►
From YouTube: North York Community Council - March 12, 2020
Description
North York Community Council, meeting 14, March 12, 2020
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=17084
Meeting Navigation:
0:12:27 - Call to order
A
We
we
have
quorum,
it's
it's
bare
quorum,
which
is
why
you'll
see
hand
sanitizer
around.
If
you
leave
to
wash
our
hands
will
lose
quorum
if
we
have
to
take
breaks
we'll
take
them.
So
counselors
I'd
like
to
call
this
meeting
of
the
North
York
Community
Council,
to
order
welcome
to
members
of
the
committee
and
members
of
the
public
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
that
we
are
meeting
on
the
traditional
territory
of
many
nations,
including
the
Mississauga's
of
the
credit.
The
Amish
nabhi
I,
understand,
I
beg
the
Chippewa.
A
The
Holden
is
Shoni
the
wend
at
people's,
and
this
is
now
the
home
to
many
diverse
First,
Nations,
Inuit
and
Maties
people.
We
also
acknowledge
that
Toronto
was
covered
by
treaty
13
with
the
Mississauga's
of
the
credit.
Now
you
can
follow
the
meeting
on
your
computer,
your
tablet
or
smartphone
at
wwr
on
GOG
a
forward,
slash
Council.
These
sessions
are
also
being
videotaped.
Are
there
any
declarations
of
interest
under
the
municipal
conflict
of
interest
Act,
seeing
none
we
can
proceed.
Can
I
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the
minutes
of
the
previous
meeting.
A
Councillor
Cole
is
moving
a
motion
all
in
favor
pose
that
is
carried.
Thank
you
councillor,
Cole.
So
without
further
ado,
we
will
proceed
with
the
run-through
of
the
agenda
because
we're
already
at
the
time
when
we
could
start
a
statutory
notice,
we're
going
to
begin
with
the
consent
items.
At
item
number
6
councillors.
A
Item
number
6
comes
from
Ward
6
preliminary
report,
zoning
amendment
application,
1881,
Steeles,
Avenue
West,
that
is
from
councillor
Pasternak,
hang
on
a
sec
I'm
just
gonna
grab
my
notes
because
I
have
notes
from
councillor
Pasternak
that
one
is
recommended
for
community
consultation.
There's
no
extension
that
needs
to
be
moved.
All
in
favor
of
preliminary
reports
opposed
seeing
none
that
is
carried
item
number
as
preliminary
report
Ward
15
zoning
bylaw
amendment
application,
17,
17,
17,
1917,
23
and
17
33,
Mount,
Pleasant
Road,
that's
in
councillor
Robinson
Zwarte.
A
A
Okay,
all
in
favor
of
the
staff
recommendations
pose
seeing.
None
that
is
carried
item
number
nine
is
a
preliminary
report
in
Ward
18,
again,
zoning
bylaw
amendment
application
number
one
and
five
on
Kent
and
Drive
councillor
Fillion
staff
recommendations
are
moved
all
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried.
Thank
you
item
number
10
is
a
hang
on
a
sec,
a
designation
of
fire
routes
in
mostly
in
councillor
minam
Wong's
area,
fire
route,
8
1684,
Victoria,
Park,
Avenue,
councilman
Wong.
Did
you
want
to
move
that?
A
Okay
cause
I'm
in
a
one
moving
all
in
favor
pose
that
is
carried
item
number
11
designation
of
fire
were
routes
in
Ward
17,
which
is
33
77
to
33
79
Bayview,
Avenue
and
I
will
move
that
as
that's
in
my
local
ward
of
Don
Valley
north
all
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried
and
we
have.
Where
are
we
here?
A
We
are
at
12
item
number
12
is
in
Ward
8
removal
of
a
director
from
the
market,
teo
district
business
improvement
area,
Board
of
Management
councillor
Cole
I'll,
move
that
okay
staff
recommendations,
all
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried
and
item
number
13
is
sorry,
oh
right.
Thank
you
for
jogging
me
to
look
at
my
notes.
Item
number
13
is
in
Ward
6
councillor
Pasternak's
Ward
he's
requested
traffic
calming
George
Appleton
way
and
James
Finley
way.
Councillor
Pasternak
has
left
word
that
he
would
like
to
defer
that
item
to
the
next
meeting.
A
So
I'll
move
the
deferral
motion
on
his
behalf.
All
in
favor
of
that
motion
oppose
that
is
carried
there.
We
go
and
then
14
is
similar
to
that.
14
is
also
in
Ward
6
turn:
prohibition,
Keele,
Street
and
George
Appleton
way.
Councillor
Pasternak
is
left
where
do
you'd
like
to
defer
that
I'd
enjoy
move
that
counter
call.
A
All
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried.
Thank
you
and
then
item
number
15.
Yes,
item
number
15
is
where's
the
title
of
the
item.
Also
in
Ward
six
parking
amendment,
amendment
stores,
Dale
Avenue,
councillor
Pasternak,
hasn't
left
special
instructions
because
staff
recommend
approval.
Some
of
the
stats
like
to.
B
A
A
All
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried
and
item
number
19
is
in
Ward
17,
which
is
the
word.
I
represent
parking
prohibition
on
Elkhorn,
Drive,
I'm,
gonna,
move
the
staff
recommendation.
Staff
recommend
approval
of
the
prohibition
all
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried
and
I
hate
him
number
20,
I
thought
I
had
one
morning,
counselor
past
facts.
Oh
it's
coming
up!
That's
right!
Thank
you.
Item
number
20
is
in
Ward
18
parking
prohibition
Addington
place
councillor
Fillion
councillor.
Fillion
is
moving
staff
recommendations
all
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried.
Thank
you
and
then
those
are.
A
A
14:26
in
Ward
six
is
a
request
for
zoning
bylaw
amendment
to
reallocate
section
37
funds
received
from
the
development
at
2772,
27,
78,
Kiel,
Street
and
councillor
Pasternak's
Ward,
and
he
has
he
has
left
no
special
instructions,
he's
an
agreement
with
staff
there
on
paper
opposed
that
is,
carry
and
then
councillors
so
that
we
have
them
on
the
agenda.
Let's
also
add
a
couple
of
introduction:
motions
that
won't
need
to
be
specifically
timed,
so
we'll
add
them
now.
A
Emotion
is
required
to
introduce
these
items.
The
first
one
is
additional
item:
NY
1427,
which
is
a
memo
submitted
by
myself
in
accordance
with
staff
recommendations
regarding
traffic
coming
on
earnest,
Avenue
motion
to
introduce
favored
pose
that
is
carried
and
then
another
additional
item.
In
word,
aid
counselor,
Kohl's,
additional
item;
NY
1428
memo
submitted
by
councillor
cole
regarding
the
addition
of
a
community
safety
zone
for
Avenue
Road
between
Rosalyn
and
Castle
field,
and
st.
A
Clements
and
Briar
Hill
avenues
calico
a
moving
introduction;
yes,
okay,
all
in
favor
of
introduction,
seeing
no
opposition
that
one
is
introduced,
so
you'll
get
those
items
right
away.
Councillors.
Okay,
is
that
takes
care
of
all
of
the
consent
items
I'm
just
putting
in
27
and
28,
okay,
so
councillors.
That
brings
us
to
the
timed
items
and
I
think
we're
well
past
9:45.
A
A
Aaron
F
we
had
some
awkward
with
the
awkwardness
with
that
last
meeting
you're
right,
so
we
will
begin
with
that.
I
think
you're,
right,
I
think
we
should
get
back
to
that
practice,
so
so
councillors.
The
the
first
item
is
item
number
one
final
report,
official
planning
amendment
and
request
for
directions:
report
on
2600,
Don,
Mills,
Road
I
have
I
have
a
deputy
registered
from
the
community,
but
we're
going
to
go
back
to
the
practice
is
the
applicant
here
and
do
they
wish
to
make
a
presentation?
First.
A
Okay,
well
without
comments
or
presentation,
we're,
as
you
know,
we're
gonna
go
your
presentation,
then
the
community
presentation
then
we'll
go
into
questions
of
staff.
It
will.
It
will
be
veering
from
procedure
to
go
back
to
you,
but
but
we'll
see
how
it
goes
it.
It
shouldn't
be
necessary,
Thank
You,
mr.
Rosenberg,
if
those
are
your
comments,
are
there.
E
A
Don't
speak
and
I
think
I
think
I
think
mr.
