►
Description
Planning and Growth Management Committee, meeting 31, July 5, 2018 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=13073
Part 1 of 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzSmajFs61A#t=19m53s
Meeting Navigation:
0:09:40 - Meeting resume
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
Wow
that
works
that
works
power
of
the
gavel.
Welcome
back.
We
will
start
the
afternoon
session.
We
have
now
item
number
31.7.
We
have
quite
a
number
of
public
speakers
on
that.
I
spoke
before
launch
as
to
what
we're
doing,
because
we
are
continuing
the
meeting
of
this
morning,
I'm
sorry
of
last
month-
and
we
started
it
this
morning,
so
we're
here
to
hear
from
the
public
please
maximum
five
minutes
per
speaker.
B
If
you
speak
for
less,
we
don't
mind,
but
if
you
have
something
important
to
say,
we
definitely
do
want
to
hear
from
you
if
someone
else
has
emphasized
it
and
you
can
tell
us
you're
supporting
what
they've
said
as
well.
That's
also
great
because
we
do
have
a
lengthy
list
of
speakers.
Please
watch
the
clock,
so
I
don't
have
to
remind
people
of
the
five
minutes
and
try
to
stay
on
the
topic.
B
C
Was
a
wide
preference
for
option
four,
which
I
now
understand
to
be
option
three
on
June
21st,
but
that
support
was
qualified
where
Midtown
and
focus
is
problematic
it.
Where
is
where
it
normalizes
extremes?
It
is
hard
to
see
that
these
revisions
will
serve
as
anything
more
than
a
holding
bylaw.
The
larger
question
is
the
repeal
of
the
growth
plan.
C
Our
challenge
today
is
to
show
the
new
premier
that
we
can
do
without
cap
and
trade
and
without
carbon
taxes
and
still
reduce
gridlock
and
emissions
by
using
the
device
of
the
growth
plan
to
promote
growth
and
underutilized
air
is
to
balance
demands
on
infrastructure
and
transportation.
Instead
of
using
the
device
of
the
growth
plan
to
exacerbate
gridlock.
We
know
those
of
us
in
the
north
end
what
Roehampton
and
Broadway
and
Erskine
are
like
on
weekday
mornings.
What
are
the
effects
of
the
growth
plan
on
air
quality?
C
We
need
to
per
say
to
persuade
the
premier
killing
the
growth
plan
is
in
the
public
interest.
We
need
a
report
on
what
the
growth
plan
will
cost
the
property
taxpayers
of
the
City
of
Toronto
should
the
needs
of
other
areas
be
subordinated
to
a
growth
plan
that
should
never
have
been
there
section
3/5
of
the
planning,
a
constructs
Council
and
the
OMB
that
they
are
to
conform
to
the
growth
plan,
section
2
I
of
the
Planning
Act
instructs
Council
and
the
OMB
they
are
to
ensure
there
are
sufficient
educational
recreational
social
services.
C
This
Sundin
unfunded
plan
is
not
what
is
contemplated
in
two
I
of
the
Planning
Act.
So
what
do
we
do
where
the
Planning
Act
contradicts
itself?
This
is
this
is
really
not
a
matter
for
the
OMB
it
is.
It
is
only
a
decision.
The
minister
can
make
the
difference
between
our
official
plan
and
the
growth
plan
is
that
the
opie
went
through
a
wide
public
process.
C
The
growth
plan
did
not
a
report
setting
out
the
problematic
aspects
of
the
growth
plan
and
the
potential
positive
uses
of
the
device
of
the
growth
plan
would
support
a
resolution
from
City
Council
that
the
province
repealed
the
young
Eglinton
provincial
growth
plan.
Alternatively,
that
that
a
report
on
the
consequences
of
the
growth
plan
be
appended
with
this
plan
when
it
is
sent
to
the
minister
I.
C
B
B
D
Good
afternoon,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
appear
before
this
committee.
My
name
is
Dorian
Adamski
and
I'm
here
today
to
support
option.
3
I
spent
the
first
20
years
of
my
life
in
the
onion
Eglinton
area.
I
went
to
Eglinton
public
school
I
was
part
of
the
last
class
to
graduate
from
North
Toronto
Collegiate
Institute.
My
childhood
was
spent
walking
every
Street
every
Park
in
every
alley.
In
my
neighborhood
in
our
neighborhood,
it
was
a
great
place
to
grow
up.
D
We
had
an
incredible
amount
of
freedom
in
the
space
to
put
it
to
good
use.
Someone
far
more
clever
than
me
once
said
that
the
only
constant
in
the
world
is
change.
Change
is
inevitable
and
Serano
has
seen
dramatic
change
over
the
last
10
years.
Neighborhoods
across
the
city
are
developing.
They
are
growing
and
that's
a
good
thing,
except
when
it's
not,
except
when
it's
too
much
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
D
It's
also
clear
that
it
has,
quite
frankly,
to
become
unlivable
years
ago
my
mother
moved
into
this
neighborhood.
To
start
a
better
life,
I
have
moved
away
to
do
the
same.
The
never-ending
construction
and
the
resulting
impacts
on
human
health
and
livability
make
it
difficult
to
spend
a
single
day
in
the
area,
let
alone
live
there.
Full-Time
and
I
fear
that
the
worst
is
yet
to
come.
D
When
we
have
to
live
with
the
finished
products
of
this
chaotic
construction,
the
rows
of
massive
condos
will
have
taken
over
and
overwhelm
the
community,
especially
along
Eglinton,
Roehampton
and
Broadway.
What
kind
of
streetscape,
what
sense
of
community
will
remain?
What
about
green
space?
What
sort
of
childhood
will
the
next
generation
have
the
soon
to
be
completed?
Lrt
is
a
necessary
addition
to
Toronto's
transit.
It
is
long
overdue,
and
it's
going
to
compound
the
challenges
of
this
neighborhood.
D
D
Thousands
of
new
residential
units
are
being
built
and
we
have
not
come
close
to
addressing
the
infrastructure
deficit.
We
are
playing
catch-up
councillors.
Thousands
of
people
live
here
now.
Thousands
of
people
who
deserve
a
livable
neighborhood
thousands
of
people
who
deserve
a
voice
option
3,
is
a
good
first
step.
Reducing
the
height
of
the
planned
new
builds
will
help
alleviate
some
of
the
pressures.
We
have
a
lot
more
work
ahead
of
us.
The
plan
as
it
stands
now
contains
no
new
green
space
for
our
neighborhood.
D
Immediate
action
must
be
taken
to
address
diminishing
livability
by
government
and
by
the
developers
themselves.
The
developers
have
been
winning
these
battles
for
years,
it's
time
for
neighborhoods
to
get
a
win.
It's
about
the
people
that
live
in
the
neighborhood
and
the
effect
this
whole
situation
has
having
on
their
lives
I'm
it's
about
trying
to
find
a
path
to
a
better
future.
Councilors
I
hope
we
can
take
an
important
first
step
together.
I
am
asking
you
to
vote
for
option
three.
It
is
the
right
choice.
Thank
you.
Thank.
E
D
Over
year
and
it's
a
huge
burden
on
the
residents,
I
already
lived
there
that
I
already
call
it
at
home,
I
called
it
at
home
for
20
years,
and
the
amount
of
change
we've
seen.
Some
good
has
been
great,
but
it's
happening
at
a
breakneck
speed.
That
I,
don't
think
is,
is
fair
to
the
people
that
live
there
or
fair
to
the
people
that
will
live
there.
Okay,.
E
You
talked
about
the
schools
growing
up
in
the
neighborhood
and
the
schools.
Are
you
aware
in
the
report
option
3
will
actually
have
will
also
have
significantly
reduced
the
shadow
impacts
on
North,
Toronto
collegiate
and
Eglinton
junior
that
I
didn't.
You
know:
well
the
Edmonton
junior
school,
the
open
space
that
this
is
a
one
of
the
great
points,
I
think
of
option
3
is
that
it'll
reduce
the
the
shadow
impact
which
would've
left
these
important
educational
institutions
and
dark
will
be
reduced
significantly?
Are
you
aware
of
that?
D
I
mean
I
grew
up,
I
was
in
those
school
yards
with
Sun
all
day.
Every
day
it
was
a
great
place
to
go
to
school
as
an
elementary
student
and
as
a
high
school
student
and
they'd
be
a
shame
and
detrimental
if
the
shadow
impacts
of
the
other
options
are
allowed
to
go
and
impacts
day
to
day
life
of
the
youth
and
children
in
the
area.
E
D
Well,
right
now
it's
it's
one
of
the
worst
parts
of
my
week
to
travel
up
to
Zagal
the
station
from
downtown
and
I
mean
no
matter
what
time
of
day
it
seems.
It's
always
overcrowded
and
and
never
a
good
experience
and
I
mean
with
the
LRT
and
coming
which
I'm
excited
for
it's
only
gonna
exacerbate
those
challenges,
tenfold,
24
34,
it's
it's
gonna
be
even
worse
and
we
do
not
have
I
guess
an
adequate
plan
to
deal
with
that
and
then
that's
gonna
be
a
huge
challenge.
D
E
Just
finish
by
asking
you
I
know:
some
of
your
family
members
have
reached
out
to
me
by
email
talking
about
the
the
kind
of
the
impacts
of
what's
happened
in
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
the
kind
of
wild-west
approach
to
development
over
the
last
series
of
years
and
just
talked
about
health
impacts.
Can
you
address
that
or
share
that
with
us
I.
D
Mean
how
many
construction
sites
are
there
in
the
area
of
10-15?
It's
crazy.
They
start
at
7:00
a.m.
they'll
go
to
7:00
p.m.
sometimes
later
making
constant
noise.
You
know
it's
very
difficult
to
have
a
good
night's
sleep
in
the
area
that
impacts
health
immediately.
The
dust
clouds
kind
of
brought
up
from
the
sites
I
mean
my
family
lives
on
the
eighth
floor,
one
on
the
Roehampton
buildings
and
it
definitely
affects
your
day-to-day
life
there.
You
can't
really
spend
much
time
on
the
balcony.
D
B
F
There
we
go.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
My
name
is
Renae
subasta,
Williams
and
I
live
on
7,
Broadway
and
I've
lived
in
Midtown
for
about
15
years.
I
want
to
tell
you
what
I
saw
in
Canada
today,
so
I
was
walking
on
Broadway
Avenue,
where
I
live
with
a
friend
after
dinner.
It
was
late
afternoon
as
we
walked
past
the
track
and
field
and
North
North
Toronto
collegiate
I
saw
families
playing
with
their
young
children.
F
Couple
teenagers
were
taking
photos,
I'm
assuming
for
their
Instagram
or
snapchat
and
seniors
were
getting
their
exercise
around
the
track,
and
there
was
a
guy
sleeping
on
the
turf
it
was
hot
I,
don't
believe
him.
This
is
the
only
green
space
in
the
area
and
mind
you.
It
is
artificial.
