of
proportion
to
other
buildings
in
the
area
and
therefore,
again,
I
would
ask
that
you
accept
the
report
and
support
councillor
DC.
No.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
L
You
mr.
chair
members
of
council
I
wasn't
intending
to
speak
because
many
of
my
neighbors
have
already
spoken
and
spoken
to
the
merits
of
this
application.
I
live
at
18,
Kingsland
Road
lived
there
for
30
years.
The
development
of
the
proposed
development
is
a
mere
two
blocks
away.
I
fully
support
the
submissions
made
by
my
neighbors,
but
I'd
like
to
speak
to
the
process.
This
matter
is
at
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board.
They
call
it
an
appeal,
but
you,
the
elected
members
of
council,
have
not
been
given
the
opportunity
to
consider
this
application
on
the
merits.
L
You've
been
stripped
of
your
responsibility
because
of
the
Planning
Act.
The
Planning
Act
allows
a
developer
to
appeal
to
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board.
A
non
decision,
in
other
words
of
City
Council,
doesn't
deal
with
an
application
within
120
days.
It
gives
the
right
to
the
developer
to
appeal
to
the
OMB.
So
my
first
question
is:
why
didn't
City
Planning
staff
deal
with
this
matter
within
120
days?.
L
Because
they
did
not
deal
with
this
matter
within
120
days,
you
no
longer
have
the
right
to
make
a
decision.
You
can
affect
the
process,
but
not
the
decision.
The
decision
will
be
made
by
an
unelected
person,
probably
one
individual
at
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board
I
have
concerns
about
the
instructions
that
planning
staff
is
recommending
that
you
adopt.
The
instructions
seem
to
be
laying
the
foundation
for
a
negotiation
that
will
see
a
building
in
excess
of
what
the
law
allows.
L
Council
has
already
adopted
the
mid-rise
guidelines
for
the
King's
way,
so
I
strongly
recommend
and
urge
you
not
to
give
city
staff
the
leeway
the
latitude
to
negotiate
behind
closed
doors
with
a
developer.
We
know.
What's
going
on
here,
the
developer
came
in
at
8.
Storeys
saw
that
there
was
a
lot
of
opposition
in
the
community
and
decided
to
appeal
to
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board,
not
the
8-story
application,
but
a
nine-story
application,
and
now
city's
planning
staff
is
saying.
Well,
let's
negotiate
well,
they
expect
to
negotiate
down
to
8
storeys.
L
Don't
allow
that
instruct
your
solicitor
instruct
your
planning
staff
not
to
negotiate
to
allow
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board
to
make
its
decision,
and
there
will
be
certainly
a
number
of
community
groups
that
will
seeking
party
status.
The
city
solicitor
we'll
be
there,
but
the
city
solicitor
has
to
know
what
your
instructions
are,
and
that
is
absolutely
to
defend
the
current
bylaw
and
the
current
official
plan
provisions
for
the
area.
The
other
concern
I
have
is
that
a
pre-hearing
conference
was
scheduled
without
direction
without
advice,
without
reference
to
the
city
councilor
or
to
council
itself.
L
Why
was
a
pre-hearing
conference
scheduled
that's
advantage
to
the
developer,
not
advantaged
to
the
city.
The
pre-hearing
conference,
which
is
a
standard
procedure
in
these
matters,
should
only
have
been
scheduled
after
City.
Council
has
made
a
decision
with
respect
to
this
matter.
Yes,
it
would
take
more
time,
but
that
gives
us
a
stronger
position
with
a
developer.
The
developer
can
come
forward
today
and
build
six
storeys
as
of
right,
so
they
can't
accuse
City
Council
of
delaying
development,
but
by
agreeing
to
a
pre-hearing
conference,
June
29th
for
their
convenience.
L
That
gives
them
an
advantage.
If
we
didn't
schedule
the
pre-hearing
conference,
the
pre-hearing
conference
could
be
many
months
from
June
29th,
which
forces
the
developer
to
decide.
Should
we
build
according
to
the
law,
or
should
we
continue
to
gamble
and
move
forward?