Rosenberg
is
familiar
with
that
procedural
pathway.
Are
there
any
questions
of
the
of
the
applicant
before
it
takes
a
seat?
Seeing
none.
Thank
you
for
your
presentation.
Okay,
the
the
the
deputy
that
you
see
on
your
green
sheet.
Counselors
couldn't
stay.
He
had
to
get
back
to
work,
but
he
is
being
replaced.
Anya
latch
of
it
from
25
power
field
in
the
same
community
of
Henry
farm
will
be
speaking
instead.
Good
morning
to
you.
F
I
will
try
to
be
fast
I'm
representing
the
Henry
farm
Association
interest,
Association
and
I'm,
also
representing
ycc
11,
the
Henry
Heights
townhouses,
with
respect
to
the
application
for
$2,600
Road
Henry
farms.
Association
concerns
relate
to
the
matter
of
traffic
signalization.
First,
let
me
just
say
that
we
are
pleased
with
the
overall
context
plan
has
concerns
the
road
alignment,
as
well
as
the
proposed
public
park.
That
is
part
of
this
application.
F
We
also
have
no
issues
with
proposed
layout
of
the
new
buildings
in
the
context
of
existing
$2,600
wrote
down
the
so-called
existing
Hunter's
Lodge,
where
we
do
have
an
issue
with
the
axis
of
traffic
to
and
from
the
site
on,
the
eastern
flank
example
to
and
from
Don
Mills
Road.
We
understand
that
access
into
or
from
the
site
from
Don
Mills
Road
Road
will
not
be
managed
by
the
existing
traffic
lights,
just
north
of
Sheppard,
which
are
controlled
by
the
TTC
to
facilitate
TTC
vehicles
existing
from
Sheppard
station.
F
Instead,
only
right
in
and
right
out,
access
to
the
site
from
Don
Mills
and
from
Don
Rosa
Road
to
the
site
will
be
allowed,
meaning
that
cars
can
only
enter
the
site
from
a
southbound
direction
on
Don
Mills
Road,
and
can
only
leave
the
site
going
in
southbound
direction
on
Donald's
Road,
given
the
volume
of
traffic
anticipated
with
the
with
the
redevelopment
site
as
well
as
redeveloped
adjacent
1650,
Sheppard
Avenue
site.
This
is
not
sustainable.
F
This
will
also
ease
the
volume
of
traffic
on
the
small
arterial
lethal
Road
flanking
the
site
on
the
north
and
will
reduce
the
volume
of
traffic
going
through
the
signal
intersection
at
Donald
road
and
Leith
Hill
Road.
It
seems
preposterous
that
TTC
would
want
to
keep
the
traffic
light
solely
for
its
vehicles
use
instead
of
also
serving
vehicles
entering
and
existing
and
exiting
the
development
site
on
a
new
road
directly
across
the
intersection
on
the
west.
F
A
compromise
would
be
to
give
TTC
vehicles
priority
access
to
and
from
the
intersection,
by
way
of
an
advanced,
green
signal.
Ttc
vehicles,
turning
to
go
south
on
Don,
Mills
Road
and
entering
Sheppard
station
from
southbound
on
Las
Road
would
have
priority
access
to
the
intersection
on
a
related
point.
Hemi
farms
Association
is
strongly
opposed
to
any
future
proposal
for
a
new
traffic
light
on
Sheppard
Avenue,
just
west
of
Don
Mills
Road.
F
Not
only
would
these
lights
be
on
a
hill
not
easily
visible
over
the
hill
going
westbound
on
Sheppard
Avenue,
but
they
would
also
be
extremely
close
to
the
existing
signal
at
terminals
and
Sheppard.
Such
a
signal
would
be
very
dangerous
and
when
read
could
easily
result
in
backed
up
traffic
blocking
the
intersection
of
Don,
Mills
and
Sheppard.
F
F
Finally,
just
a
word
about
the
design
of
the
proposed
townhouses
and
33
story
behind
building
behind
Hunter's
Lodge
at
2600
on
Mills
Road,
recognizing
that
community
council
has
not
purview
over
design
age
of
Hemi
farms.
Association
is
generally
pleased
with
the
proposed
exterior
design,
but
we
would
respectfully
encourage
the
developer
to
tie
the
exterior
cladding
of
the
proposed
building
as
much
as
possible
to
the
Brown
break
of
the
existing
Hunter's
Lodge
by
using
brown
berry
color
accents
throughout.
Instead
of
all
glass
and
glass
wall,
exterior
cladding
as
too
often
the
design
of
choice
in
Toronto.
F
F
A
A
Yes,
so
councillors
on
that
on,
so
we're
gonna,
stick
with
item
number
one,
the
the
comments
on
2600
John
Mills
at
this
point.
Are
there
any
questions
of
the
deputy,
seeing
that
I
just
have
one
myself
so
John,
you
you're
it
principally
well,
we
didn't
talk
a
lot
about
the
height
of
the
building
that
there's
a
lot
of
density
being
added
to
the
neighborhood
there.
So
your
comments
are
a
real
focus
on
on
the
traffic
concerns,
but
really
they
are
density
related
and
that
you're
concerned
about
about
absorbing
all
of
this
around
that
corner.
A
A
F
A
F
A
Thank
you
and
councillors
I
see
that
in
the
end,
mr.
Mosely
was
able
to
come
back
from
the
office.
So
did
you
want
to
speak
to
to
add
anything
that
might
have
been
missed
and
time
constraint
it's
covered.
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
so
seeing
no
further
deputy
counselors
I'm
gonna
move
to
questions
of
staff.
Do
counselors
have
any
questions
of
staff
on
this.
A
One
I
have
a
couple
myself
that
I
just
want
to
ask
and
I'm
gonna
time
myself,
because
I
could
go
on
oops
here
we
are,
let
me
just
reset
it
so
I
just
wanted
to
ask
staff
I've
chatted
with
the
the
applicant
about
this
we
have
in
in
the
report.
This
is
a
building,
that's
going
on
a
site
of
an
existing
sort
of
60
cement,
slab
apartment
building.
So
we
know
the
energy
footprint
of
those.
Those
are.
Those
are
one
of
the
biggest
challenges
that
the
city
has
in
terms
of
reducing
its
emissions.
A
G
Through
you,
madam
chair,
we
don't
have
anyone
here
from
the
environmental
group,
but
the
the
minimum
requirement,
as
you
indicated,
is
the
Tier
one
standard
we
haven't
had
discussions
with
the
applicant
at
this
point
to
see,
if
they're
willing
to
go
above
and
beyond
the
Tier
one
standards
and
meet
the
two
tier
two
standard.
But
it's
a
discussion
we
could
have
as
we
sort
of
proceed
with
this
application.
A
And
the
the
the
residents
were
asking
mostly
about
the
traffic
plan
in
their
deputation.
They
were
asking
for
consideration
to
be
given
it
I
think
it's
you
know
it's
almost.
It's
almost
like
a
sort
of
convenient
accident,
the
the
access
road
that
is
contemplated
to
be
to
be
covered
by
this
particular
applicant
to
to
help
us
meet
the
context
plan
of
putting
a
road
network
in
here
they'll
be
required
to
build
the
access
out
to
Don
Mills
Road,
which
is
a
right
in
right
out
now.
A
What
the
residents
are
asking
is
is
whether
or
not
we
could
use
what
is
a
convenient,
mid
block
light
right
now
it
looks
like
between
Leith,
Hill
and
Sheppard.
That
is
just
used
to
get
buses
into
the
TTC
terminal,
but
as
it
happens,
when
you
look
on
the
map,
it
really
aligns
with
where
we're
putting
the
right
in
right
out
road.
Was
there
any
discussion
during
the
application
process
about
taking
the
opportunity
to
make
that
into
an
intersection
so
that
they
could
have
both
bright
and
left
access.
G
So
through
you,
madam
chair,
the
the
the
block
plan
itself
is
is:
does
not
have
any
public
streets.
It's
a
3.8
hectare
site,
it's
collectively
with
all
with
all
the
parcels.
It's
a
very
large
parcel.
The
road
network
that's
been
proposed,
provides
access
to
Leith,
Hill,
Don,
Mills
and
Sheppard
Avenue,
so
it
provides
a
comprehensive
network
for
the
ranked
what
was
reviewed
was
looking
at
sort
of
the
configuration
of
this
of
the
roads
and
having
them
sort
of
as
straight
as
possible
and
and
and
direct
as
possible.