Green
space
in
the
immediate
neighborhood
I
saw
parents
with
strollers,
watching
their
kids
run
around
the
parking
lot.
I'd
st.
Monica's
church.
That's
right
opposite
the
school,
because
there
is
no
green
space
in
the
neighborhood.
F
Instead,
there
are
plans
to
put
40
storey,
50-story
and
60
something
condos
on
these
three
streets.
Now
the
planners
do
promise
a
Park,
Street
loop
they've
said
that,
but
based
on
that
plan,
residents
may
not
be
able
to
walk
on
that
loop
for
what
a
decade
or
two
some
of
the
residents
won't
be
around
I.
Can't
promise
I'll
be
around
to
walk
on
that
loop,
so
I
come
here
to
advocate
for
option
three
known
as
option
for
originally
it's
the
only
option
that
actually
takes
into
consideration
the
city's
mandate
on
what
makes
a
livable
neighborhood.
F
It
is
also
the
plan
that
is
most
consistent
with
the
growth
plan
and
the
provincial
policy
statement.
It
supports
a
livable
community
as
defined
by
the
city.
So
I
ask
you
to
vote
for
it.
It
is
I,
think
a
reasonable
compromise
between
the
residents
and
the
planners,
and
it
takes
into
consideration
livability,
I'm,
actually,
employment
and
the
people
who
are
invested
in
this
neighborhood
and
in
the
city
they
live
there
and
they
want
to
live
and
they
deserve
to
live
in
a
neighborhood,
not
just
a
sequel
to
City
Place
guys
come
on.
F
F
E
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr.
chair,
some
people
in
the
neighborhood
have
called
it
a
density
dump
yeah
on
the
three
streets,
one
of
which
you
live
on
yeah,
Roehampton,
Broadway
and
Eglinton,
and
maybe
even
their
skin.
To
some
extent,
I
see
some
people
here
from
erskine
today,
I
just
want
to
ask
you
I,
don't
know
how
to
do
this
tactfully,
but
is
there
anything
any
kind
of
social
piece
to
this
like
this?
You
know
this
is
a
an
apartment.
Neighborhood
partially
is
there?
F
I
think
people
wanted
to
be
a
neighborhood
because,
like
what
like
I
said
before
on
Canada
Day,
it
was
late
evening,
so
the
Sun
wasn't
as
blisteringly
hot
as
it
had
been,
and
people
were
out
right.
You
know
the
sidewalks
were
filled
with
people
and
they
were
on
the
track
and
field
like
I,
said
chilling
out
walking
that
guy
was
napping.
F
F
To
suggest
that
we
are
going
to
get
anytime
soon,
not
in
the
next
deck
or
to
a
space
where
people
can
take
their
children,
and
these
are
not
apart
from
the
teenagers.
Most
of
these
children
were
word
strollers
right,
they're,
walking
around
kind
of
toddling,
some
running
crazily
they're,
all
like
mostly
under
ten.
So
it's
a
fairly
young
neighborhood
and
there
aren't
the
amenities
that
people
who
have
been
there
for
30
years
or
people
who
have
just
moved
in
in
the
last
five
years.
E
F
E
F
I
believe
so
I
mean
it's
a
great
neighborhood
I,
don't
blame
people
who
want
to
come
and
live
there,
but
if
you're
going
to
create
a
neighborhood
where
you
want
people
to
be,
you
have
to
give
them
other
reasons
to
come
there
all
right.
Yes,
you
can
put
your
head
down
at
night
once
the
construction
noise
has
died
down,
but
you
also
need
more
reason
like
office
jobs,
okay,.
B
G
H
B
G
You
very
much,
sir,
my
name
is
Terry
Olsen
I
live
at
seventy
Roehampton,
but
I
have
been
in
the
neighborhood
or
adjacent
to
it.
For
35
years
now
the
province
designated
this
area
in
2006
as
an
urban
growth
area,
with
a
density
objective
than
of
400
people,
jobs
and
jobs
per
hectare.
Today
it
is
over
600
people,
jobs
per
hectare,
an
increase
of
more
than
50%
from
that
objective
in
2006
now
people
will
say
and
I've
heard
people
say
at
the
OMB-
that's
just
a
minimum
density
to
them.
I
say
give
your
head
a
shake.
G
G
This
is
not
an
anti
development,
anti
business
presentation,
on
my
part
or
in
the
part
of
any
of
the
people.
I
know
who
are
here
and
I,
don't
know
everybody,
but
I
know
a
number
of
them.
We
believe
in
that
we
believe
that
option
three,
which
I
support
for
the
reasons
articulated
by
the
people
who
spoke
before
me,
is
still
a
developer
friendly
report.
G
But
here
are
just
a
few
of
the
problems
that
my
view
will
be
exacerbated
in
our
neighborhood
by
increased
development
that
exceeds
option
three.
First
of
all,
it
is
unsafe.
It
is
unsafe
for
the
disabled,
who
can't
manage
the
streets,
the
sidewalks
because
of
the
traffic
and
the
crowding
and
their
wheelchairs
and
scooters.
The
sidewalk
in
front
of
our
building
in
Roehampton
does
not
allow
two
scooters
to
pass
does
not
allow
people
in
wheelchairs
to
get
by
each
other.
There
are
often
trucks
parked
on
top
of
the
sidewalks
making
deliveries
to
the
construction
sites.
G
The
disabled
cannot
handle
the
community
in
its
present
state.
Secondly,
it
is
unsafe
for
the
elderly,
a
number
of
whom
still
live
in
their
homes,
not
in
the
high-rises.
Some
in
the
high-rises
who
have
trouble
trouble
navigating
the
rough
and
broken
streets
I
come
downtown
every
day
on
the
subway
and
I
see
people
in
their
walkers
trying
to
navigate
broken
pavement
and
the
sidewalks
and
having
to
cross
because
something's
blocked
I
mean
to
go
across
the
street
because
something
is
blocked
due
to
the
construction
trucks
going
in
and
out
of
the
sites.
G
It
is
really
unsafe
for
bicyclists
I
defy
anyone
to
ride
on
a
regular
basis
on
Eglinton,
Roehampton
or
Broadway.
It's
worth
your
life
literally.
To
do
so.
This
city
is
presently
and
properly
so
focused
on
enhanced
bicycle
safety
for
its
residents.
There
are
no
bike
lanes
in
our
neighborhood
there.
No
bike
lanes
and
Eglinton,
Roehampton
or
Broadway.
The
streets
are
narrow,
they're
clogged
with
construction
vehicles.
Automobiles
can
hardly
pass
each
other
as
a
result
to
put
bicycles
in
the
middle
of
that
is
to
invite
almost
certain
disaster.
G
It's
inevitable,
perhaps,
but
it's
also
avoidable,
and
it's
no
answer
to
say
that
there
is
a
fantasy
of
a
Green
Line
or
a
ribbon
of
this
or
that
around
the
neighborhood.
There
is
no
concrete
plans
for
it.
More
party
there
is
no
budget
for
it
unless
buildings
are
torn
down
or
bought
and
parks
created
in
that
space,
which
would
cost
tens
of
millions
of
dollars,
it
isn't
going
to
happen.
G
G
There
are
no
parks
of
green
spaces
there,
not
enough
schools
and,
in
my
view,
the
plans
that
are
proposed
in
options,
1
or
2
will
turn
the
area
into
a
ghetto
of
transient
residents.
It
is
a
myth
to
think
that
families
are
going
to
raise
their
children
or
want
to
raise
their
children
in
these
proposed
high-rises
without
a
school
to
go
to
or
a
place
to
play.
G
These
buildings
will
become
the
inner
city,
neglected
buildings
that
have
plagued
many
American
cities
in
the
past
and
for
just
the
same
reasons,
I
urge
you
to
read:
Jane
Jacobs
the
life
and
death
of
American
cities.
If
you
haven't
read
it
already,
those
who
don't
remember
history
are
condemned
to
repeat
it.
Be
not
among
those
those
are
my
submissions.
Thank
you.
Thank.
E
I,
don't
believe
so,
but
thank
you
for
your
your
dissertation.
Today.
You
cited
Jane
Jacobs,
which
she
was
a
big
proponent
of
livable
communities
and
neighborhoods
you're,
not
saying
I'm,
not
hearing
you
say,
hey
we're
in
embiez,
you're
saying
it's
just
been
too
much
too
fast
is
that
is
that
your
take
on
it?
No.
G
E
G
A
ridiculous
question:
thank
you.
No,
the
answer's,
no
I
have
been
I'm.
A
lawyer.
I
had
been
to
the
OMB
as
as
a
professional
person
as
a
lawyer
representing
people,
not
in
this
case,
not
anything
doing
with
my
neighborhood
and
I've
been
there
when
they
dealt
with
the
building
on
Broadway.
That's
going
up
adjacent
at
25
Broadway,
it's
a
hideous
experience.
I've,
never
been
to
an
adjudicator
Abuna
Lynne
45
years
as
a
trial
lawyer.
That
is
more
ridiculous.
As
the
last
judicial
values
or
adjudicated
values
than
the
OMB.
It
is
a
show.
B
G
Think
what
was
said
on
our
behalf
of
last
time
by
one
of
our
colleagues
was
the
OMB
was
supposed
to
be
the
bulwark
between
the
interests
of
the
development
community,
which
are
fair
and
recognized,
and
the
interest
of
those
in
the
community
they're
going
to
be
affected
by
those
development.
That
did
that
didn't
happen
and
and
and
I
would
say
that
it
failed
in
its
mandate
to
act
as
that
bulwark,
as
that
stopped
as
the
watchdog
over
the
community
and
human
values,
and
seemed
to
concern
itself.
G
B
As
you
said,
things
happen
and
they
take
an
experience
to
it,
and
they
stated
that
in
their
original
report
and
now,
they've
also
stated
that
the
option
three,
which
is
one
being
considered
I,
think
my
colleagues
going
to
have
has
to
consider,
would
reduce
the
densities
but
still
meet
the
official,
the
provinces,
official
growth
plan,
so
being
a
person
experienced
at
the
board
and
as
a
solicitor
what's
the
type
of
egg.
What
explanation
can
we
give
now
to
try
and
talk
about
what
might
be
considered
here?
B
G
I'd
answer
that,
first,
sir,
by
saying
that
you
have
a
broader
latitude
and
more
tools
in
your
toolbox
in
terms
of
your
responsibilities
and
did
the
OMB,
where
they
failed
in
their
mandate,
in
my
view,
to
interject
themselves
into
the
process
as
protectors
of
the
public.
You,
as
elected
officials
close
to
the
public,
have
that
ability
and
facility
nobody's
saying
don't
develop,
nobody's,
saying
stop
at
least
I'm
not,
but
people
are
saying
slow
down
catch
our
breath
and,
let's
exercise
the
common
sense
values
for
which
you
were
all
elected.
G
B
G
G
At
that
time
they
got
hollowed
out
because
nobody
wanted
to
live
there
anymore,
and
if
you,
the
idea
that
people
are
going
to
come
with
families
and
set
down
roots
and
stay
in
that
community,
without
any
infrastructure
to
support
them
is
fantasy.