Those
are
my
submissions.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
A
M
M
About
five
years
ago,
I
asked
our
former
councillor
Peter
Milken
about
the
Kingsway
medical
site.
I
was
interested
in
it
because
my
husband
rents
from
the
site
and
he'll,
and
he
has
a
demolition
clause.
So
I
was
always
following
the
building
finding
out
what's
happening
and
at
the
time
Peter
told
me
that
developers
had
approached
him
about
the
site
and
he
told
me
that
buildings
next
to
the
site
had
to
be
purchased
and
the
laneway
widened,
and
he
said
a
city
would
never
approve
it.
Otherwise
they
wouldn't
accept
the
liabilities.
M
And
so
my
question
today
is
what's
changed,
how
our
emergency
vehicle
is
going
to
get
down
that
narrow
stretch
of
the
lane
way
it's
as
long
as
two
buildings
slide,
and
also
how
are
you
going
to
protect
the
residents
who
live
in
those
buildings?
That's
their
back
exit,
and
this
is
right
next
to
the
parking
garage
and
there's
going
to
be
literally,
probably
a
greatly
increased
traffic
on
that
lane
way.
M
H
A
N
Truly
through
you,
the
chair,
the
current
zoning
is
as
strong
as
any
other
zoning
in
the
city.
It's
a
zoning
that
was
in
place.
It's
an
Avenue
type
zoning
that
was
put
in
place
in
2003
when
the
blur
Kingsway
guidelines
were
were
put
in
place
as
well.
So
it's
a
zoning
that
as
strong
as
any
other
zoning
throughout
the
city,
so
so.
N
H
N
Mid
rise
guidelines
are
performance
standards
that
are
guidelines
to
guide
development
along
the
avenues,
but
they
are
not
a
zoning
bylaw.
Some
of
the
elements
in
the
performance
standards
of
the
Avenue
to
mid
rise
have
put
in
have
been
placed
into
zoning
bylaws,
but
they
are
not
a
zoning
bylaw
in
itself
and
in
the
mid
rise
design
guidelines.
It
states
that
if
there
are
current
areas
that
have
Avenue
zoning
in
place
and
have
had
an
Avenue
study,
then
they
are
outside
of
this
study.
So.
H
There's
going
to
be
a
pre-hearing
in
June,
and
this
is
asking
us
to
provide
directions
to
staff
to
continue
negotiations,
and
if
that
and
I
presume
that
will
that
will
occur
if
a
negotiated
settlement
is
reached.
What
is
the
next
step
then,
and
will
there
be
another
would
be
another
public
meeting
to
advise
the
community.
That
planning
is
on
board
with
a
proposed
development
that
would
have
been
a
settled
agreement.
What
what's
the
next
step
in
the
process.
H
H
N
H
I
E
O
O
First
of
all,
because
we
tend
to
not
hold
those
community
meetings
in
the
summertime,
then
September
and
October
have
a
lot
of
religious
holidays
when
we're
also
prevented
from
holding
those
community
meetings.
So
the
preliminary
report
was
done
in
September,
but
on
this
one,
because
there
is
no
OPA,
just
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment,
it's
actually
120
days,
it's
a
statutory
requirement,
which
is
just
four
months
and
our
standard
is
to
respond
within
nine
months.
O
It's
what
we
aim
for
in
October
the
community
meeting
was
held
and
following
the
community
meeting
we
did
have
conversations
with
the
applicant
said
you
know
listen.
This
is
what
we
heard
at
the
community
meeting.
We
had
our
number
of
issues.
Please
go
away
and
think
about
how
you're
going
to
respond
to
those,
and
then
we
would
have
been
expecting
some
kind
of
revision
to
come
in
what
we
received,
though
in
January,
was
a
revision.
O
That
is
the
proposal
that
you
see
in
front
of
us
now
for
the
nine
story
building
and
within
approximately
a
week
to
ten
days
the
appeal
was
filed.