G
There
is
a
light
is
proposed
along
Sheppard
and
Leith
Hill,
which
would
give
give
residents
from
this
block
access
to
to
a
signalized
intersection.
There
was
some
discussions
had
with
TTC
about
that
alignment.
Ttc
is
concerned
that
any
any
connection
of
that
intersection
would
cause
delays
and
there
in
there
roots
in
the
timing
of
the
other
buses
leaving
leaving
the
Don
Mills
station.
However,
having
said
that,
also
there
is
a
there
is
a
building
and
a
parking
structure
below
great
in
any
configuration.
The
East
Street
is
not
actually
aligned
with
that
intersection.
G
A
G
You
manager
it's
a
final,
it's
a
final
report
on
the
Official
Plan
Amendment,
which
which
lays
out
the
road
network.
It
is
a
request
for
direction
on
on
the
on
the
zone,
on
the
on
the
on
the
on
the
site
itself
for
2,600
there,
the
the
bills
will
be
withheld.
The
order
will
be
withheld
pending
finalization
of
the
bills,
the
section
37
and
details
that
are
also
tied
to
1616
50
Sheppard
Avenue,
so
the
two
are
tied
together,
so
there
is
still
an
opportunity.
G
A
G
A
A
If
you
want
to
put
them
up
on
the
screen
that
North
Korea
Communications
1,
so
the
council
adopt
the
staff
recommendations
in
the
report
being
amended
to
read
as
follows,
and
it's
simply
at
correcting
a
typo
having
to
do
with
the
square
metre
egde
in
the
park.
As
you
can
see,
you
can
see
the
strikeout
of
1221
square
meters
to
make
it
1222
and
motion
number
two.
A
This
is
this:
is
an
owner
intensifying
their
own
site
and
on
their
site
is
an
old
standard,
green
building?
We
don't
have
the
the
immediate
legislative
levers
to
to
demand
that
we
absolutely
green
all
of
those
buildings
right
now,
but
they
are
a
particular
challenge
to
us
in
meeting
targets.
The
the
60
some
of
the
cement
slab
building-
and
this
is
a
neighborhood
that
is
absolutely
full
of
those.
A
The
peanut
and
Parkway
forests
are
a
huge
contributor
to
went
to
that
particular
type
of
architecture
owing
to
the
era
that
it
that
it
was
produced,
and
this
type
of
infill
application
is
happening.
A
lot
on
on
this
particular
piece
of
real
estate,
so
I'm
simply
moving
this
motion,
because
I
think
we
have
to
begin
to
look
at
a
new
standard
that
says
we're
an
owners
intensifying
their
own
site
with
one
of
those
old
60s
emitters
on
it.
They've
got
to
get
to
tier
2.
A
This
is
before
the
the
costly
standard
that
gets
you
to
got
a
bill:
district
energy
system,
etc,
etc.
That's
Tears,
3,
&
4,
but
I'm
asking
tier
2
because
it
will
offset
the
footprints
of
the
other
existing
60s
building.
So
those
are
my
emotions
and
my
comments
and
in
the
opportunities
going
forward,
some
of
the
things
that
the
residents
have
been
concerned
about,
we
hope
to
deal
with
in
in
the
go
forward.
A
A
Word:
15
refusal
report,
official
plan,
amendment
amendment
and
zoning
bylaw
application
number
two
San
field
Road
and
did
we
have
do
we
have
any
additional
instructions
from
from
counsel
Robinson,
seeing
none
counselors
staffer
looking
for
support
to
their
refusal
to
move
that
on
behalf
of
councillor
Robinson,
deputy
Merriman
and
Wong,
did
you
want
to
move
that
part?
Okay,
you're
now
in
the
minutes,
then
sorry
counselor
Cole?
Unfortunately,
we
have
oh
okay
you're
staying
in
the
room.
Unfortunately,
we
have
Barrett,
we
have
bare
quorum
and
you
can't
really
touch
anybody
out
there
anyway.
A
Now
we're
on
your
item.
Counselor
call
item
number
three,
which
is
final
report
official
plan,
amendment
and
zoning
amendment
for
twenty
four,
ninety
two
25:14
Yuen
Street,
ten
to
twelve
castle
field,
Avenue
and
portions
of
twenty
Castle
field
and
five
to
sixty
seven
duplex
Avenue
counselors.
There
is
a
related
matter
that
we
that
we
had
last
month
is
on
its
way
to
council
in
the
legal
matter.
I've
been
advised
that
we
have
to
stick
to
the
planning
report
that
is
before
us
today
is
the
best
course
of
action.
H
Good
morning,
madam
Jared
morning,
members
of
Community
Council,
my
name
is
max
Alaskan
I'm
from
Goodman's
LLP,
and
we
are
counsel
to
the
applicant
in
this
matter.
I
do
have
a
short
presentation
regarding
the
application
and
I'll
also
note
that
the
proposal
is
described
in
a
staff
report
before
you.
That
recommends
approval.
So
in
this
first
slide,
you'll
see
the
location
of
the
site,
which
is
on
the
southwest
corner
of
Yonge
and
Castlefield
north
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
H
It's
currently
a
site
of
a
three-story
commercial
building
that
includes
the
Capitol
Theatre,
some
great
early
to
retail.
Among
other
things,
it's
on
a
designated
Avenue
under
map,
two
of
the
Official
Plan,
and
also
designated
mixed
use
areas
for
the
majority
of
the
site.
There's
a
portion
at
the
rear
that
is
currently
designated
neighborhoods.
H
Although
the
application
was
filed
before
OPI
405
and
the
young
Addington
secondary
plan
was
adopted,
it
does
fall
within
the
boundaries
of
that
plan.
As
you
can
see
in
the
map
here,
it's
within
area
C
2,
which
is
the
Yonge
Street
North
Village,
and
the
height
range
provided
for
an
O,
P
or
405
in
this
area,
is
8
to
15
stories.
H
H
Extensive
consultation
was
conducted
on
this
application.
Three
meetings
were
held
with
the
community
and
stakeholders
before
the
application
was
even
submitted
and
then
in
September
of
2019
after
revisions
to
the
proposal
were
made.
A
further
meeting
was
held
with
the
community
to
discuss
those
revisions.
H
The
terrorists
formed
I
describe
fits
within
the
45
degree
angle
airplane,
which
also
provides
for
appropriate
landscaped
private
spaces
on
those
terraces
as
well.
It
provides
for
five
hours
of
sunlight
on
the
opposite
side,
walk
some
images
here
where
you
can
see
the
terrorist
forum,
as
well
as
the
private
landscaped
space
that
I
described.
H
The
proposal
also
conserves
the
key
heritage
attributes
of
the
existing
heritage.
Building
on
the
site,
the
fine
grain
rhythm
of
retail
space
at
grade
will
be
maintained.
Preserving
the
village
feel
of
this
portion
of
Yonge
Street
and
the
Capitol
Theatre,
facade,
marquee
and
canopy
will
all
be
conserved.
H
In
addition,
a
listed
heritage
building
known
as
the
orange
Hall,
sits
behind
the
subject
site
at
the
rear
of
the
property.
A
mid
block
connection
is
being
provided
in
the
form
of
a
column.
Add
that
provides
both
a
pedestrian
connection
from
Yonge
Street
to
this
listed
heritage,
building
and
a
view
corridor
to
the
building.
So
it
can
be
appreciated
from
young.
H
These
last
set
of
slides
show
a
comparison,
madam
chair
and
members
of
community
council
of
the
original
application
and
the
proposal.
That's
now
before
you
as
you
can
see
the
image
on
the
left
compared
to
the
image
on
the
right.
The
proposal
is
significantly
scaled
down
from
40
story
from
21
stories
now
to
14
stories,
and
the
overall
built
form
has
been
scaled
down
too,
with
a
much
smaller.
H
A
H
It
also
provides
for
conservation
of
the
heritage
buildings
on
site,
and
so,
in
our
view,
the
application
represents
good
planning
and
we
ask
that
you
adopt
the
recommendations
of
staff
and
I'll
simply
end
by
thanking
staff
for
their
hard
work
on
this
file
and
thanking
you
for
your
time.
Today.
Okay,.
B
A
couple
of
short
questions,
as
you
know,
the
architect
for
the
Capitol
Theatre
was
the
renowned
Murray,
Brown
and
I
know
that
part
of
this
application
is
the
heritage
designation.