It's
not
gonna
happen.
You
wouldn't
raise
your
kids
there.
Neither
would
I
good.
Thank
you
any.
A
At
number,
25,
Broadway
and
I
would
just
like
to
show
you
the
current
development
plans
in
our
immediate
neighborhood.
The
two
balloons
at
two
northeast
blocks,
north
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
These
are
already
approved
buildings
that
are
in
the
process
of
being
either
built
or
planned.
For
this
is
number
55.
65
Broadway
went
to
the
OMB,
there's
a
proposed
to
propose
to
45
story
towers
on
one
site.
They
approved
39
stories.
This
is
on
Broadway
across
the
street
from
55
65.
It
is
12
stories
to
be
built
in
a
current
parking
lot.
A
A
A
A
Turning
the
corner
at
number
39
41
Roehampton.
There
is
a
48
storey
tower.
Moving
along
on
red
unreal
Hampton
there
is
at
89
and
101
a
36
storey
tower
is
being
attached
to
an
existing
building.
This
is
the
LRT
which
we
love
and
are
in
full
support
of.
However,
you
can
see
that
it
is
in
full
construction
and
the
streets
are
in
complete
disruption,
mode,
I,
think
a
number
of
people
mentioned
it,
and
this
is,
while
all
the
other
building
is
going
on
in
the
neighborhood.
A
This
is
150
Eglinton,
East,
again
I'm
just
going
along
the
two
blocks
that
we've
been
talking
about,
the
northeast
quadrant,
a
39
storey
tower,
is
being
proposed.
This
is
the
current
building
that
is
going
on
at
right
at
the
corner
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
It
is
a
58
storey
tower
and
it
is
next
to
a
36
storey
tower.
A
This
is
the
intersection
of
Roehampton
and
red
path.
There
are
two
towers
across
from
each
other:
simultaneous
construction,
38
and
34
stories.
I.
Think
a
lot
of
people
have
mentioned
the
the
Toronto
District
School
Board
issue.
These
are
the
signs
that
have
gone
up
saying
they
may
not
be
able
to
accommodate
the
students
you
may
have
already
the
member
the
council
may.
The
members
of
the
committee
may
have
received
a
letter
from
the
North
Toronto
principal
William
Mack,
who
said
I
can
I
quote
him
from
his
letter
option.
A
Three
may
also
have
an
impact
in
reducing
the
tremendous
impact
on
the
existing
infrastructure
and
will
hopefully
positively
affect
the
massive
and
dangerous
traffic
and
transit
congestion
in
the
area.
A
number
of
people
have
already
mentioned
that
there
are
two
and
three-bedroom
family
units
being
planned
for
the
new
towers.
Here,
people
won't
be
able
to
send
their
children
to
school
there.
This
is
just
an
example
of
the
difficulty
of
the
navigation
that
people
have
crossing
the
street
and
navigating
the
sidewalks.
That
Terri's
spoke
about
earlier
block
trucks,
parking
on
sidewalks.
A
Here's
a
group
of
people
trying
to
make
their
way
across
along
the
stroller
and
an
older
people
in
front
and
here's
our
current
reality
you've
seen
an
example
of
what
we're
already
dealing
with.
This
is
not
taking
into
into
consideration
any
new
potential
buildings,
the
lots
of
construction.
There
are
tight
and
closed
walkways,
but
I
think
as
a
group
we're
an
optimistic
Bunch.
We
wouldn't
be
here
if
we
didn't
think
we
could
work
together
to
make
our
community
more
livable.
A
E
You
mr.
chair
I'm,
really,
you
obviously
put
a
lot
of
time
into
pulling
together.
This
photo
walk
about,
I'm,
really
grateful
for
that
and
I
guess
I
wish
all
councillors
could
come
to
these
three
streets
and
see
what's
happening
there
if
they
did.
If
each
councillor
on
this
committee
and
City
Council
walked
through
Erskine
Keewatin,
even
but
more
importantly,
Roehampton
and
Broadway,
what
would
their
experience
be
on
at
a
peak
time
day
Monday
to
Friday?
What
would
their
experience
to
be
like
I
think.
A
E
A
B
Have
to
I
have
to
interrupt
you
because,
what's
in
front
of
us
is
the
planning
and
the
Heights
and
densities
etc
of
buildings
and
I'm
cognizant
of
the
problems
that
you
face
there,
but
I
don't
really
need
a
line
of
questioning
is
any
further
as
to
what
you're
currently
experienced
with
the
dust
we've
heard
it.
We
know
what
we
see
it
in
the
pictures.
Okay,.
E
I'll
move
on
to
another
question.
Thank
you.
The
you
were
part
of
the
working
group
that
worked
to
diligently
to
come
up
with
option
to
be
presented
at
the
community
meeting
that
took
place,
and
then
planners
worked
on
that
further
they
went
up
in
a
number
of
on
a
number
of
buildings.
They
went
up
higher.
Do
you
see
the
option
for
that
is
now
presented
to
this
committee
as
option
three?
As
a
compromise
I
see.
A
It
as
a
very
fine
compromise-
and
it
is
a
compromise
and
it
meets
all
the
provincial
requirements
for
those
that
have
already
been
exceeded,
as
we've
all
said,
and
it
accommodates
the
same
number
of
people
and
jobs
in
the
report
that
compares
the
three
options:
the
residents
and
jobs
per
hectare
in
option.
One
option
two
and
option
three
very
very
little.
A
B
F
F
Mr.
burrows
and
I
are
both
residents
of
70
Roehampton
Avenue,
and
this
is
his
words
over
the
last
decade,
the
powers
to
be
created
as
speeding
train
that
is
roaring
down
a
track
through
our
neighborhood
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
and
it's
creating
massive
overdevelopment.
It
has
and
will
continue
to
but
diminish
the
quality
of
life
for
not
only
those
of
us
who
are
already
living
in
our
neighborhood,
but
for
the
thousands
who
buy
condos
in
our
quadrant
without
knowing
the
chaos
that
is
in
store
for
them.
F
15
years
ago,
the
province
designated
this
area
as
a
growth
node.
Looking
back,
it
made
sense
to
a
large
number
of
residents
to
this
area
that
was
so
well
served
by
the
Yonge
subway.
Their
objective
was
to
breathe
life
into
this
community.
However,
by
2016
the
number
of
new
residents
had
exceeded
the
original
objective
by
more
than
40
percent.
F
Now
in
2018,
the
subway
is
bursting
at
its
seams,
the
streets,
sidewalks
and
rolls
are
often
and
manageable,
and
now
this
unbridled
development
instead
of
reading
life
reading
life
into
our
community,
is
choking
life
out
of
our
community.
As
you
walk
our
streets,
Roehampton
Broadway,
Erskine,
red
path,
Eglinton,
almost
every
development
application
has
been
approved
or
is
asking
you
to
approve
thousands
of
more
units,
40
stories,
50
stories,
60
stories.
It
truly
feels
like
there
is
no
limit
to
the
height
of
Toronto
developers.
F
We
are
now
okay
for
the
for
the
developers
insatiable
desire
to
maximize
profits
at
the
expense
of
our
neighborhood.
We
are
now
in
uncharted
waters
and
the
criteria
for
approving
all
this
development
appears
to
no
longer
have
anything
to
do
with
creating
a
positive
quality
of
life,
dependable
infrastructure
places
to
work
and
play
freedom
from
the
fear
of
being
run
down
at
an
intersection
public
transit
that
lets
you
get
to
work
on
time,
schools
that
are
not
overcrowded.
If
you
don't
approve
option,
3
Eglinton
Avenue
will
end
up
being
a
massive
wall
of
high-rise
buildings.
F
We
are
asking
you
to
get
on
to
that:
speeding,
train
and
courageously
pull
the
cord
cord
that
will
have
the
Development
Train
move
on
to
a
different
track
that
will
take
it
to
a
new
destination
based
on
a
more
stable,
healthier,
safer,
controllable
and
livable
vision
of
our
community.
A
community
that
each
of
you
personally
would
be
proud
to
live
in.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
K
Good
afternoon,
mr.
chairman
and
councillors,
I
am
David
Dumoulin
I'm,
the
president
of
the
condo
corporation
at
900,
not
Pleasant,
Road
I'm,
representing
our
community
of
242
units
and
the
related
interests
of
all
the
owners
and
tenants.
We
are
also
here
to
support
the
efforts
of
our
Council
of
J,
Robinson
and
other
residents,
stakeholders
in
Ward
25,
from
whom
you've
already
heard
a
good
deal.
K
We
want
each
of
you
on
this
committee
to
know
that
option.
3
is
what
we
support
as
a
neighborhood
and
as
a
community.
It
is
our
compromise
with
the
planners
and
residents
to
help
bring
the
developers
onto
the
same
team.
We
are
here
today
seeking
your
support
and
your
leadership
to
develop
a
plan
with
significantly
reduced,
permit,
permitted,
Heights
and
therefore
reduced
densities
on
Broadway,
Roehampton,
red
path
and
Eddington.
K
You've
already
heard
that
this
area
was
already
40
percent
over
density,
when
the
plan
was
approved
in
2016
that
40
percent
is
now
closer
to
40,
50
or
60
percent.
Over
density.
Excuse
me,
as
a
consequence
of
the
over
development
in
the
northeast
quadrant
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
an
area
already
experiencing
unprecedented
density.
Intensification
you've
heard
all
the
details.
K
We
can't
do
anything
about
the
buildings
that
have
been
approved
or
are
being
built,
but
we
are
asking
if
you
have
considered
how
much
more
density
can
be
absorbed
on
top
of
all
of
what
exists
with
the
as
yet
unapproved
application,
which
continue
to
be
posted
on
our
local
streets.
We
are
being
overwhelmed
daily
and
we
are
truly
fearful
that
the
density
will
hit
over
100
percent
over
acceptable
limits
without
options.
K
Well,
you're,
here
to
ask
you
our
elected
representatives,
how
much
more
are
you
asking
us
to
endure?
We
have
already
absorbed
more
than
our
fair
share
of
development.
The
character
and
soul
of
our
neighborhood
is
being
sacrificed
to
feed
insatiable
development,
greed
plain
and
simple.
We
are
certain.
There
are
other
neighborhoods
on
the
main
transit
lines
in
this
city
that
would
welcome
and
benefit
from
having
some
of
this
new
proposed
development
being
redirected.
K
Their
way,
as
you
will
hear,
this
rapid
development
pace
of
pace
of
development
raises
significant
concerns
for
the
neighborhood,
including
all
the
standard
things
you
would
expect.
As
our
elected
stewards,
the
area's
infrastructure
capacity,
with
special
attention
to
transits
school
water
utility
services,
community,
centers
and
daycares
already
are
overwhelmed.
A
good
example
of
our
dilemma
is
the
proposed
development
on
the
north
side
of
Broadway
at
110,
114
and
120.