So
typically,
what
would
have
happened
was
that
after
October,
that
would
have
been
been
a
series
of
discussions
and
negotiations
about
what
changes
came
out
of
what
was
heard
at
the
community
meeting
and
also
directions
from
staff
looking
at
all
of
the
policies
and
guidelines
in
the
context
for
the
site.
But
that
process
was
pretty
much
halted
by
a
new,
quite
a
somewhat
different
application.
O
Now
for
the
nine
stories
which
needs
to
then
be
re
reviewed
by
urban
design,
by
transportation
and
by
the
others
so
at
since
then,
we
have
met
with
the
applicant
and
their
lawyers
to
express
to
them
some
of
the
key
issues
with
the
the
nine
story
proposal,
similar
to
what
is
now
in
the
report.
All
of
the
report
is
more
detailed
than
those
discussions
would
have
been
so.
I
O
There
are
several
issues
that
are
outlined
in
the
report:
it's
not
just
the
height
and
the
number
of
stories
or
the
number
of
units.
It's
also
issues
of
angular
playing
issues
of
shadow
issues,
of
cumulative
impacts
that
are
all
outlined
in
the
report.
On
the
issue
of
the
laneway.
This
is
currently
a
one-way
lane
way.
O
We
aim,
through
our
official
plan,
to
have
a
laneway
widened
to
six
metres.
However,
there
is
a
formula
that
is
applied
when
you're
looking
at
a
lane,
that
is
commercial
on
one
side
and
residential
on
another,
and
so
even
with
the
laneway
widening
that
would
be
required
through
transportation
services
comments
on
the
commercial
side.
We
don't
actually
expect
to
get
the
widening
on
the
south
side,
so
the
lane
will
be
widened
along
this
property,
but
not
to
a
full
two-way
lane
width,
and
so
the
lane
would
need
to
remain
a
one-way
lane
way.
O
I
O
You'll
notice
in
that
recommendation
is
that
the
first
part
of
that
recommendation
says:
should
we
end
up
at
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board,
and
should
the
Ontario
missile
board
choose
to
approve
something?
There
are
certain
things
that
we
want
to
have
already
direction
from
City
Council
to
do.
One
of
them
is
to
secure
section
37.
Another
one
is
to
make
sure
that
the
servicing
works
for
this
building.
Another
is
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
Hydra
geological
reports,
there
are
a
series
of
the
very
technical
requirements
that
we
need
to
have
counsel
direction
to
do.
P
O
P
O
P
I'm
very
familiar
with
this
kind
of
development,
let
me
say:
well,
we
had
mid-rise
design
guidelines
that
were
brought
in
across
the
city
on
avenues
which
I
thought
would
override.
Whatever
designation
of
zoning
bylaw
requirement
was
on
this
particular
site
or
on
this
particular
location
am
I
wrong
in
assuming
that
that
the
design
guidelines,
notwithstanding
that
they
hadn't
been
escalated
to
official
plan
policies,
would
not
override
this.
In.
O
P
O
The
Official
Plan
policies
about
built
form
and
mixed-use
building
speak
to
a
number
of
things.
They
speak
to
Street
proportion
they
speak
to
massing.
They
speak
to
sunlight
on
sidewalks,
but
they
also
speak
to
looking
at
the
cumulative
impacts
along
Avenues.
So
those
are
the
Official
Plan
policies
at
the
high
level
that
it
doesn't
conform
with.
Okay,.
P
O
I,
the
in
the
new
zoning
bylaw,
five,
six,
nine
2013-
that
exercise
was
really
about
taking
42
bylaws
across
the
city
and
harmonizing
those
bylaws.
What
those
what
that
exercise
did
not
do
was,
it
did
not
add
additional
density
or
additional
height
to
sites.
I
was
in
charge
for
the
first
four
a
year
on
the
read
on
the
harmonization
of
the
commercial
residential
zones,
including
this
area,
so
where
I
would
have
looked
at
what
is
the
height
in
the
old
building
on
the
old
bylaw
and
I
would
have
carried
that
forward.