Are
you
willing
to
entertain
made
with
a
community
an
opportunity
to
recognize
this
for
most
toronto
architect
in
the
heritage?
Preservation?
Other
was
a
plaque
or
some
kind
of
commemoration
of
this.
B
H
B
Yes,
and
if
you
could
put
up
I'll
just
really
refer
to
this,
just
for
clarification
again,
so
the
original
application
was
on
the
the
left
part
of
the
screen
right,
which
had
the
application.
The
bill
form
went
all
the
way
to
duplex
Avenue
right
correct,
so
the
application
before
us
is
now
much
more
of
a
narrow
footprint.
That
does
not
go
that
far.
It
only
goes
to
where
the
parking
lot
which
now
exists
there.
It
only
goes
to
that
point
there
by
the
parking
lot,
a
gate,
I
guess
that's.
A
I
So
my
name
is
Maureen
Carroll
with
Witten
Park
residents
organization
represents
member
households
from
Lawrence,
West,
South,
Jerusalem
and
Briar
Hill
and
then
from
Yonge
Street
to
Saginaw
and
Proudfoot.
The
developer
submitted
revised
plans
in
November
2019
and
is
proposing
a
50
point.
Four
meter
14-story
building
with
a
five
and
a
half
meter
mechanical
structure.
I
I
I
An
amendment
to
the
city
plan
is
required
to
have
the
designation
of
the
western
portion
of
the
site
change
from
neighborhoods
to
mixed
use
areas
and
the
rear
setback
is
only
2.8
meters
from
the
park
or
green
pea,
and
it
should
be
at
least
seven
and
a
half
meters.
The
height
of
the
building
should
be
properly
angle
it
from
the
green
pea
Park
area.
I
I
Still
amendments
to
the
city,
bylaw
are
also
required
to
permit
the
proposed
height
and
density,
and
then
one
of
these
community
consultation
meetings
held
in
September
2019
people
brought
up
some
of
these
issues.
They're
in
the
city's
report,
the
height
could
set
a
precedent
for
Yonge
Street
going
north
up
to
Lawrence.
I
Have
that's
one
of
the
major
concerns
as
having
a
precedent
with
a
building
like
that
all
the
way
up,
Yonge
Street
and
also
the
raise
designation
of
lands
from
neighborhood
to
mix
use,
could
impact
on
blocks
deeper
within
the
neighbourhood
and
also
at
the
community
meeting.
It
was
brought
up
that
the
proposal
should
comply
with
the
council,
approved
Midtown
and
focus
document,
and
then
there's
also
the
problem
of
social
structure.
The
schools
are
already
over
capacity.
I
Okay,
so
the
proposed
height
is
much
higher
than
the
Midtown
and
focused
parameters.
They
were
carefully
meticulously
developed
by
city
planners
over
years
of
consultation,
with
many
many
community
stakeholders
unanimously
approved
by
City
Council
and
then
arbitrarily
changed
by
the
provincial
government.
I
A
I
B
B
B
I
I
I
B
Terms
of
the
I
know,
one
of
the
concerns
you
mentioned
was
about
the
the
height
and
the
angular
plane
and
I
was
made
aware
of
this,
and
I
wasn't
really
cognizant
of
it
that
angular
planes
I
know.
If
you
know
this,
if
angular
planes
relate
to
just
immediate
impacts
on
residential
homes,
abutting
a
new
development
and
not
on
open
space
or
even
parks,
I,
don't
know
sure
if
you're.
I
B
I
B
Yeah,
that
is
interesting,
but
at
least
there
is
finally
a
public
access
or
opening
to
that
gem
very
mysterious
orange
Hall
that
we
haven't
seen
anybody
in
in
50
years.
But
is
there
anybody
here
from
the
orange
Hall
a
wonder,
I
don't
know,
but
so,
but
at
least
there's.
Finally,
some
kind
of
opening
yeah,
it's
a
colonnade.
B
B
Thank
you
so
much
for
all
your
hard
work,
five
years
of
real
earnest
community
consultation
and
not
only
on
this
project
but
I,
know
Litton
Park
ratepayers
have
done
and
I
see,
Andy
Gord
here
you
know
all
the
work
that
was
done
for
four
years
and
it
is
certainly
appreciated
by
city
staff
and
others
who
were
part
of
your
very,
very
conscientious
input
into
future
plans
for
this
area.
Thank
you
for
that.
Thank.
I
A
B
D
Bottom
chair,
the
angular
plane,
is
addressed
in
two
sections
in
the
report,
page
28,
which
is
the
building
massing
and
also
the
Sun
and
shadow
section
of
the
report
on
page
28.
In
this
particular
case,
we
applied
and
angular
playing
from
the
residential
development
on
the
duplex
side
of
the
property,
not
the
a
proposed
area
of
the
teepee,
a
lot
that
would
be
the
big
park
running
through
the
shadow
plans.
There
is
limited
impact
of
the
14
story,
building
on
the
proposed
Park
area
between
1018
and
1218.
D
There
are
existing
shadow
impacts
that
are
more
significant
on
that
property
from
the
young
Eglinton
center
on
the
east
side
of
Yonge
Street,
and
so
the
building
is
in
line
with
those
shadows
at
9:18
at
10:18.
There
is
a
minimal
impact
on
the
park
that
swings
across
and
is
primarily
off
at
11:18,
but
it's
fully
off
at
1218
am
of
1218
p.m.
B
14
stories
under
the
new
opa
405,
that
was
the
change
from
the
Midtown
and
focus
proposed
official
plan
amendment
one
of
the
changes
as
a
result
of
that
new
provincial
policy
as
regards
to
planning
in
that
area
with
under
OPA
405.
What
was
the
case
before
under
Midtown
Enfocus
and
then
now
under
the
new
you
might
say,
framework
by
the
province
with
OPA
405
through.
D
Madam
chair,
the
application
was
submitted
on
June
29th
2018.
The
OPA
405
was
approved
by
City
Council
in
July
of
2018,
and
the
province
approved
op8
405
in
June
of
2019,
as
approved
by
the
province.
The
heights
that
allowed,
within
this
character
8
to
15
stories,
and
we
have
an
applicant
proposing
14
stories.
Council
approved
version
of
the
secondary
plan
had
8
stories
with
bonusing
going
up
to
ten
storeys.
The
right
away
on
this
section
of
Yonge
Street
is
33
meters,
so
that
would
allow
on
a
one-to-one
ratio,
11
stories
on
the
property.
B
D
D
B
B
Just
that
it's
you
know,
if
part
of
this
whole
revitalization
of
that
corner.
So
it's
sort
of
thing
that
we'll
deal
with
later
in
terms
of
the
Heritage.
Is
there
anybody
from
heritage
here
could
I'm
and
if
they
would
just
comment
on
the
application
and
how
heritage
showed
Toronto,
but
there,
you
might
say,
ideas
are
on
this
application
and
the
agreement
so.
A
C
C
It's
the
design
that
was
submitted
to
us
has
gone
through
a
few
iterations
and
we
were
able
to
maintain
conservation
of
a
substantial
portion
of
their
property,
not
solely
the
elevations
fronting
Yonge
Street,
but
we're
getting
some
depth
to
that.
At
least
some
representation
of
the
two
of
the
individual
stories
to
a
depth
of
a
vestibule,
approximately
getting
conservation
getting
some
commemorative
space
not
actually
conserved
but
commemorated
for
the
theater
area
itself.
A
Okay,
Kelter
Cole
does
that?
Does
that
cover
up
you?
Yes,
it
was
informative.
Thank
you
for
asking
me
that
little
presentation
are
there
any
other
questions
of
staff
on
this
item.
I
just
have
one
myself.
If
I
could
I'll
call
myself
the
the
both
the
applicant
and
and/or,
both
their
resident
I
should
say
in
the
local
council
are
concerned
about
what
Midtown
focus
means.
I
actually
have
similar
concerns
about
the
Sheppard
Avenue
secondary
plan.
So
I
understand
that
we
now
do
have
the
bulk
of
the
regulations
that
we
were
waiting
for
in
bill.
A
D
D
Well,
that
will
deal
with
the
the
major
transit
station
areas
across
the
city
of
Toronto,
including,
of
course,
we
have
a
station
here
within
this
area.
There's
not
there's
not
going
to
be
the
the
policies
in
place.
There's
not
going
to
be
any
change
to
the
to
the
policy
and
the
Yonge
and
Eglinton
secondary
plan.