K
The
application
itself
is
misleading,
as
you
heard
somebody
describing
it
a
bit
earlier.
It
claims
that
they
are
proposing
128
and
135
storey
tower.
However,
when
you
read
the
smaller
type
in
the
plan
in
the
application
I'm
sorry,
these
towers
will
be
on
top
of
six
storey
podiums
and
thus
will
bring
the
actual
Heights
the
34
and
41
storeys
respectively,
which
would
make
them
22
stories
higher
than
the
adjacent
19
story,
building
much
higher
than
they
claim
and
building
a
virtual
wall
for
us
to
stare
at.
K
If
it
goes
ahead
with
the
current
application,
it
will
not
only
block
out
the
Sun,
but
literally
will
block
out
the
sky
because
of
the
proposed
height
and
mass.
It
will
negatively
impact
property
values
and
personal
investments,
which
many
owners
is
a
key
aspect
of
their
investment
portfolio,
as
well
as
the
retirement
funds
for
many
seniors
in
our
neighborhood.
K
K
We
want
to
emphasize.
We
are
not
anti
development
and
you've
heard
this
before,
and
that
is
why
we
are
need
to
rely
on
you,
our
elected
representatives,
to
recommend
and
approve
option
3
to
the
full
council.
This
is
the
only
option
that
permits
and
manages
additional
growth,
but
not
at
the
expense
of
existing
owners.
B
K
The
clock
is
late,
I'm,
sorry,
okay,
this
vote.
Your
vote
will
have
a
pervasive
and
historical
impact
on
our
community.
The
vision
form
and
fit
of
future
development
under
option
three
will
help
to
ensure
the
context-specific
character
of
the
neighborhood
will
be
eroded.
No
further.
Thank
you
for
consideration.
Thank.
B
E
Beautiful
decent
buildings
are
being
pulled
down
just
to
go
higher
and
higher
and
higher
rentals
precisely
okay.
So
that's
a
density
issue.
You
talked
a
bit
about
shadow
impacts
and
Sky
View
sunlight.
What
is
it?
What
impact
is
the
heights
of
these
building?
Having
on
that
mate
on
this
neighborhood,
the
northeast
quadrant?
Well,.
K
I
can
only
give
you
a
personal
example:
I
live
on
the
16th
floor
of
a
high-rise.
The
building
being
proposed
beside
me,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
will
be
22
stories
higher
than
our
own
building
and
making
it
25
stories
higher
than
where
I
said
at
16
and,
as
I
said,
creates
a
virtual
wall.
The
whole
side,
west
side
of
our
building
will
have
nothing
to
look
at
bio,
except
a
wall
which
is
only
25
meters
away
as
a
side
setback.
Hardly
look
at
the
sky.
Thank.
L
Good
afternoon,
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
the
Republic
Regis's
residents,
Association
as
I
am
the
chair
of
that
Association.
Our
association
represents
the
people
who
reside
at
25
Broadway,
seventy
Roehampton
and
the
staff
and
the
students
of
North
Toronto,
Collegiate,
Institute,
you've
already
heard
and
we'll
be
hearing
from
many
of
our
members,
some
of
whom
had
to
leave
already
you're
hearing
from
them.
What
it's
actually
like
to
live
on
the
ground
in
our
community
I
understand
that
several
who
couldn't
make
it
today
have
said
scores
of
emails
to
you
in
support
of
option
3.
L
Thank
you
for
giving
us
this
opportunity
to
be
heard
by
you.
We
are
also
grateful
to
city
planners
for
for
putting
forward
option
3
the
option
that
was
resoundingly
endorsed
at
the
large
recent
community
consultation
meeting
and
the
one
we
hope
will
earn
your
vote
today.
We
formed
the
RR
a
six
years
ago
to
address
the
specific,
rising
concerns
about
the
eroding
livability
of
our
unique
vertical
community.
We
understood
that
the
vibrant
and
dynamic
neighborhood
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton
that
we
chose
to
live
in
was
situated
in
what
the
province
called
a
growth
node.
L
We
expected
growth
and
even
some
growing
pains,
but
it
soon
became
alarmingly
clear
that
development
was
running
rampant
in
our
area.
Despite
the
RR
A's
active
involvement
in
Midtown
and
focus
planning
from
day
one,
we
stood
by
helpless
as
we
witnessed
one
building
after
another
being
torn
down
and
another
mammoth
Tower,
sometimes
twice
the
height
being
approved
and
constructed
on
that
site.
We
came
to
understand
that
this
happened
predominantly
because
in
the
past
the
OMB
often
overrode
Midtown
and
focuses
vision
and
city
planner
recommend
Asians
in
favor
of
developers,
ambitious
schemes.
L
Today
we
are
suffering
the
burden
of
this
past
unchecked
development
are
we
also
to
have
future
quality
of
life
dictated
by
developers
at
the
expense
of
the
livability
of
our
community?
To
be
clear,
as
you've
heard,
our
community
are
champions
of
sensible,
incremental
growth.
In
fact,
some
people
have
called
us
yummies.
L
We
say
yes
to
development,
that
is
sensible
and
incremental.
In
recent
years
we
have
worked
successfully
with
some
developers
and
city
councillors
to
achieve
results
that
have
been
acceptable
to
all
parties
councillors,
for
you
today
is
not
business
as
usual.
Today,
the
future
of
our
entire
neighborhood
rests
on
your
decision.
The
singularly
important
decision
you're
about
to
make
will
impact
the
lives
of
tens
of
thousands
of
people
for
decades
to
come.
We
are
proposing
that
you
vote
for
option
3.
It
represents
a
compromise
between
planners
and
residents.
That
is
both
reasonable
and
pragmatic
option.
L
3
supports
the
well-being
of
all
residents
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton
in
all
four
quadrants
through
reduced
Heights
and
density.
In
contrast,
the
other
two
options
propose
Heights
and
density
that
will
jeopardize
the
quality
of
life
in
our
specific
community,
which
lies
at
the
south
end
of
the
northeast
quadrant
of
Yonge
&
Eddington.
Are
we
supposed
to
be
less
fortunate
than
our
neighbors?
Who
live
a
few
blocks
to
the
north
of
us
or
a
few
blocks
to
the
south
of
us?
L
You
might
feel
at
a
disadvantage
in
casting
your
vote
today,
because
you
don't
actually
know
what
it's
like
to
live
in
our
community.
So
please
listen
generously
to
the
folks
who
do
and
who
are
speaking
to
you
today
then
picture
yourself
living
on
these
conditions.
When
you
cast
your
vote
for
option
3,
you
will
help
create
a
more
livable
community
for
everyone
who
lives,
works
and
plays
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton
and
at
the
same
time
you
will
actually
be
upholding
the
promising
vision
and
values
embodied
by
city
planners
in
the
Midtown
in
focus
document.
E
L
E
Some
of
the
buildings
that
you
would
have
liked
have
seen
15,
but
they
were
20,
went
up
to
20.
The
planners
altered
the
working
groups
option
by
going
up
to
20
18
18
27,
29,
24
26,
but
really
the
the
working
group
was
just
looking
for
15
there.
So
there
was
a
lot
of
compromise
at
play
as
part
of
option
3,
which
is
before
committee.
That's
correct,
principal
Mac
sent
a
letter
into
committee.
I
I
was
blown
away
by
that
letter
that
a
principal
would
write
something
and
actually
he
would.
L
Did,
as
did
his
predecessor,
Joel
Goran
cough,
who
was
principal
at
that
school
for
5
years
and
work
shoulder-to-shoulder
with
us
in
pushing
for
reduced
height
and
density
may
I
also
add
that
the
principal
at
st.
Monica's
public
school
also
supported
our
initiative
of
reducing
Heights
and
density.
Okay,.
L
C
That
is
the
first
page
of
my
letter.
Excuse
me,
first
of
all,
I
want
to
thank
you
very
much
for
giving
me
an
opportunity
to
appear
in
front
of
you
once
more
I'm
a
partner
in
the
firm
of
preservation
ball.
We
are
the
solicitors
for
the
society,
though,
on
the
office
building
a
20
to
39
Yonge
Street,
our
clients
have
entered
into
an
agreement
with
the
owners
of
the
adjoining
property
at
22:45,
Yonge,
Street,
Jen,
sell
properties,
and
this
afternoon
I
know
that
my
friend
Kristin
Zola,
who
is
their
legal
counsel
together
with
dr.
C
Arif
Durham.
She
wished
to
speak
with
you
when
you,
if
you
would
be
pleased
to
hear
their
deputation
essentially
I,
want
to
repeat
to
you
in
the
clearest
of
terms
that
our
clients
recognize
the
tough
work
and
the
background
with
respect
to
the
Midtown
update.
But
I
can't
tell
you
that
we
support
the
work
that
has
been
done
up
to
this
point
because
of
the
reliance
on
section
26
of
the
Planning
Act,
the
there
is
an
ax
that's
about
to
fall
on
our
clients.
C
Next,
if
you
should
proceed,
and
it's
as
simply
stated
as
this
section
20
subsection
9
of
the
Planning
Act-
provides
that
it
should
you
update
the
secondary
plan
for
the
young
Eglinton
area,
as
you
plan
on
doing
then
within
three
years,
you
have
an
obligation
to
then
change,
alter
and
update
as
well
the
zoning
bylaw
at
that
moment
in
time.
Should
you
permit
the
options
that
we've
heard
about
this
afternoon
to
proceed?
You
will
include
schedule
2112,
which
identifies
our
clients
properties,
a
twenty
to
thirty
nine
and
our
friends
at
22:45
as
an
eight
story.
C
Building
that's
been
wrong.
In
my
view,
I've
suggested
to
you
that
if
you
consider
that
you
wish
to
proceed
further
than
what
we're
going
to
ask
of,
you
is
that
you
exempt
this
property
in
the
manner
in
which
I
described
in
the
wording.
That
appears
on
the
first
page
of
my
letter
of
Jeor
to
you
of
July.
C
Third,
simply
remove
the
height
limit
on
the
properties
known
municipal
e,
as
twenty
to
thirty
nine
and
twenty
to
forty
five
Yonge
Street
to
determine
the
height
limits
through
site-specific
analysis,
applying
built
form
and
design
policies
applying
the
existing
zoning
bylaw,
Heights
and
applicable
guidelines.
In
that
fashion,
you
would
preserve
our
clients
opportunity
to
continue
to
own
and
provide
the
facilities
that
it
does
in
this
location.
It's
right
the
right
thing
to
do.
C
Our
clients
have
presented
themselves
by
appearing
at
a
development,
a
development
application
review
which
I
think
a
post
are
prepared
me
a
pre
consultation
meeting
just
on
the
19th
of
this
past
month,
and
at
that
point
it
was
clear
from
your
planners
that,
although
they
understood
that
the
uses
that
our
clients
apply
to
their
building
and
so
forth,
they
would
not
consider
the
changes
in
which
we
are
pursuing,
nor
the
concept
design,
which
our
client
is
have
described
by
my
friend
dr.
interim.