M
P
O
When
you
look
at
the
map
of
the
exemptions,
it
shows
specific
geographic
areas.
It
doesn't
directly
relate
to
whether
it
had
an
avenues
underlying
that
if
it
was
shown
as
avenues
on
the
map,
there
were
a
number
of
cases.
Many
of
them
may
have
been
avenues,
but
you
have
to
look
at
the
map
to
to
see
the
excluded
areas
and
typically
these
are
either
areas
that
had
previously
had
an
Avenue
study
done
that
already
had
updated
zoning
and
there's
a
few
other
examples
that
are
are
listed.
Thank
you.
M
O
That's
what
they
proposed
on
their
drawings.
However,
what
is
more
typical,
usually,
is
that
they
will
show
zero
on
the
drawings
and
what
gets
built
into
the
zoning
bylaw
is
that
the
residential
visitor
and
the
commercial
parking
spaces
are
combined
and
shared
on
a
first-come,
first-served
basis.
So
right
now,
on
their
drawings
are
showing
zero
for
the
commercial.
Okay.
N
Recommendation
to
negotiate
is
very
standard.
We
generally
put
it
in
all
our
requests
for
directions
report.
It
doesn't
take
away
the
ability
of
council
ultimately
to
make
the
decision
on
any
negotiations
that
are
arrived
at.
It's
also
very
common
in
applications
to
find
a
way
to
involve
residents
groups
in
negotiation
if
it
should
come
to
that
at
the
appropriate
time.
It's
as
I
said
completely
standard.
Thank.
M
O
A
tool,
a
laneway,
the
requirement
would
be
six
meters
and
based
on
the
standard
requirements
for
widening
right
now.
The
width
is
only
three
point.
Six
six,
this
site
on
the
north
side
of
the
lane
with
a
commercial
side,
is
being
asked
to
convey
more
than
half
of
the
land
that
would
be
wire
to
get
it
to
six.
That's
the
widening
of
1.67,
which
would
bring
it
to
a
total
of
five
point.
Three
three,
which
is
enough
to
squeeze
two
cars
pass
each
other,
but
not
enough
for
a
proper
two-lane
lane
way.
O
O
O
There
was
a
community
meeting
in
October
and
we
did
have
some
further
discussions
with
the
appellant
at
some
point
before
Christmas
and
then
roughly
the
beginning
of
January.
The
applicant
submitted
revised
drawings
for
the
nine
story
and
within
five
to
ten
days,
then
submitted
the
appeal,
because
then
you
can
appeal
the
latest
drawings
so.
B
O
B
So
something
triggered
them
to
file
an
appeal.
Would
you
say
that,
given
that
there
wasn't
a
staff
report
that
that's
an
aggressive
approach,
could
you
characterize
it
as
that
way
or
is
it
typical
I
mean
we
see?
We
see
these?
These
appeals
come
through
after
a
couple
of
years
of
going
back
and
forth,
and
finally,
a
developer
kind
of
draws
a
line
and
says:
okay
enough,
we'll
go
to
the
OMB,
but
in
this
case
there
wasn't
even
a
staff
report
on
this
I
wouldn't.
B
O
B
Staff
are
of
the
opinion
in
the
report
that
we
got
the
request
for
Direction
report
that
that
really
it's
it's
not
a
rezoning.
It's
an
official
plan
amendment,
and
so,
if
this
hadn't
been
appealed,
would
we
be
angling
towards
something
more
like
a
refusal
report?
If
what
was
I
mean
I
know,
I
can't
say
that
you're,
that's
what
you
were
going
to
report,
but
typically
when
a
zoning
amendment
is
submitted
and
there's
a
question
of
official
plan,
that
usually
means
no.
We,
you
know
staff
can't
support.
Theoretically
that
don't
support
those
things
so.
B
O
The
proposal
that's
in
today
doesn't
meet
a
number
of
official
plan
policies
around
street
proportion
around
cumulative
impact,
a
number
of
things
when
you
file
a
zoning
bylaw
application
alone.