A
D
The
young
Eglinton
area
we're
meeting
our
targets
in
terms
of
intensification,
so
there's
not
going
to
be
like
we've
well
exceeded
our
targets,
so
it's
not
really
kind
of
have
an
impact.
We
will
deal
with
individual
development
applications
from
a
planning
perspective
in
terms
of
their
massing
and
the
the
impact
that
they
may
have.
A
A
B
So
therefore,
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
asked
about
the
heritage
aspects
of
this
is
because
I
think
we,
the
community,
wants
to
preserve
and
protect
that
kind
of
continuity.
So
in
this
application
there
has
been
a
lot
of
effort
by
the
applicant
and
heritage,
Toronto
and
planning
staff
to
ensure
the
heritage
preservation
of
the
this
old
theater,
which
was
built
by
one
of
Toronto's
iconic,
architects,
Murray
Brown.
So
that
is
one
thing.
I
think
the
community
is
happy
to
see
that
there
is
an
attention
to
heritage
preservation.
B
The
the
frustration
has
hurt
by
the
decadent
from
Linton
Park
repairs
is
that
there
was
a
robust
community
consultation
for
up
to
five
years
on
the
secondary
plan
called
Midtown
and
focus,
and
this
site
was
part
of
that
and
the
community
had
thought.
They'd
come
to
some
agreement
with
the
city
that
there
would
be
mid
rise
application
here
on
this
site
and
with
the
potential
park
in
the
back.
But
then,
as
you
know,
last
June
I
think
it
was
all
this
was
out.
B
The
window
and
the
province
overruled
Midtown
and
focus
which
affected
not
only
our
side
of
Yonge
Street
but
the
other
side.
And
so
there
was
new
parameters
allowing
greater
density,
greater
height,
which
we
were
told
by
the
province
that
we
weren't
building
enough.
We
weren't
building
fast
enough
high
enough
massing
enough
in
young
Nagant
inand.
As
our
planner
Alberto
ski
said.
We
have
met
our
targets
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton
and
have
we
ever
met
them?
B
So
so,
if
you're
just
trying
to
take
a
walk
or
see,
if
you
can
see
the
Sun
one
day
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton
you'll
see
what
I'm
talking
about.
So
that's.
Why
there's
a
sensitivity
here
to
this
project,
because
it's
in
context
of
everything
that's
been
going
on
in
the
yungang?
That's
an
area
where
I
don't
the
other
side.
B
There's
the
sixty
five
storeys
just
went
up
and
there's
another
applicant
who
is
now
going
to
committee
of
adjustment
I
think
they
got
39
stories
now
they
want
45
a
committee
of
adjustment,
so
there's
never
enough,
but
I
think
that
this
application
is
a
very
reasonable
I
think
is
a
suitable
application.
The
the
renderings,
the
the
Heritage
Preservation,
the
quality
that
you
know,
planning
staff
has
attended
to
I.
Think
is,
quite
you
know
acceptable,
and
it
is
trying
to
make
a
challenging
situation
into
one.
That
is
an
opportunity
for
the
future
and
I.
B
Think
it's
going
to
be
a
vibrant
addition
to
the
neighbourhood.
Despite
the
challenges,
the
whole
neighbourhood
it
has,
and
the
other
thing
is
that
the
original
application
would
have
been
quite
a
massive
footprint,
all
the
way
west
to
do
flex.
Now
it
is
no
longer
there.
It
is
much
more
contained
footprint
and
by
the
applicants,
so
I
think
that
all
in
all,
it
is
something
that
is
supportable
and
that,
hopefully,
in
the
future,
we
will
work
with
the
applicant
and
the
site
plan
process
to
ensure
that
all
the
detailed
site
plan,
mechanics
etc.
B
Any
any
application
in
that
area
should
also
be
included
as
part
of
the
Mandate
of
the
construction
safety
coordinator,
Sean,
McGee
I
think
it
is
so
that
is
important
because
all
these
construction
sites,
because
I
need
you
to
wrap
up
yeah.
All
these
construction
sites
become
quite
precarious
at
times
because
of
the
cumulative
effect
of
the
Eglinton
crosstown
and
all
the
other
buildings
are
going
up
so
I'm,
supportive
and
I
urge
people
to
support
the
staff
recommendation.
B
A
E
15
seconds
I
hear
elsewhere.
Cole's
done
a
really
good
job
on
this
under
very
difficult
circumstances,
because
of
what
the
province
basically
imposed,
I'd
like
to
be
recorded
in
the
negative,
not
nothing
to
do
with
councillor
Cole's
good
work.
Just
I
have
other
reasons
for
not
supporting
this
application.
A
A
Okay,
that
is
carried.
Thank
you,
okay,
and
our
next
item
is
counselor.
Cole
is
the
heritage
item
accompanying
and
and
you've
already
had
a
presentation
on
it
item
number
four
is
alterations
to
heritage;
sorry,
yeah,
alterations
to
heritage
property
at
twenty
four,
ninety
and
2506
Yonge
Street
intention
to
designate
twenty
four
ninety
and
2506
Yonge
Street
councillor
Cole
you've
already
had
a
presentation
from
heritage.
Did
you
want
to
make
any
comments
on
this
item
on
its
way
through
no.
B
So
we
have
this
one
piece
of
old
Toronto
left
here,
and
so
that's
why
the
heritage
designation
here
and
the
heritage
agreement
is
critical
in
terms
of
Toronto,
not
only
this
area
of
the
city,
but
also
all
of
Toronto,
that
we
retain
and
respect
some
of
our
heritage
and
just
one
last
comment.
As
you
know,
this
was
the
site
of
the
rebellion
of
1837
okay.
So
we
online
Mackenzie
walked
these
streets
and
Montgomery's
tavern
was
just
down
the
street,
and
so
I
encourage
you
to
visit
these
last
messages
of
Toronto.
B
A
Thank
you,
I'll
just
make
one
comment
myself
if
it
could
include
on
the
plaque
that
that
this
is
the
movie
theater,
where
my
entire
family
went
to
see
funny
girl,
I,
think
that
would
be
a
nice
thing
to
put
on
the
black
it's
as
far
back
as
I
go
with
the
site.
It'll
go
back
to
the
rebellion,
it's
one
of
my
earliest
memories
of
us
having
a
happy
time
at
a
movie,
though
okay.
A
So
if
there
are
no
other
speakers
item
number
four
councillor,
Cole
is
moving
the
staff
recommendations,
all
in
favor
opposed
that
is
carried.
Okay.
Thank
you
item
number
five
step.
Utens
item
number.
Five
is
we're
back
to
similar
neighborhood
item
number
one:
an
item
in
my
ward
request
for
Direction
report
official
plan
amendment
and
zoning
amendment
application,
1650,
Sheppard,
Avenue,
East,
the
in
the
speakers.
As
deputy
mayor
says,
we
share
from
applicants
forth
on
the
first
on
the
speaker's
list.
The
registered
deputies
that
you
see
first
are
in
fact
representing
the
applicant.
A
C
Think,
thank
you
very
much.
Members
of
council
I
also
have
with
me
my
client
mr.
Robert
Carroll
in
the
audience
today,
I
didn't
intend
to
make
a
very
detailed
application.
The
staff
report
is
quite
detailed.
We've
reviewed
it
wanted
to
express
our
appreciation
for
the
work
that
staff
have
done
on
this.
C
Both
planning
staff,
legal
staff,
as
well
as
only
the
other
departments
at
the
City
of
Toronto
that
have
had
their
input
into
what
has
been
a
very
long
process
and
a
very
collaborative
process,
not
just
with
city
staff,
but
also
with
the
other
owners
in
the
block
and
we're
gonna
we've
heard
from
mr.
goldberg
on
behalf
of
one
of
them
with
respect
to
2600
and
we're
going
to
hear
from
another
one
of
the
owners
representatives
in
the
deputation
that
follows
mine.
C
Everyone
has
put
a
lot
of
hard
work
into
it,
and
I
just
wanted
to
express
my
appreciation
for
that.
I
wasn't
aware
that
there
was
going
to
be
a
deputation
from
the
Henry
farms.
Representatives
today,
but
I
am
I,
did
hear
some
very
positive
comments
about
the
block
planning
exercise
in
that
deputation
with
respect
to
the
location
of
the
park.
The
way
the
blocks
have
been
broken
up
in
the
positioning
of
the
towers
and
I
was
actually
I'm
actually
buoyed
by
the
the
positive
comments
that
I
did
here.