C
She
effectively
scheduled
2112,
which
I
am
referring
to
defines
an
eight-story
limit
with
respect
to
the
property
owned
by
our
clients
and
its
joint
venture
partner
and
reflects
merely
the
podium
level
which
is
characteristic
of
the
buildings
that
are
located
within
the
young
Eglinton
study
area
effectively.
I
think
that
whoever
has
drawn
these
schedules
has
simply
said
we're
just
going
to
treat
these
people
the
way
we
wish
to.
They
have
no
rights
and
I.
Consider
this
to
be
a
form
of
expropriation
without
compensation,
but
the
axe
is
in
your
hands:
don't
use
it!
C
Please
preserve
our
clients,
rights,
don't
alter
things.
Remove
this
eight-story
designation,
that's
what
I
came
for,
but
before
I
leave,
I
want
to
say
that
as
well
I'm
in
support
of
the
presentation
and
the
letters
that
have
been
given
to
you
by
my
friend
David
Brahms
goal
of
the
firm
of
Goodman's,
where
he
do,
he
describes
the
effect
of
using
section
26
for
the
purpose
of
the
process.
You're
following
there
are
alternatives
in
the
Planning
Act,
it's
a
great
act.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
C
M
C
M
M
M
C
B
N
Thank
you
very
much.
Councillor
shiner
and
the
members
of
the
committee
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
My
client
Jen,
sell
properties.
Inc
owns
the
property
at
22:45,
Yonge
Street,
and
many
of
you
may
be
familiar
with
it
as
the
Tim
Hortons
at
the
southeast
corner
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
it's
a
two-story
building,
there's
a
Tim
Horton's
on
the
ground
floor
and
there's
a
hair
salon.
Above
it
it
is
immediately
south
of
the
first
property
at
the
corner
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
N
My
correspondence
is
before
you.
It's
item,
thirty-one
point,
seven
point,
six
six
and
that's
in
addition
to
correspondence
we
submitted
to
the
the
earlier
part
of
this
public
meeting
and
I
commend
it
to
your
reading
and
I've
I've
put
up
the
first
page
of
my
correspondence
as
well,
because
we're
seeking
the
same
modification
that
mr.
Kyser
is
seeking.
As
mr.
Kyser
said,
the
two
property
owners
are
working
together
in
terms
of
these
submissions.
I
echo
the
concerns
that
have
been
made
regarding
the
use
of
section,
26
and
I
commend
to
the
committee.
N
N
Kaiser's
just
said,
is
an
extremely
important
location,
not
just
in
this
secondary
plan,
but
in
the
entire
city
of
Toronto
and
we've
identified
in
our
letter
concerns
that
we
have
with
the
treatment
of
these
two
properties.
At
twenty
to
thirty
nine
and
twenty
to
forty
five
Yonge
Street
concerns
with
respect
to
how
they're
being
treated
pursuant
to
the
provincial
policy
statement
and
the
growth
plan.
N
Now
we've
been
involved
in
this
process,
I
personally
been
involved
on
behalf
of
Jen
sell
properties.
Since
2015
my
clients
been
involved
longer
than
that
we've
been
involved
in
the
OPA
289
process,
which
was
the
public
realm
policies
for
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
We've
been
involved
in
the
site,
specific
application
at
one
Eglinton
East
we've
been
involved
in
this
current
secondary
plan
process
and
my
client
before
my
time
was
involved
in
the
site.
Specific
applications
at
2221,
Yonge
Street
we've
had
many
meetings
with
staff.
N
N
What
our
concern
is
that
we
feel
that
we've
been
ignored
and
we
feel
that
we've
been
dismissed
and
mr.
Durant
that
dr.
Durant
she's
going
to
speak
a
little
bit
about
that
as
well,
and
what
we
see
in
the
secondary
plan,
which
proposes
only
eight
stories
for
this
site,
as
mr.
Kaiser
said,
sort
of
a
envisioning
the
podium
of
the
next
door
developments,
we
don't
see
what
the
vision
of
this
plan
is.
N
However,
the
wording
of
the
policies
that
were
added
to
the
plan
and
the
current
report-
that's
before
you
are
unclear
as
to
whether
those
five
stories
would
apply
to
this
site,
and
so
I'd
say
if,
if
they
were
intended
to
apply
to
the
site
than
the
language
and
the
plan
needs
to
be
sharpened
and
made
clearer
dr.
Durham.
N
She
is
here
to
speak
about
not
only
his
disappointment
with
the
process
so
far,
but
also
to
share
with
you
his
vision
for
the
site
and
he's
able
to
speak
much
more
eloquently
than
I
am
about
that
vision
for
the
site
and
once
you've
heard
what
dr.
de
Ramsey
has
to
say.
I
would
refer
you
back
to
the
letters
that
I've
provided
in
the
mr.
N
Kaiser
has
provided
and
the
recommendation
in
that
letter,
and
what
we
are
asking
is
that
this
committee
removed
the
height
limit
on
the
properties
known
municipally
is
20
to
39
and
20
to
45
no
Street
and
that's
an
eight
story.
Twenty
nine
meter
height
limit
to
determine
the
height
limits
through
site-specific
analysis,
applying
built
form
and
design
policies.
The
existing
zoning
bylaw
height,
which
is
61
meters
or
about
15,
store
the
existing
zoning
bylaw
and
applicable
urban
design
guidelines.
That's
our
request
of
the
committee.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
speak.
M
M
J
Cherish
rider
and
councillors
of
the
PG
MC
I
am
dr.
Rieff
Durham,
she
a
principal
of
Gen
cell
properties
and
a
practicing
and
emergent,
and
a
practicing
emergency
room
physician.
My
deputation
today
is,
in
addition
to
my
previous
deputation
and
in
support
of
our
written
submissions
from
mr.
Christian
Zola
of
Overland
LLP
and
the
deputation
and
submission
of
mr.
J
We've
come
together
and
proposed
to
build
a
100,000
square
foot,
14-story
specialized,
hybrid
medical
office,
building
right
at
the
southeast
young
Edmonton
subway
entrance,
creating
3
to
400
jobs
at
an
investment
of
25
to
30
million
dollars.
Chairman
charter,
thank
you
for
granting
us
deferral
of
the
proposed
plan.
On
June
8
2018
for
further
consultation.
Accordingly,
we
met
with
city
planning
staff
on
June
19th
for
a
pre-application
meeting
and
attended
the
community
consultation
meeting
on
June
21st
2018.
J
Your
direction
to
city
staff
was
consider
increasing
employment
opportunities
within
the
area,
including
along
Yonge,
Street,
Eglinton,
Avenue
and
other
key
streets
and
intersections
served
by
the
existing
and
future
transit
station.
This
was
not
adequately
fulfilled.
Accordingly,
we
requested
PG
MC
to
consider
removing
the
height
limits
on
the
properties,
no
municipally
as
2:39
and
22:45
youngstreet,
to
determine
the
height
limits
through
the
site-specific
analysis,
applying
built
form
and
design
policies,
the
existing
zoning
bylaws
and
applicable
guidelines.
J
We
assemble
our
entire
team
for
the
pre-application
meeting
with
city
staff
on
June
19th,
including
our
architects,
senior
land
use
planner
from
both
fields,
traffic
engineer
from
WSB
cost
and
consultants
from
CBRE,
legal
representatives
and
owner
representation
from
both
properties.
We
were
met
by
single
planner
and
an
urban
designer
and
architectural
presentation
was
followed
by
land
use
planning
rationale.
Our
design
proposal
is
within
our
current.
As
of
right,
zoning
and
respectful
of
all
required
municipal
and
contractual
spatial
separations.
J
The
city
planner
was
hesitant
to
endorse
or
endorse
our
proposal
due
to
the
previously
endorsed
one
Eglinton
avenues
proposal.
That
is
a
mere
six
point:
eight
meters
from
our
north
property
line
and
in
defiance
of
the
tall
building
guidelines,
several
requests
for
suggested
modifications
in
elaboration
went
unanswered.
I
am
perplexed.
We
attended
the
community
consultation
meeting
on
June
21st
2018
the
facilitated
workshop
on
lowering
building
heights
on
the
north
side
of
Eglinton,
spearheaded
by
the
councillor
received
most
of
the
focus
for
tall
building
sites.
J
The
additional
five
storeys
of
office
will
not
make
up
for
the
loss
of
employment
using
the
scale
back
permissions.
The
net
result
is
no
additional
employment
use
generated
I
stood
up
twice,
but
due
to
the
time
constraint,
I
did
not
get
to
speak.
There
are
far
more
mid-rise
sites
in
the
plan
area.
Why
have
these
sites
being
emitted
from
preferential
inducement
for
employment
uses?
I
was
not
selected
in
my
question
regarding
our
specialized
hybrid
site
and
mid
ride.
Sites
in
general
remains
unanswered.
J
In
all
three
options,
our
combined
site
is
marked
for
8
storeys,
that
is
29
metres.
Modern
medical
buildings
are
engineered
with
subfloor
servicing
to
enable
surgical,
suites
procedural
rooms
and
lead
lining
for
x-ray
Suites.
The
net
impact
is,
we
would
probably
get
only
seven
floors
in
29
metres
making
the
proposal
unfeasible
councillors
pause
for
a
moment
and
look
at
the
confluence
of
positive
events.
A
group
of
doctors
owns
a
property
atop,
the
southeast
Young
Eglinton,
subway
intersection.
This
is
Center
ice.
You
can't
get
a
better
sight
for
patient
accessibility.
J
They're
experienced,
motivated
and
well
capitalized
they're
forged
comprehensive
planning
initiatives
with
their
south
neighbor
the
presented,
a
proposal
that
is
supported
by
the
charters,
foremost
planning
engineering
and
architectural
consultants.
We
want
to
be
part
of
the
solution
to
Midtown
healthcare,
accessibility
and
the
overcrowding
crisis
in
the
Sunnybrook
emergency
department.
We
want
to
create
a
medical
micro
community
of
high
quality
jobs.
Why
are
we
being
denied
adequate,
independent
consideration?
J
Counselors
our
dreams
of
a
Medical
Center
is
not
new.
We
purchased
the
property
14
years
ago
and
have
patiently
waited
for
a
feasible
opportunity.
Five
years
ago
we
reaffirmed
our
long-term
development
objectives
at
the
2221
young
OMB
proceedings,
On
June,
1st
2017,
that
is
last
year.
We
met
city
staff
and
reiterated
our
development
objectives
and
asked
city
staff
to
respect
the
12
point:
5
meter,
side
yard
tall
building
guidelines
so
as
not
to
impact
our
future
development
objectives.
We
were
very
disappointed
to
learn.
J
City
staff
had
issued
a
final
report
for
our
north
neighbor
at
one
Eglinton
Avenue
East
on
September
29
2017,
endorsing
a
65
story,
condo
tower
with
a
mere
6
point.