Without
an
official
plan
amendment,
then
the
zoning
bylaw
application
needs
to
abide
by
those
policies
of
the
Official
Plan.
If
you
apply
for
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
and
an
official
plan
amendment,
then
it's
looked
at
more
broadly
is
a.
B
B
A
P
At
it
and
says,
if
you
want
to
try
and
accomplish
this,
you
have
to
do
an
official
plan
amendment.
We
may
not
be
able
to
support
it,
but
what
idiotic
applicant
would
not
apply
for
a
zoning
amendment
on
this
particular
development
in
a
zone
and
an
official
plan
amendment.
At
the
same
time,
number
one
number
two
I
just
want
all.
That
is
one
question.
P
Well
number
two
I
just
want
to
clarify
what
I
heard
and
you
don't
even
have
to
answer
that
question
I
want
you
basically
said:
if
it's
a
zoning
amendment
only
they
must
comply
with
the
opie
that's
in
place
and
in
this
particular
application.
It's
that
site-specific
opie
back
in
2003,
correct!
No,
no,
which
Opie
are
we
talking
about
the.
O
Are
local
area
bluer
Kingsway
urban
design,
guidelines
from
2000
that
apply
to
the
site,
but
they
are
not
policy,
they
are
not.
They
do
not
form
part
of
the
Official
Plan.
They
are
guidelines.
There
is
also
a
zoning
that
implements
those
guidelines
that
allows
for
as
of
right,
development
up
to
that
six
storeys.
Then
there
are
the
mid
rise
performance
standards.
Those
are
guidelines,
but
they
specifically
in
their
Maps,
exclude
this
area.
Okay,.
A
C
You
mr.
chair
I've
got
a
motion
to
put
up
on
the
screen
that
Etobicoke
York
Community
Council
recommend
that
City
Council
direct
the
city,
solicitor
and
appropriate
city
staff
to
attend
the
entire
municipal
board
to
defend
the
blue
Kingsway
Avenue
study
and
the
six-story
height
limit
set
out
in
The
Associated
zoning
bylaw,
904
2003
and
authorize
the
city
solicitor
to
retain
any
outside
consultants
as
necessary.
E
C
Well,
as
the
of
course,
we're
gonna
as
well
move
the
report
and
I
do
that,
because
we
have
bylaws
for
a
reason-
and
this
particular
community
spent
years
and
years
and
years
working
with
planning
and
with
the
city
to
establish
certain
development
expectations,
and
we
have
a
Miss
Campbell
who
set
it
quite
correctly.
This
is
very
distressing
when
you
put
that
kind
of
time
and
energy
into
something
and
the
rules
are
forever
changing,
although
they
are
forever
changing.
I
think
this
one
is
winnable
I
think
we
have
something
here.
C
That
is
precedent
setting
and
it's
not
minor,
compared
to
what
was
established
in
2003,
it's
30
feet
higher,
it's
40%
more
GFA,
so
we
we
are
going
to
go
to
the
OMB.
We
are
going
to
work
as
hard
as
we
can
to
establish
arguments
that
defend
the
Avenue
study
and
and
I
believe
we
will
prevail.
I
want
to
thank
all
the
residents
that
came
out
tonight.
I
know
many
of
you
I
see
familiar
faces
were
with
us
a
few
weeks
ago.
There
was
probably
500
of
us
a
couple
of
weeks
ago.
C
Those
of
you
that
can't
be
in
the
chamber
tonight
that
are
in
the
hallway.
Thank
you
as
well
for
coming
and
the
chair
tonight
said.
It's
amazing
how
you
only
had
seven
questions
asked
with
seven
speakers
with
with
this
kind
of
a
crowd
and
I.
Let
them
know
that
a
few
weeks
ago
there
was
many
more
questions,
so
it
certainly
makes
a
difference.
When
you
have
this
kind
of
effort
from
the
community
speaking
out
loud,
the
petition
is
going
to
make
a
difference.
We
will
keep
you
informed
along
the
process.