C
So
a
lot
of
technical
work
has
gone
into
that
transportation
report
with
respect
to
the
layout
of
streets,
the
location
of
signalization,
of
intersections
the
movements
that
are
permitted
in
various
location
right
down
to
the
width
of
the
streets
that
are
being
required
through
this
context
plan.
So
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
thought
and
a
lot
of
work
has
gone
into
establishing
that
road
network
I
wanted
to
turn
turn
my
attention
to
the
comments
that
I
understand
are
gonna
follow
mine
from
mr.
plot.
C
He
has
put
a
letter
on
the
record
or
his
client
has
put
a
letter
on
the
record
that
that
we
have
reviewed
they're,
requesting
some
flexibility
in
terms
of
finalizing
the
wording
of
the
Official
Plan
amendment
that
will
apply
to
all
these
lands.
We've
provided
our
input
back
to
city,
legal
and
it's
I
see
mr.
Callaway
here
today.
It's
not
mr.
Calley,
oh,
that
we
provided
the
input
to,
but
to
the
lawyers
who
are
assigned
to
the
file.
They
do
know
that
we
understand
the
concerns
that
mr.
C
platts
client
is
going
to
be
raising
and
we
would
support
having
a
flexible
approach
to
make
sure
that
we
can
land
the
language
of
the
Official
Plan
amendment
in
a
way
that
recognizes
all
of
the
hard
work.
That's
been
done
by
staff
in
terms
of
taking
this
matter
to
the
public
and
the
the
time
and
energy
and
effort
that
have
been
put
in
by
all
of
the
owners
within
the
block.
So
we
we.
We
trust
that
the
collaboration
and
the
good
faith
that's
been
shown
throughout
is
going
to
lead
to
a
resolution.
C
That's
going
to
work
for
all
the
owners
which
to
us
is
extremely
important,
because
there's
not
just
the
question
of
implementation
of
Official
Plan
amendments
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
on
this
block.
There's
also
the
very
the
very
real
question
of
actually
getting
this
block
built
out.
Getting
a
road
network
getting
built
out
getting
new
services
built
out
and
those
those
services
and
those
roads
cross
a
lot
of
people's
property
lines.
So
we
need
to
have
continued
cooperation
from
the
owners
within
the
block.
C
In
addition
to
the
comments
that
we've
provided
to
city
legal
on
that
respect,
we
have
provided
some
other
detailed
comments
to
city
legal,
all
of
which
I
think
are
manageable
and
all
of
which
I
trust
we're
going
to
be
able
to
work
out
as
we
move
through
this
proximate
process.
So
with
that
I'll
take
any
questions
that
councillors
the
councillors
may
have.
A
A
A
Definitely
yeah,
okay,
just
to
be
to
be
sure.
I
do
have
a
question
in
terms
of
things
that
have
to
be
ironed
out.
One
of
the
biggest
concerns
that
that
remains.
You
heard
some
of
the
transportation
concerns
that
this
lack
of
it
mentioned
earlier,
and
they
really
pertain
to
both
the
buildings,
those
those
two
intersections.
The
residents
inside
the
the
the
area,
though,
are
still
frustrated
by
they
don't
really
have
the
detail
or
a
visual
of
what's
taking
place
in
terms
of
amenities
here,
they're
they're
pool
is
being
removed.
A
It
don't
seem
to
have
access
to
amenities
in
the
new
building.
But
there's
not
a
lot
of
detail
is.
Is
it
gonna
be
considered
a
friendly
motion
if
I
move
a
motion
that
that
some
of
that
has
to
be
detailed
and
ironed
out
before
we're
making
a
section,
37
agreement
and
an
L
pad
hearing
that
that
has
to
be
more
detailed
and
and
and
shared
with
the
residents
I
I.
C
Turned
to
my
client
who's
nodding
that
certain
certainly
there
there
is
a
plan
to
introduce
new
amenity
space
within
the
existing
Sunrise
apartment
tower
and
and
I
think
in
fairness
to
those
residents.
Yes,
they
should
get
a
list
or
a
detailed
list
of
what
those
kinds
of
amenities
are
going
to
be
and
so
I
you
know.
I
certainly
wouldn't
have
any
objection
on
behalf
of
my
client
to
to
making
that
clear
to
them.
Then
perhaps
it
has
been
made
to
them
sure.
A
J
J
They
wanted
to
see
how
staff
wanted
to
see
how
this
block
would
come
together
and
evolve
together
and
after
a
considerable
amount
of
effort
back
and
forth,
my
client
doesn't
have
an
application
pending
expended
the
resources,
hire
legal
counsel
planners
engineers,
both
civil
and
transportation
engineers
and
an
architect
to
help
with
massing
exercises.
And
what
have
you
so?
My
clients
been
an
active
participant
in
this
process
since
the
beginning.
We
are
very
pleased
with
the
recommendations
of
staff
and
with
the
Official
Plan
amendment.
J
We
commend
staff
for
their
work
as
well
as
the
councillor
and
the
community
who
undertook
several
community
consultation
meetings.
We
heard
for
much
of
them.
We
had
a
community
consultation
meeting
earlier
this
winter
I
believe
it
was
in
January
at
some
point
and
it
was
fairly
well
attended,
despite
the
weather,
the
Hat
night,
if
I
recall
correctly,
but
interestingly
enough
and
I
go
to
a
lot
of
these
community
consultation
events
and
there
was
not
the
fire
and
brimstone
as
they
sometimes
call
it.
At
these
events,
I
thought
the
comments
from
the
community
were
quite
rational.
J
There
was
not
a
major
dispute
over
most
things.
The
concept
plan
and
the
reason
for
the
concept
plan
and
the
additional
infrastructure
would
be
created
was
well
understood
by
a
community
I
believe
that
they
felt
that
they
were
a
part
of
that,
as
as
my
client
and
I
understand,
the
other
owners.
I
am
here
today
to
make
a
small
request
of
this
committee.
My
friend
foreshadowed
that
request
and
that's
to
ensure
that
the
recommendation
to
Council
provides
for
flexibility
to
address
some
minor.
What
I
would
call
tweaks
to
the
OPA
instrument
itself.
J
And
so
you
can't
interfere
with
a
silhouette.
But
there
is
some
indication
as
to
the
maximum
height.
But
that's
about
all
that.
That's
really
locked
down
in
the
okay,
but
those
minimum
requirements
are
the
fundamental
building
blocks
that
my
client
requires
in
order
to
really
understand
how
this
is
going
to
be
built
out
and
proceed
with
the
conveyance
is
that,
as
the
staff
report
identifies
need
to
happen
before
anybody
can
put
a
shovel
in
the
ground
so
before
any
of
this
can
really
take
shape
and
there's
a
lot
of
infrastructure
work.
J
A
A
K
Counselor
and
chair,
thank
you.
I'm
Jonathan,
Mosely
I'm,
one
of
the
executive
of
the
Henry
farm
Community
Association
and,
as
Daniella
kovitch
indicated,
were
located
on
the
south
side
of
Sheppard,
just
west
of
Don
Mills
Road.
So
we
have
a
direct
interest
in
what's
happening
to
the
general
context.
Plan
in
the
area
are
going
to
be
very
brief.
Just
three
comments
on
the
proposal
for
for
a
1650,
Sheppard
Avenue.
K
We
think
that
the
the
density
proposed
for
this
building
is
particularly
excessive
and
at
31
stories
even
reduced
from
35,
which
was
the
original
application.
Even
at
31
floors,
looms
very
large
over
the
building.
That's
only
15
stories,
only
25
meters
in
front
of
it,
so
we
do
have
concerns
about
that.
We
would
ask
that
the
applicant
revisit
some
of
the
the
density
proposed.
Again,
we
don't
have
opt
objections
to
higher
density,
but
we
do
think
the
3.99
FSI
is
quite
high.
The
second
comment
is
kind
of
incidental.
K
It's
about
the
dryer
fans
of
the
neighboring
carwash.
If
anybody
who's
walked
along
there
when
the
carwash
is
operating,
that
fan
is
extremely
loud
and
we
noted
that
the
three-story
townhomes
are
going
to
be
built
immediately
adjacent
to
the
carwash
and
particularly
the
fan
that
operates
there
from
8
o'clock
till
10
o'clock
at
night.
That
will
certainly
be
an
issue
that
no
doubt
councilor
will
hear
about
from
residents
who
move
in
there,
that
there's
a
fan
noise
and
that
noise
is
very
loud.