8
meter
setback
from
the
gents
off
site
consider
the
implications
for
a
moment
in
order
to
accommodate
a
65
storey
condo
on
a
postage
stamp
lot.
City
staff
have
disregarded
the
tall
building
guidelines
and
effectively
expropriated
the
development
potential
of
our
lands
from
the
current
61
meters.
As
of
right,
zoning,
which
would
be
14
stories
down
to
29
meters
or
7
stories,
is
this
right.
J
Accordingly,
pay
property
taxes
for
the
last
14
years.
The
plan
before
you
now
formalizes
this
collocation
is
this
right.
The
one
Eglinton
zoning
bylaw
amendments
have
not
yet
passed
so
the
application
appeal
process
are
not
complete
down.
Zoning
and
Gentile
site
before
you
would
be
prejudicial
to
any
appeal
process.
Is
this
right
higher
order
planning
policies
clearly
called
for
intensification
up
zoning,
not
down
zoning,
particularly
for
employment
and
institutional
uses,
as
we
proposed
is
this
right?
What
would
the
minister
municipal
first
say
the
fundamental
question.
M
J
M
J
M
J
J
M
N
Addressed
that
one
of
the
items
that
I
alluded
to
in
my
deputation
was
that
we
have
been
involved
in
a
number
of
processes
at
the
planning
level
and
they
go
back
to
at
least
the
approval
of
the
building
at
2221
Yonge
Street,
which
is
immediately
south
of
the
engineer's
building.
And
that
process
was
back
in
2013
2014.
And
that's
when
the
development
aspirations
for
this
site.
Okay,
respected
dr.
de
Ram.
She
has
started
so
to
say
that
we've
waited
okay.
E
N
Last
moment
I
think
is,
is
not
it's
part
of
the
point
I
was
trying
to
make
in
my
deputation,
perhaps
didn't
make
it
effectively
enough.
We
have
been
trying
to
draw
this
to
City
Council's
attention
to
the
planning
growth
management
committee,
Toronto
planning
departments
for
a
number
of
years
now
so.
M
I
mean
I
mean
generally
14
stories
in
in
the
context
of
65
stories.
50
stories,
40
stories
is
not
egregious
and
the
fact
that
it's
not
a
condo,
it's
actually
bringing
office
jobs,
is
something
that
would
be
seen
as
a
positive,
so
I'm
just
surprised
that
your
sort
of
your
backs
are
against
the
wall
right.
At
this
point,
we're.
M
M
O
Chairman
shinier
counters,
thank
you
for
taking
the
time
member
of
the
audience.
Thank
you
trying
to
speak
again.
My
name
is
Adam
and
Roman
I'm,
a
member
of
the
board
of
the
Republic
resident
Association
living
at
25,
Broadway
Avenue
for
three
years
and
20
years
in
the
neighborhood
I
know
it
will
I've
come
today
to
respectfully
urge
you
to
vote
for
option
number
three
of
the
young
Eglinton
secondary
plan.
O
Such
a
vote,
in
my
opinion,
would
correct
an
injustice
and
help
progress
in
equity
in
harm
that
were
inflicted
in
our
neighborhood,
perhaps
unknowingly
and,
most
importantly,
prevent
greater
harm
and
injustice
in
future.
I.
Don't
think
anybody
here
stressed
yet
the
the
point
of
fairness
house
is
a
very
small
corner
of
young
Eglinton
Patel,
somehow
be
made
into
a
density,
dump
suffering
most
of
the
cost
of
growth
on
behalf
of
the
entire
young
Eglinton
Nexus.
O
Why
don't
just
take
my
word
for
it,
like
others
before,
have
urge
you
I
urge
you
to
come
to
a
neighborhood,
to
walk
in
our
shoes
or
to
speaker
to
experience
what
city
holds
policies
brought
upon
us
and
upon
our
neighbors?
No
need
for
me
to
repeat
all
my
colleagues
have
said.
They've
said
eloquently:
I'll
just
make
five
points
about
the
overdevelopment:
the
dangerous
subway,
the
escalating
traffic
and
risk
to
school
children,
lack
of
green
space
and
utilities,
and
resources
well
beyond
the
tipping
point.
O
First
of
a
development,
the
tall
towers,
they're
well
beyond
the
planned
maximum
block,
as
many
have
said
before,
they
blocking
sunlight
and
air
and
now
also
blocking
the
sky
and
the
dozen
construction
everywhere
are
damaging
our
health.
It's
going
to
get
worse
again
why
everything
in
one
small
place.
Second,
the
subway,
the
young,
Eddington
subway,
is
dangerously
crowded
and
it's
getting
more
dangerous
daily
and
again,
I
urge
you
to
come
experience
it.
O
It
often
feel
like
a
Japanese
subway
with
bushes,
with
pushers
needed
to
squeeze
passengers
in,
but
without
the
large
expanse
and
the
safety
zones
against
why
further
traffic
it
is
turning
potentially
more
dangerous.
By
the
day,
there
are
more
than
1,400
schoolchildren
on
Broadway
Avenue
alone,
there's
1,200
in
North
Toronto
collegiates,
when
one
of
my
son's
went
to
school
and
more
than
200
Santa
Monica,
some
of
which
younger
than
10
the
school
street
is
being
made
into
a
mini
401
in
the
middle
of
the
city,
with
the
kids
leader
on
both
side
of
it.
O
Sooner
or
later,
some
child
may
be
hurt.
Based
on
your
vote
today,
the
principal
of
North
Anto
Collegiate
is
alarm
and
he
wrote
to
you,
as
some
other
people
have
mentioned,
and
so
has
the
principals
of
Santa
Monica
and
saw
the
kids
parents,
and
so
are
we
in
fact,
on
a
personal
level.
This
is
a
major
reason
why
I
chose
to
get
involved
and
stay
involved.
Kids,
they
don't
have
a
voice
in
here.
O
O
When
you
know,
colleagues,
including
counsel,
Jay
Robinson,
have
been
so
helpful
to
us
work
to
ensure
that
both
benefits
and
cost
divided
fairly
and
equally
at
present,
they
are
not,
and
it
is
decent
fans
that
caused
my
neighbors
and
me
to
mobilize
to
correct
it
and
to
stay
mobilized.
Now
again,
I
am
going
to
stress
a
point
again
was
made
before
we
are
not
against
development.
We
wouldn't
have
been
here
and
you
wouldn't
have
chosen
to
live
in
the
area.
We
live
everywhere,
but
we
are
against
dangerous.
O
The
wild
west
developments
was
supplies
to
the
city,
which
is
what
developers
are
their
suppliers
to.
The
corporation
are
perceived
to
benefit
unduly
at
the
expense
of
shareholders,
which
is
what
we
the
citizens
are,
and
this
perceived
unfairness
is
what
brought
my
colleagues
and
neighbors
and
me
to
City
Hall,
to
express
abuse
to
you
directly.
I
would
elect
the
directors
and
management
and
to
ask
for
your
support.
O
Indeed,
you
and
your
vote
are
the
only
thing
standing
between
us
and
furthering
justice,
and
you
have
a
chance
to
make
a
wrong
right
and
again
on
a
personal
level.
Isn't
this
what
you
probably
chose
public
service
in
the
first
place
now
I
again,
respectfully
urge
you
to
vote
for
number
four,
the
the
plan
number
three.
O
It
is
a
most
reasonable
compromise
and
it's
the
only
means,
as
I
can
see,
to
harm
to
redress
the
harm
done
to
us
and
prevent
more
than
done
in
the
future
and
again
make
the
city
fell
to
all
the
citizens.
I.
Thank
you
for
your
attention
and
for
your
public
service.
Any
questions
I'll
be
happy
to
answer.
E
O
B
Thank
you.
The
next
step
you
tenth
I
have
is
Megan
Lockington,
mins,
then,
and
Miss
Lois
key,
and
for
those
of
you
that
are
here.
If
your
comments
have
been
made
already
by
others,
and
you
can
support
those,
we
still
have
a
lot
of
Deputies
here
and
I
want
to
make
sure
we
maintain
quorum
at
the
meeting
as
any
we're
a
little
bit
shine
and
quorum
today.
So
if
you
can
help
us
move
through,
it
is
appreciated.
B
P
You
Thank
You,
chair
Shriner
and
members
of
this
committee
for
allowing
me
to
speak
today.
My
name
is
Megan
Lockington,
Minh's
and
I
live
in
Davisville
Village
part
of
war
22.
My
home
is
about
a
30
minute,
walk
from
Yonge
and
Eglinton
I'm
here
to
present
the
results
of
a
petition
circulated
in
the
Yonge
and
Eglinton
surrounding
communities
which
states
together.
We
demand
that
plans
for
community
local
public
schools
with
capacity
for
present
and
future
student
populations
be
approved
and
adequately
resourced
before
new
residential
developments
are
approved
by
the
City
of
Toronto.
P
This
petition
was
started
in
mid-june.
As
of
today
we
have
279
signatories.
This
statement
echoes
councillor,
Matt
Lowe's,
request
and
I
quote,
for
a
pause
on
all
development
until
the
much-needed
hard
infrastructure
and
social
services
are
in
place
to
provide
the
high
quality
of
life
that
our
community
deserves.
Myself
and
other
members
of
our
community
felt.
This
petition
was
necessary
after
attending
a
Toronto,
District
School
Board
TDSB
meeting
in
June.
P
However,
I
respectfully
ask
this
committee
to
make
a
new
school
a
young
and
Eglinton
an
immediate
priority
for
this
growing
neighbourhood,
as
opposed
to
simply
exploring
a
funding
strategy
and
identifying
sites.
This
needs
to
be
an
immediate
priority.
When
a
school
is
in
their
neighbourhood,
the
children
will
be
given
a
place
where
they
feel
safe
and
that
they
belong
a
school
can
be
the
heart
of
the
community
and
make
residents
feel
ownership
and
pride
of
their
neighborhood.
P
Because
of
the
lack
of
timely
planning
for
this
new
school,
the
children
of
my
community
are
at
risk
of
losing
their
neighborhood
school
and
being
taken
from
their
community.
Please
work
as
quickly
as
possible
to
identify
a
site
and
find
a
funding
strategy
to
meet
the
capital
requirements
to
build
a
new
school
for
the
Yonge
and
Eglinton
neighborhood,
the
city,
the
province
and
tedious
B
need
to
work
together
to
get
this
done
now.
Thank
you
for
your
time
today
and
for
listening
to
my
thoughts.
P
B
B
B
We've
doing
that
in
ours,
I
think
the
activity
and
that's
a
question
of
you
is
I:
don't
want
to
lose
the
quorum.
Okay
great,
it
seems
to
be
like
yeah
we're
revolving
door
here.
That's
why
I
said
we're
sorry,
we're
short
members.
So,
if
more
than
one
walks
out
of
the
room,
we
have
to
stop
so
I
guess.
My
question
is
this:
is
a
school
board
issue?
B
B
Q
Good
afternoon
everyone,
my
name,
is
Emma
sworsky
and
I'm.