C
L
B
Want
to
say
thank
you
as
well
to
everyone
that
came
and
I
went
through
a
couple
of
tough
development
applications
still
going
through
some
and
I
can
attest
that
it
certainly
helps
when
the
community
comes
together
in
rallies
and
I
can
see
how
much
of
an
articulate
and
organized
group
you
are
tonight.
It
makes
a
huge
difference.
I
hope
the
developer
has
someone
in
the
audience
or
just
going
to
watch
the
tape
of
this,
because
it
really
shows
you
came
out
you'd
alert
speeches
that
were
right
on
point
and
I'll.
Tell
you
I
know
this.
B
This
area
very
very
well.
I
was
listening.
The
gentleman
that
was
talking
about
Royal
York
being
backed
up
people.
You
know
what
I
went
to
high
school
at
Rory
lurk
and
Norseman
I
used
to
walk
up
there
every
day,
25
years
ago
and
watch
the
cars
I
got
married
in
the
church
at
Brewer
in
Royal
York.
My
first
daughter
was
baptized
there
and
I
know
you
can't
get
a
parking
spot.
B
I
know
that
if
I
go
to
crooked
queue,
you
can't
get
a
parking
spot
at
night
and
I
know
the
Montgomery
building
and
in
fact
a
good
friend
of
mine
lived
there
and
we
had
many
a
party
up
on
the
top
floor
on
the
roof.
There's
it's
an
amazing
development
and
it's
something
that
I
keep
on
my
mind
to
remember
as
a
place
that
that
we
should
see
more
of
on
Bloor,
Street
and
I
love
the
community
for
pointing
to
those
examples.
B
I
think
what
you're
going
to
see
tonight
is
the
worship
turn
to
bear
right
on
this
I
see
the
actions
of
the
developer
is
aggressive.
I
can
characterize
them
as
that
to
go
and
appeal
something
before
there's
a
staff
report
following
a
community
meeting
where
there
was
outcry
and
ask
for
something
that
the
report
says
right
here
is
overdevelopment
and
it
doesn't
meet
our
official
plan.
I
think
we,
as
council
members
need
to
defend
our
official
plan.
It's
what
shapes
our
city.
B
It's
what
keeps
the
communities
the
way
we
love
them
and
we
know
them
and
we
want
them
to
be
I.
Think
you've
got
a
great
counselor
here
and
he's
going
to
need
your
help
in
this
fight.
I
know:
I
just
went
through
it
with
some
great
community
associations
that
are
continuing
to
work.
Please
stay
organized.
Remember,
there's
no
way
around
this
in
good,
old-fashioned,
hard
work,
roll
up
your
sleeves,
keep
doing
the
research
critique
every
document
you
can
get
online.
B
It
will
be
prepare
to
line
up
if
there
is
a
hearing-
and
it
gets
to
that
point,
but
I
can
see
that
the
ataxic
tactics
have
been
aggressive
to
this
point
and
I
hope
you
rise
to
the
occasion
and
I
hope
that
your
counselor
can
can
harness
your
power
because
I
know
he
can
and
I
wish
you
good
luck
on
this
and
I
will
want
to
continue
to
enjoy
that
stretch
of
Bloor
Street.
Congratulations
to
all
of
you.
I
Thank
you,
I
will
be
supporting
the
local
councillor.
I
think
it's
frustrating
for
me
because
one
of
the
deputies
mentioned
and
others
in
the
community
meeting
that
was
held
in
October
2016.
The
community
hasn't
had
an
opportunity
to
comment
on
the
application
and
when
an
applicant
comes
in
and
submit
this
application
and
it
doesn't
get
process-
and
we
don't
have
the
opportunity
for
the
community
to
give
input
then
going
to
the
unter
Municipal
Board,
where
we're
not
involved
in
that
the
community
is
not
involved
in
it.
I
They
can't
get
what
they
want,
because
it's
that
the
negotiations
is
done
with
the
our
planning
staff
and
city
solicitor
and
the
applicant
and
most
applicants
know
that
so
when
they
put
in
an
application-
and
they
know
that
the
community
or
the
city
staff
are
against
the
application-
they'll
go
directly
to
the
'enter
Municipal
Board.