K
K
We
would
respectfully
ask
the
applicants
to
work
together
to
try
to
integrate
all
of
the
buildings
together
as
much
as
possible,
and
that
includes
particularly
the
brick
accents
that
we
hope
will
be
used
on
the
buildings
that
they
match
the
buildings
that
are
there
in
existence.
So
we
talked
about
brown
brick
for
the
hunters
Lodge.
The
building
behind
that
should
have
brick
accents
that
are
brown.
The
one
behind
1650
should
have
white,
yellow
brick,
accents
and
and
the
future
building
behind
leaf
hill
would
similarly
would
like
to
see
that
accent
in
a
similar
way.
K
They
can
have
different
colors,
but
we
would
like
to
see
the
design
to
be
very
similar,
if
not
almost
the
same,
in
the
sense
of
the
materials
and
the
look
of
the
buildings.
That's
something
that's
very
important
to
us
and
I
know
the
council
doesn't
have
much
to
say
on
design,
particularly
as
a
zoning
and
OPA
application,
but
we
would
respectfully
ask
the
applicants
to
look
at
that
we'd
be
happy
to
work
with
them
on
that,
just
to
improve
the
way
that
the
area
looks.
A
Thank
you,
mr.
Moseley.
Are
there
any
questions
for
Sol
there
any
questions
from
other
councillors,
seeing
none.
If
I
can
just
ask
a
question,
because
the
the
the
noise
from
the
the
car
wash
the
gas
station
is
actually
a
part
of
the
whole
context
plan
here,
but
you
bring
that
up.
I
can't
actually
recall
if
there's
there's
even
any
kind
of
fencing
or
noise
attenuation
for
the
community
for
the
car
wash
now.
K
A
L
G
G
L
G
L
The
next
question
I
want
to
ask
the
last
fellow
kind
of
piqued
my
interest
because
he
said
those
kind
of
1960
buildings
which
I
have
a
lot
of
would
be
inconsistent
with
kind
of
the
glass,
the
glassy
type
structures
that
they
build
now
and
I'm
sympathetic
to
his
his
comment
that
it
would
not,
it
would
stick
out
and
not
really
match
what
was
currently
built.
So
would
you
agree
with
that,
and
what
do
we
do
about
that
through.
G
You,
madam
chair,
so
this
is
this:
is
the
zoning
stage
of
the
application
yeah
and,
and
we
will
be
still
processing
a
site
plan
application
on
this,
so
as
I
ended
previously
there,
there
is
opportunity
to
take
this
to
design
review
panel.
If
the
local
council
wishes
as
well,
we
could
have
a
working
group
that
looks
at
the
specifically
the
materials
and
how
they
fit
and
integrate
from
material
perspective,
with
with
the
with
the
existing
buildings,
to
focus
on
on
those
elements.
I
see.
L
A
Seeing
no
other
questions
for
councilors
I
have
a
couple
of
myself
regarding
the
design
review
panel.
You
you,
you
sated
it
correctly.
We
have
the
option
of
going
there,
but,
generally
speaking,
it's
pretty
obvious
already
two
planning
staff
that
it
needs
to
go
there,
and,
and
so
we
don't
move
motions,
we
would
just
find
out
that
our
applications
are
headed
there
in
in
this
case.
This
is
a
real
concern.
Coming
forward
from
the
community.
G
A
Right,
that's
what
kick
starts
at
okay,
that's
comforting,
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
speak
to
the
density
comments,
because
that
between
the
two
buildings
between
item
number
number
five,
one
of
them
sort
of
clogged,
so
it
really
depends
on
how
the
old
buildings
are
positioned.
One
of
them
comes
in
at
about
3.5
density,
this
one
3.99,
so
they're,
they're
similar,
but
but
but
the
different
characteristics
give
you
a
different
calculation
at
Emerald
City
across
the
intersection
where
the
densities
in
this
application
sit
in
terms
of
what
is
now
the
new
regulation
around
subway
stations.
So.
G
So
so,
typically
what
we
were
looking
at
in
for
this
secondary
plan,
we
were
looking
at
a
maximum
of
3.99
density
on
the
block,
and
this
is
consistent
with
with
other
sort
of
corner
sites
in
proximity
to
transit
along
this
along
this
area,
the
the
emerald
emerald
park
or
the
parkway
forest
development
application
there.
There
are
three
point:
nine
nine
densities
within
that
community.
At
a
particular
at
the
corner,
there
was
a
there
was
an
OPA
done
a
while
back
where
the
densities
were
increased
on
some
sites
to
three
point:
nine
nine.
G
A
Okay
and
then
lastly,
last
question
is
about
the
conversation
that
started.
We
had
this
morning,
Israelis
just
before
the
meeting
started
and
then
I
discussed
with
you.
There
is
a
great
deal
of
detail
in
here
about
the
amenities
that
will
be
be
usable
amenities
in
1650,
Sheppard,
Avenue
East
that
will
be
improved
and,
in
fact
built
where
they
don't
exist
now
in
the
existing
building,
also
amenities
in
the
new
building,
but
the
design.
The
relationship
is
a
bit
vague
Minh
and
it's
it's
different
than
what
happened
in
I
didn't
know:
number
one.
Twenty
six
hundred.
A
At
what
juncture
will
they
with
the
negotiations,
happen
if
I'm
moving
a
motion
today
to
say
that
those
details
really
need
to
be
negotiated
and
shared
with
the
residents?
Would
that
happen
before
the
l
pad
hearing
or
could
it
can
happen
at
some
later
time?
What
point
is
the
section
37
agreement
secured
and
done
and
that's
it.
G
So
thinking
about
I'm
sure
the
the
l-pad
hearing
I
believe
is
scheduled
for
may
sometime,
but
the
the
staff
has
have
requested
as
part
of
the
recommendations
that
the
order
be
withheld
pending
finalization
of
the
Official
Plan
amendment,
the
zoning
bylaw
and
the
section
37
agreement.
So
we
could
continue
to
work
with
the
applicant
on
the
the
amenity
spaces
and,
what's
in
those
amenity
spaces
and
then
secure
them
as
part
of
the
the
section
37
and
outline
it
in
more
detail.
So
that
would
happen
after
the
l-pad
hearing.
After.
G
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Those
are
my
questions.
Thank
you.
So
I
reset
the
clock.
Are
there
any
speakers
to
the
item?
Or
would
you
like
me
to
go
first
because
I'm
gonna
put
some
motions
on
the
table?
Okay,
start
the
clock,
I
myself,
because
it's
a
long
motion
the
first
one
is
again
like
the
other
one,
a
technical
one
that
nails
down
the
the
measurements
of
the
park
that
will
be
on
this
site.
City
Council,
adopt
the
staff
recommendations.
A
The
report
from
the
Acting
Director
Community
Planning,
amended
to
read,
with
recommendation,
to
amend
it
to
read
as
follows:
City
Council
accepted
on-site
parkland
dedication
site
having
a
minimum
size
383
square
metres
in
an
off-site
parkland
dedication
having
a
minimum
size
of
99
square
metres
that
that
was
missing
from
the
recommendation.
I'll
consider
the
rest
of
that
to
amendment
read
and
then
I'm,
adding
a
motion
to
that
staff
moved
to
negotiate
the
details
regarding
the
amenities
to
be
provided
and
secure
them
as
part
of
the
section
37
agreement.
A
Consider
the
rest
of
that
read
so
so
councillors.
The
one
thing
that
is
missing
from
this
report
is
a
picture
of
what
it
looks
like
right
now,
if
you,
if
you
google
it
what
you'll
see,
is
that
the
corner
of
Don,
Mills
and
Shepherd
there's
a
gas
station.
But
if
you
move
beyond
that,
what
you
see
are
three
cement
slab
towers
in
the
park.
A
If
you
will
that
sort
of
formed
a
block,
because
in
each
case
they
took
the
old
north
Kirk
plan
of
if
I
buy
a
great
big
lot
and
it's
it's
an
acre
and
a
half
I
can
build
an
apartment.
Building
on
it
and
I
will
meet
the
the
density
requirement
of
1.5.
What
they
left
behind
them
was
a
great
big
open
field,
which
is
all
within
500
meters
of
the
subway
station.