A
resident
of
Ward
25
at
900,
Mount
Pleasant
Road
I've
been
living
in
a
young
Eglinton
area
for
the
past
26
years.
The
reason
I
chose
to
remain
in
this
neighborhood
after
selling
my
house
on
Sherwood
Avenue,
which
is
also
in
Ward
25,
that
where
I
lived
and
I
raised
my
children,
they
went
to
John
Fisher
public
school,
which
had
been
my
home
for
16
years
prior
to
2008,
when
I
bought
and
moved
to
my
condo
on
Mount
Pleasant
Road
at
Broadway
was
the
following.
Q
It
combined
everything
I
was
looking
for.
This
was
a
safe,
quiet,
family-oriented
residential
area,
and
yet
it
offered
the
convenience
of
shopping
and
entertainment
at
a
walking
distance.
The
view
from
my
12
floor
balcony
is
a
nineteenth
storey.
Building
offers
me
a
feeling
of
city
living
a
healthy
mix
of
concrete
structures
of
green
space.
Q
Many
treetops
but
I
see
them
and
of
something
very
precious,
the
sky
with
when
we're
lucky
the
Sun
during
the
day
and
the
stars
at
night,
I'm
about
to
lose
that
with
the
construction
of
two
towers
on
1/10,
114
and
120
of
Broadway,
Avenue,
24
and
35
stories,
which
I
understand
is
in
reality,
34
and
41
stories.
Practically
next
door
to
my
balcony,
facing
west
I'll
be
facing
a
wall
just
like
mr.
mr.
Q
Dooley
mentioned,
which
will
be
the
twice
the
height
of
my
condo
building,
and
this
is
my
retirement
investment,
I
love,
my
condo
I
love
my
sunsets,
and
why
developers
should
be
allowed
to
profit
at
my
expense
at
the
expense
of
many
of
us
who
have
been
living
in
this
area.
For
many
many
years,
I
find
this
trend
of
giving
in
to
developers
absolutely
baffling
and
don't
get
me
going
about
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board
I,
don't
like
to
use
bad
language
in
public
I'm,
not
against
progress.
Q
I
want
to
stress
that
and
I'm
not
anti
development
per
se,
but
it
has
to
make
sense.
There
is
a
way
to
allow
for
growth
while
respecting
the
existing
and
future
residents,
and
for
that
you
have
to
think
ahead.
My
concerns
with
the
existing
and
proposed
development
in
the
areas
in
the
area
are
the
following
and
well
they've
been
mentioned
before
I
had
the
one
who
wastes
your
time.
Q
Q
So
one
block
there
are
eight
plan
or
approved
construction
of
buildings,
ranging
from
28
to
30
9
storeys
in
height
like
for
me.
This
is
outrageous.
It's
just.
It
doesn't
make
any
sense.
So
therefore,
option
3,
which
meets
all
the
provincial
requirements
and
limits
new
buildings
to
20
and
15
stories,
is
for
me
the
only
acceptable
and
reasonable
compromise
between
the
community,
ratepayers
and
planners
and
I'm,
counting
on
you,
members
community,
trying
members
to
listen
to
our
plight
and
vote
for
option
number
3.
Thank
you
for
giving
me
this
opportunity
to
speak
up.
Thank.
B
B
B
R
B
B
So
we
can
identify
them,
and
it's
not
just
the
two
of
you,
but
everyone
else
is
there
leer.
It
would
be
appreciated
because,
as
I
said
it's
already
getting
on
in
the
afternoon
and
there
will
be
questions
of
staff
after
and
there
will
be
some
motions
I
expect.
So
we
aren't
going
to
just
finish
at
the
end
of
the
deputations.
We.
R
So
Jeff,
my
name
is
Jeff
turtle
and
I'm.
A
co-chair
of
the
Federation
Mitrano
resin
associations
and
John
Parsons
is
a
member
of
our
of
our
board
and
as
an
organization
that
has
been
participating
actively
in
all
stages
of
the
Midtown
and
focus
as
of
a
number
of
our
member
resident
associations
within
the
the
North
Toronto
lower
North
York
area.
We
frankly
are
unwilling
to
be
drawn
into
recommending
among
the
choice
of
options
for
this
piece
of
the
plan.
R
One
quadrant
out
of
four,
which
in
a
sense,
is
viewed
out
of
context
of
consideration
of
the
whole
area
like
it's.
The
plan
was
on
all
four,
not
just
on
the
one
quarter
and
at
this
late
stage
in
a
process
that
has
been
marked
by
strong
public
engagement
efforts
on
the
part
of
city
staff.
We
acknowledge
that
the
development
anticipated
by
the
plan
already
meets
or
exceeds
provincial
growth
plan
requirements,
but
understand
that
the
city
is
not
in
a
position
to
challenge
this.
R
We
supported
the
effort
to
define
fixed
height
unit
limits,
which
we
were
assured,
but
we're
based
on
modeling
that
took
into
account
all
city
guidelines
and
such
as
setbacks,
angular
planes,
Park
requirements
and
the
growth
plan,
and
so
on
to
limit
any
negative
impacts
of
density
such
as
shadowing.
We
appreciate
the
plans
comprehensive,
look
at
growing
population
needs
for
open
space,
employment,
transit,
etc,
in
other
words
a
complete
community
and
where
development
should
take
place
and
in
what
form.
R
R
The
problem,
which
will
be
asked
exacerbated
with
the
LRT
opening
the
absence
of
a
young
relief
line,
nope
no
plan
to
resolve
that
and
by
possible
future
approvals
of
an
extension
of
the
unlined
to
Richmond
Hill
outside
of
the
city's
control,
while
Midtown
a
focus
provides
a
planning
framework
for
future
new
development
that
results
in
significant
residential
intensification.
It
simply
cannot
proceed
as
provided
for
in
the
plan
without
controls
on
the
implementation
of
the
plan.
We
offer
a
three-part
proposal
to
address
this.
R
Secondly,
restrict
residential
development
to
small
projects
to
be
defined,
and,
thirdly,
develop
a
phasing
plan
for
the
Midtown,
a
focused
plan
that
would
be
tied
to
transit
and
other
missing
infrastructure
for
there
for
the
young
corridor
actually
coming
on
stream.
So
you
don't
just
willy-nilly.
Have
things
happen,
so
we
recommend
that
planning
staff
be
requested
to
report
to
City
Council
in
2019
on
these
three
aspects
of
a
controlled
implementation
process.
John,
okay,.
O
Yeah,
as
a
number
of
people
have
said,
there's
a
lack
of
infrastructure
here.
People
are
not
able
to
send
theirs
their
kids
to
schools
in
the
area,
there's
a
shortage
of
parks.
There's
a
development
in
the
young
Eglinton
area
is
essentially
out
of
control,
thanks
in
large
part
to
the
OMB
having
taken
over
planning
from
the
city.
I
understand,
I,
I,
trust
that
the
motion
you
made
councilor
China
at
the
last
meeting,
will
be
brought
back
again.
O
One
of
the
elements
of
that
motion
was
to
ask
the
planning
staff
to
update
its
ridership
projections,
which
have
not
been
updated
to
take
into
account
the
effect
of
all
of
the
OMB
approved
developments
that
have
occurred.
We're
facing
a
situation
in
yungang
Linson.
Sorry
we're
facing
a
situation
in
young
Eglinton,
where
already
it
is
virtually
impossible
to
get
on
the
subway
in
the
morning
rush
hour
without
having
to
wait
for
several
trains
even
worse,
at
stations
to
the
south
down
to
bluer.
O
Buhler
itself
is
at
this
point
a
dangerous
station
young
england
and
with
the
opening
of
the
Eglinton
LRT,
is
also
going
to
be
a
dangerous
situation.
Do
we
have
to
wait
for
somebody
to
be
pushed
off
the
program
off
the
station
platform
onto
the
tracks
and
be
killed
before
the
city
starts,
dealing
with
the
fact
that
there
is
a
mismatch
between
infrastructure
and
development?
O
There's
a
absolute
I
believe
there's
an
absolute
imperative
for
this
committee
and
for
council
to
put
a
moratorium
on
development,
not
just
adopt
option
3,
but
put
a
moratorium
on
future
development
until
infrastructure.
Captain
catches
up
I'm
not
opposed.
We
are
not
opposed
to
development,
but
we
are
opposed
to
development
without
the
infrastructure
it
is
supported.
B
R
So
I
put
it
on
another
hat
here:
I'm
putting
on
the
Hat
as
co-president
of
the
Leeside
property
owners
association,
and
we
have
a
very
specific
concern:
a
request
to
change
in
the
Midtown
a
focus
plan
to
maintain
the
neighborhoods
designation
for
the
properties
on
the
east
side
of
Bayview
north
from
parkersville
Avadh,
just
south
of
Eglinton
Avenue,
including
the
set
of
ten
quadruplex,
is
the
double
duplexes.
Instead
of
designating
them
as
mixed-use
as
proposed
by
the
plan,
this
is
request
is
driven
by
the
unique
heritage
and
locational
attributes
of
these
properties.
R
The
three
reasons
are
as
follows:
retail
agreed
is
a
primary
characteristics
of
mixed-use
land
use,
whereas
these
properties
are
entirely
residential
and
are
not
identified,
in
fact,
they're
excluded
from
the
retail
streets
designation
map
21.5.
In
addition,
the
slope
of
the
land
from
Parker's
just
before
Eglinton
makes
it
unsuitable
for
retail
uses.
Secondly,
immediately
behind
the
quads
is
Talbot
Park,
which
includes
the
baseball,
the
the
well-known
Leeside
baseball
diamond,
which
is
located
well
below
grade
that
secretes
kind
of
a
cavern
down
there
on
the
side
of
the
former
Walmsley
Brook.
R
In
order
to
minimize
shadowing
on
the
baseball
diamonds
essential
to
maintain
low-rise
rather
than
mid
rise
or
high
rise
on
Bay
View
in
proximity
to
this
park,
as
neighborhoods,
there
was
a
four-story
height
limit,
whereas
under
the
under
the
mid
mixed-use
that
would
be
seven
or
more
stories.
Conversion
to
mix
use.
What
makes
would
cause
serious
shadowing
on
the
on
the
diamond
avoidance
of
shadowing
on
public
parks
is
a
printer
key
principle
in
good
planning,
which
has
not
been
upheld
in
this
case.
R
The
third
reason
is
that
it's
unclear
or
unknown
whether
mixed
use
it's
compatible
with
the
heritage
designation
of
the
Quadra
plexus,
two
of
which
have
already
been
designated,
so
the
property
would
be
problematic
to
to
make
to
have
seven
story
or
more
buildings.
Here.
All
ten
I
won't
go
into
the
detail
about
that,
so
this
request
has
been
discussed
with
city
planning
staff
and
supported
by
councillor
Burnside,
who
couldn't
be
here
to
this
afternoon.
B
No,
the
issues
I'm
just
trying
to
guard
clarification.