They
can't
be
bothered
going
through
the
process.
It
takes
so
long.
They
know
it's
going
to
be
a
refusal
report,
so
they
go
directly
to
on
terminus
footboard
and
that's
the
way
most
applications
that
come
board.
They
go.
I
They
go
directly
to
them
because
normally
the
on
term
municipal
board
always
supports
applications
and
that's
why
we
hate
do
and
be
that's
what
we've
been
trying
to
get
rid
of
them.
But
you
know,
for
example,
I
have
one
in
my
ward,
the
original
application
was
99
units
and
because
we
didn't
process
the
application.
This
is
at
Western
401.
The
applicant
comes
in
with
500
and
they're
at
the
only
four
500
units,
the
original
application
was
99.
I
So
now
we're
at
the
n-terminus
foot
board
arguing
debating
the
599
should
have
been
what
we
should
be
arguing
and
having
consultation
meetings
with
the
public,
so
we're
kind
of
left
out
and
so
I
and
I
understand.
You
know
the
staff
mentioned
that
they
didn't
receive
comments
from
the
various
departments
in
that,
and
so
there
wasn't
an
opportunity
for
local
councillor
to
have
a
meeting
where
the
community
actually
had
input
to
deal
with
all
the
issues
that
were
brought
up
in
the
October
2016
issue
meeting.
I
There
were
a
number
of
concerns
that
were
that
were
expressed
that
day.
Hopefully
they
get
addressed
at
the
LMB.
So
it's
really
frustrating
for
me
when
this
happens
and
we
get
so
many
applications
that
go
through
this
process
and
it's
just
very
frustrating
not
only
for
the
community
but
for
members
of
council.
So
thank
you
to
the
community.
That's
here.
Thank
you.
P
Very
briefly,
okay,
very
very
briefly,
I
had
a
very
similar
application.
Okay,
the
only
difference
between
my
application
and
this
application
is
that
this
application
had
the
benefit
of
the
community
council
me
where
that
gentleman
had
an
opportunity
and
the
community
had
an
opportunity
to
speak
at
community
council.
My
application
went
from
the
appeal
directly
to
the
OMB,
bypassing
this
community
council
meeting.
P
So
I've
seen
what
can
happen
on
applications
that
proceed
to
the
OMB
I'm,
also
fearful
that
the
consequence
coming
out
of
this
application
may
be
very
similar
what
happened
to
mine,
even
though
they
eliminate
the
community
count.
I
hope
it's
kept
the
six-story,
because
that's
what
it
should
be
and
should
be
no
more
than
that,
but
I'm.
P
Just
saying
and
you're
going
to
hear
about
my
case
because
five
years
ago
is
when
the
decision
was
handed
down,
or
at
least
the
original
decision
was
handed
down
and
I'm
born
that
he
won't
be
next
year
next
month,
next
week,
still
hassle
that
application,
the
building's
already
up,
and
in
my
view
the
final
decision
has
not
been
made
because
of
all
the
irregularities.
I
never
had
the
opportunity
to
have
that
application
come
here
and
scrutinizing.
A
Kind
of
battles
I
have
to
fight
okay.
So
the
motion
is
on
the
screen.
I'm
going
to
ask
counter
to
channel,
to
read
it
out,
one
more
time
for
the
benefit
of
the
people
out
in
the
hallway.
I
know
the
people
in
here
you
saw
on
those
screen
the
council,
you
shadow,
could
you
read
your
motion?
It
will
vote
on
it
for.
C
Sure
and
if
I
can
get
a
recorded
vote,
mr.
chair,
that
a
topical
your
community
council
recommends
that
City
Council
direct
the
city,
solicitor
and
appropriate
city
staff
to
attend
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board
to
defend
the
blur
Kingsway
Avenue
study
and
the
six-story
height
limit
set
out
in
The
Associated
zoning
bylaw
941
2003
and
authorized
the
city
solicitor
to
retain
any
outside
consultants
as
necessary.
Thank.