A
A
What
if
you
redeveloped
it
and
I,
was
asked
to
come
and
visit
the
the
final
project
that
the
students
had
done
and
the
room
was
full
of
developers
from
all
over
the
city,
so
I
should
have
known
that
that
that
they
were
gonna
start
looking
at
this
site.
Planning
took
a
great
approach
here,
because
these
two
applications
came
quickly,
one
on
top
of
the
other.
They
said
to
hold
back,
there's
no
context
for
putting
residents
behind
the
residents
here,
there's
no
way
in
or
out.
We
have
to
really
design
the
blog
so
in.
A
In
fact,
what
they
did
was
very
similar.
What
happened
at
University
of
Toronto
has
an
academic
exercise,
but
now
it's
real.
It's
made
very,
very
real
for
the
residents
who
live
on
the
site.
The
construction
plan
in
here
is
a
great
concern
to
them.
The
ins
and
outs,
the
added
access
impacts,
not
just
the
neighborhoods
around
them,
but
very
very
much.
The
people
living
on
that
on
the
site
really
affects
the
traffic
to
and
from
school,
at
Saint
Timothy's
effects
the
aromas
there.
A
There
are
huge
impacts
here,
but
that
being
said,
it
also,
this
application
was
made
shortly
before
we,
we
found
ourselves
under
a
brand
new
planning
regime,
and
so
it's
a
it's
looked
at
while
it
was
applied
for
it
before
the
contacts
plan
puts
it
in
the
realm
of
what
really
is
gonna
happen
in
this
neighborhood
under
bill
108
under
under
the
new
OPA
405,
and
so
what
they've
tried
very
hard
to
set
a
context
here
for
tower
in
the
park?
Infill
that
may
likely
happen.
It
will
likely
happen
around
any
building
in
the
peanut.
A
There
are
some
other.
You
know
interested
applications.
One
already
filed
up
on
Godstone
Road,
so
they've
tried
very
hard
to
set
a
tone
here,
but
what
I've
said
to
residents
is
why,
well,
you
see
height
here
the
leanness
of
the
buildings
by
making
them
tall
as
opposed
to
trying
to
shorten
them
down
to
meet
that
density.
They
would
then
be
sitting
in
a
pile
of
bricks.
Basically,
whereas
here
you've
got
a
park
in
a
road
network,
the
height
is
daunting,
but
the
density
requirement
the
affordable
housing
within
helps
mitigate
to
some
point.
A
What
is
very,
very
important
is
that
the
amenities
be
worked
out.
I
met
with
the
applicant
this
morning
to
say
that
having
a
vastly
different
approach
between
what's
happening
at
Don,
Mills,
2600
applications,
1650,
really
I
think
is
going
to
create
a
future
problem
for
the
community
and
and
and
some
ill
will
and
I
think
we
really
have
to
sort
that
out,
but
I'm
confident.
Having
heard
staffs
comments
that
we
can
do
that
over
the
next
year,
and
that
being
said,
those
are
my
comments.
A
L
A
L
L
L
Yeah
I
opposed
tower
renewal
because,
as
I
said
at
the
time,
I
remember
making
the
speech
quite
emphatically,
because
this
was
sort
of
a
really
new
thing.
I
said
it
was
a
Trojan
horse
for
developers
to
build
more
condos,
and
here
we
are
what
a
what
is
it
a
Trojan
horse
for
developers
to
come
in
and
build
more
condos
and
I?
Don't
think
the
residents
are
supporting
of
that
and
I
think
for
your
ward
and
my
ward
works
were
particularly
susceptible
to
that
tower
in
the
parks.
A
L
C
B
We
should
perhaps
ask
in
future
for
a
report
on
this
to
see
what
the
accumulative
effect
of
all
these
applications
are
going
to
be
and
the
impact
on
our
green
space-
and
you
know
everything
from
traffic
to
you-
know-
impact
on
local
services,
so
I'm
not
going
to
move
something
here,
but
I
think
that's
something
we
should
explore
going
forward.
So
there's
no
specific
motion,
but
certainly
I
think.
It's
time
we
made
me
revisited
that
I
take.
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
Oh
sorry,
well,
I'll
go
back
to
it
since
I'm
since
I've
read
out
22
now,
councillor
Pasternak
would
like
us
to
defer
it
so
I'll
move
a
motion
to
defer
Oh
favor
opposed.
Does
it
Cal,
sir?
No
sir
Minna
Wong
would
like
to
vote
twice
on
that
one
councillors
I
have
to
go
back
to
221
because
I
believe
there
were
yes,
there's
a
there's
an
option
there:
okay,
when
a
fair
home
staff
recommended
refusal,
but
there
also
is
the
option
if
approving
with
conditions,
etc,
etc.
What
is
your
specific
number.
A
A
E
A
A
Okay,
so
we're
really
taxing
the
clerk's
here.
I
can't
believe
how
fast
they
got
that
reconfigured,
so
counselor
call
the
local
councillor
is
moving
recommendation
number
three
approval,
but
with
the
conditions
all
in
favor
post,
seeing
none
that
is
carried
okay,
so
councillors
we
are
now
moving
on.
We've
done
22,
it's
a
deferral,
so
we're
moving
on
to
23
we're
back
to
councillor
Cole's
wort,
which
is
application
to
remove
a
private
tree
at
52
Briar
Hill
staff
recommend
refusal.
B
A
A
Okay,
councillor
Cole's
moving
staff
recommendations,
all
in
favor,
seeing
no
opposition
that
is
carried
and
then
I
believe
we
only
have
the
additional
items
left.
Madam
clerk,
in
my
reign,
okay,
so
councillors
it
is
the
new
items
that
were
circulated.
I
think
the
first
one
is
mind:
item
number
27,
yes,
item
number
27
I
won't
make
a
lot
of
comment
except
to
say
that
this
is
a
staffer
recommending
the
installation
of
the
traffic
calming
on
earnest
Avenue.
It's
simply
here,
as
as
an
additional
item
walked
on
by
myself
for
timing
more
than
anything.
A
A
Seeing
none
any
comments
by
my
explanation:
pretty
much
does
it
for
you.
So
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
put
before
you:
okay
opposed
none
that
is
carried
and
then
item
number
28,
which
is
a
motion
added
by
councillor
Cole.
Regarding
the
addition
of
community
safety
zones
on
Avenue
Road
between
Roseland,
Roselawn
and
castle
field,
yes,.
B
A
B
It's
Alan
be
school,
so
the
situation
is
that
right
now,
allenbys
school
of
butts
on
two
Avenue
Road
and
the
safety
zone
is
one
block
long
and
there's
an
opportunity
to
put
a
speed
enforcement
camera
there
in
Avenue
Road,
but
they
can't
put
it
up
because
there
are
splash
guards
on
both
sides
of
Avenue
Road.
So,
therefore,
the
vision,
zero
transportation
is
asked
that
if
we
could
extend
the
safety
zone,
one
block
north
one
block
south,
then
they'll
be
able
to
erect
the
camera
and
they
won't
be
obstructed
by
the
splash
cars
we're
presently
there.
A
Okay,
those
are
your
comments.
Do
counselors
have
any
questions.
I
just
have
one
question
through
you
said
the
staff
staff
have
been
recommending
this.
This
doesn't
require
that
we
can
just
move
right
to
designation.
This
doesn't
require
polls
or
anything
like
that.
Okay,
I'm,
gonna,
I'm
gonna
bring
staff
to
the
floor
and
just
get
them
to
quickly
comment
because
we're
taking
immediate
action
here.
Mr.
Clement,
if
you
just
want
to
add
comment
through.
C
A
C
A
C
A
A
L
C
L
A
B
It's
what
it
is
is
that
there
was
a
pilot
project
which
had
speed
enforcement
technology
there
right
on
Avenue,
Road
and
the
speeds
recorded.
Were
you
know
it's
like
the
Indianapolis
Speedway
I
mean
the
numbers
and
the
the
the
speed
up
dog.
We
clocked
somebody
120
in
a
40
or
whatever
they're
there,
anyways
they're,
robust.
L
L
That,
like
it's
not
possible
to
go
120
kilometres
an
hour
on
any
Street
in
the
city
when
kids,
like
you
put
in
a
community
safety
zone
because
it's
near
a
school,
the
proposition
behind
that
is
because
they're
kids
around
now,
if
you're
saying
that
they're
going
like
120
kilometres
an
hour,
then
well
relevant
to
me,
and
it
would
have
to
be
when
the
kids
are.
You
know
either
getting
in
going
into
school
they're
coming
out
of
school.