Sure
of
the
addresses,
because
a
lot
of
my
colleagues
have
come
to
me
with
different
requests,
I'm
trying
to
make
sure
I
have
the
right
one
in
front
of
me.
Thank
you
very
much,
I,
don't
see
any
other
questions
and
thank
you
for
keeping
your
time
down.
It
is
appreciated,
so
the
next
speaker,
I,
have
is
John,
get
them
in
I'm
close
with
that
yeah
and
after
that,
I
have
al
TV.
I
I
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity.
Mr.
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
mr.
Keeley
and
I
our
board
members
from
the
South
Eglinton,
ratepayers
and
residents
association
known
as
Sarah,
we're
here
to
speak
about
the
development
issues,
somewhat
specific,
of
course,
to
our
area.
But
we
do
very
much
recognize
the
issues
in
the
entire
study
area
and
we've
been
active
in
all
of
those
developments.
Even
beyond
the
exact
scope
of
our
area.
I
We
echo
the
the
comments
and
and
support
much
of
what
you've
heard
from
the
residents
about
the
development
pressures
about
the
impact
that
exists
on
livability
and
especially
in
regard
to
the
infrastructure.
The
soft
infrastructure
parts
of
play,
spaces
of
schools,
especially
and
you're,
going
to
have
a
deputy
in
from
the
TDSB
as
well.
So
I'll
anticipate
echoing
the
comments
of
that
deput
n't
and
supporting
those.
In
our
letter
to
the
committee,
we've
noted
four
points
that
I'd
like
to
just
go
through
with
you
quickly
and
and
highlight
a
couple
of
things
from
that.
I
We
find
that
we
could
support
any
of
the
three
options
presented
and
we
have
criteria,
though,
that
we
would
urge
you
to
consider
in
doing
so.
First
of
all
that,
whatever
proposal,
whatever
option,
is
selected
by
the
committee
to
recommend
the
City
Council,
that
it
conformed
to
be
consistent
with
and
have
regard
to,
the
various
provincial
plans,
policy
statements
and
the
interests
in
the
Planning
Act.
So
we're
concerned
there
that
we
not
move
forward
today
with
a
plan
that
meets
our
hopes
and
aspirations
but
violates
ultimately
and
perhaps
inadvertently
the
Planning
Act.
I
So
what
I
would
request
is
that
you,
mr.
chair
or
any
of
the
members
of
the
committee,
ask
staff
if
they
can
actually
support
at
the
province,
all
of
the
options
available
or
whether
the
fact
that
they've
provided
their
advice
previously
in
the
final
report,
causes
any
difficulties
and
perhaps
ask
them
if
they
see
a
way
around
that
or
if
any
of
you
for
that
matter,
have
a
way
around
that.
We
see
that
as
an
obstacle
that
that
we
find
greatly
concerning
we'd,
also
like
to
see
that
the
maximum
possible
employment
opportunities
are
supported.
I
We
also
very
much
would
like
to
see
the
lowest
possible
additional
permitted
tower
height
in
the
Eglinton
corridor
for
future
and
current
development
applications
not
yet
approved.
As
long
as
the
previous
criteria
are
satisfied,
it's
the
case
that
you
know
there's
disagreement
in
the
room.
No
doubt
I'm
sure
there
are
people
in
the
audience
behind
who
would
like
to
see
maximum
density
and
maximum
height
we've
heard
from
many
people
who
would
like
very
much
the
opposite.
We
would
all
like
that
I
think
as
as
residents
and
citizens.
I
I
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
adhere
knowingly
to
the
best
advice
that
we
can
get
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
put
forward
a
plan
that
ultimately
fails
ultimately
falls
flat
where
we
lose
all
of
the
many
benefits
of
the
thousands
of
people's
opinions
and
time
and
consultation
that
has
gone
into
building
this
plan.
All
the
hard
work
and
time
and
money
invested
on
the
part
of
city
staff
to
give
us
to
Johnson
complete
I.
M
M
M
And
open
spaces,
and
again
that's
been
recognized
many
times
as
today.
We
certainly
want
to
reinforce
and
compliment
city
planning
in
in
the
extensive
effort
that
they've
given
throughout
the
consultation
process.
Sarah
has
been
very
active
throughout
the
three
years.
I
I
believe
that
I've
attended
all
of
the
sessions.
It's
been
full
and
complete
for
everyone,
who's
taken
the
time
and
and
an
effort
to
do
it.
We've
certainly
believed
that
this
that
the.
E
Just
wondering
why
you're
wondering
about
whether
it
conforms
to
the
growth
plan,
because
it
does
cite
that
on
page
13,
so
if
you
take
a
chance,
take
an
opportunity
just
to
look
at
that
it,
the
planners,
have
done
an
excellent
job.
Saying
option
three
does
cover
that
off
and
also
with
the
ratio
of
jobs
to
residents.
Are
you
aware
that
it
is
actually
option?
Three
is
basically
the
same.
So
again,
that's
in
the
report
before
us.
Yes,.
I
E
I
B
I
B
S
Cherish
Shinar
and
members
of
the
committee.
Thank
you
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
My
name
is
Dan
cast
Aldo
and
I'm.
The
manager
of
planning
with
the
Toronto
District
School
Board
I'm
here
today,
to
speak
with
you
about
the
draft
young
Eglinton
secondary
plan
and
specifically
to
express
our
firm
support
for
the
importance
of
building
complete
communities
and
the
importance
of
schools
as
key
service
facilities
within
those
communities.
S
A
of
our
letter
stated
June
6
than
July
4th
2018
I'd,
like
to
start
by
acknowledging
and
thanking
city
planning
staff
for
taking
a
highly
collaborative
approach
in
this
exercise
and
for
the
front
for
the
meaningful
engagement
opportunities
that
we
at
the
TDSB
were
provided
throughout
the
process.
The
TDSB
strongly
supports
the
policies
within
the
draft
plan
that
recognize
the
importance
of
building
complete
communities.
Schools
are
an
integral
and
vital
component
of
a
complete
community.
S
The
TDSB
strongly
believes
in
neighborhood
schools,
where
students
have
an
opportunity
to
walk,
to
learn
and
to
participate
in
a
wide
array
of
extracurricular
activities
within
their
own
community.
Further,
in
addition
to
delivering
a
core
curriculum,
the
TDSB
recognizes
that
schools
already
function
as
community
hubs
where
families
gather
to
access
the
social,
cultural,
recreational
and
other
resources
they
need
together
in
one
spot,
the
secondary
plan,
categorizes
schools
as
community
service
facilities,
which
are
defined
as
infrastructure
within
the
plan.
S
Most
importantly,
the
secondary
plan
includes
policies
which
require
that
development
does
not
outpace
the
provision
of
infrastructure,
including
key
infrastructure
such
as
schools.
The
TDSB
is
extremely
supportive
of
this
policy
approach,
as
it
mirrors
our
objectives
and
is
recognized
as
good
planning.
Currently,
the
TDSB
operates.
Eight
Elementary
and
two
secondary
schools
within
the
Midtown
area,
enrollment
at
local
schools,
has
grown
substantially
over
the
past
ten
years,
particularly
at
the
elementary
panel
and
Hanna
has
now
reached
a
critical
point
in
that
our
existing
land
and
buildings
are
over
utilized.
S
As
a
result,
existing
elementary
facilities
are
no
longer
able
to
accommodate
additional
growth.
The
strain
on
these
facilities
will
only
be
exacerbated
by
the
cumulative
impact
of
the
thousands
of
new
units
that
are
approved
or
under
review
at
the
city.
It
has
become
clear
that
a
new
Elementary
School
is
desperately
needed
to
serve
the
Midtown
community.
The
accommodation
challenge
is
no
more
apparent
than
at
Eglinton
junior
public
school,
which
is
located
right
in
the
heart
of
the
urban
growth
center.
The
school
is
situated
on
a
highly
constrained
site
of
only
1.6.
S
Acres
has
no
green
space
or
appropriate
play
fields,
cannot
accommodate
portables
and
has
no
further
opportunity
for
expansion.
This
past
year,
Eglinton
Junior
public
school
was
operating
at
113
percent
of
its
capacity
with
575
students.
Our
most
recent
projection
for
the
school
suggests
that
it
will
reach
820
students
or
162
percent
utilization
by
2024.
As
of
now,
no
further
opportunities
exist
to
accommodate
additional
students
within
the
building
and
other
measures
have
been
implemented.
S
The
policies
of
the
secondary
plan
that
pace
growth
consumer
it
with
the
provision
of
schools
as
a
community
service,
provides
the
board
with
confidence
that
securing
a
location
for
a
new
school
will
be
a
priority
for
both
the
board
and
the
City.
The
TDSB
is
extremely
supportive
of
these
policies,
as
they
are
critical
to
accommodating
growth
within
this
community.
We
do
believe
that
the
policies
can
be
improved
with
some
minor
additions
to
better
address
the
critical
shortage
of
capacity
at
local
elementary
schools.
S
Although
most
aspects
of
the
policy
development
process
were
highly
collaborative,
the
board
still
has
it
standing
concerns
with
map-21
nine
Midtown
mobility
network
in
map-21,
ten
properties
with
potential
cultural
heritage
value.
The
TDSB
respectfully
requests
that
approval
of
these
two
maps
in
their
current
form
be
deferred
until
we
have
had
an
opportunity
to
engage
further
with
city
staff
to
determine.
S
If
there's
a
better
approach
that
addresses
our
issues
while
still
satisfying
the
needs
of
the
city,
in
conclusion,
although
the
TDSB
request
some
minor
changes,
we
strongly
support
the
policies
of
the
draft
plan
as
they
relate
to
building
complete
communities
and
ensuring
that
the
provision
of
infrastructure
aligns
with
the
pace
of
development
by
defining
schools
as
infrastructure.
The
policy
framework
acknowledges
their
importance
as
part
of
complete
communities,
and
it
reinforces
the
need
to
ensure
that
adequate
school
capacity
is
available.
S
M
M
S
S
M
S
Northern
is
also
around
100
percent.
There's
2,000
students
there
right
Forest,
Hills
operating
at
is
capacity
a
little
over
a
hundred
percent
utilization
actually
and
that's
by
design
just
for
program
reasons.
Central
tech
is
slightly
under,
but
it
serves
a
more
specialized
focus
and
it's
open
to
students
across
the
system.
M
S
Right
now
we're
planning
to
major
capital
projects
in
the
area.
One
is
the
replacement
of
Davis
village
in
your
public
school,
so
that
school
will
be
rebuilt
at
a
much
larger
capacity
than
it
is
now
we're
adding
approximately
230
new
spaces
as
part
of
that
rebuild
Hodgson
middle
school
is
another
project
for
us,
and
that's
the
local
middle
school
serve
students
in
grades
6
to
8.
S
We
had
been
approved
for
an
addition
by
the
province
of
12
classrooms,
but
what
we
had
found
through
an
update
of
our
enrollment
projections
for
local
schools
for
Hotch
and
itself,
new
development,
information
in
the
area,
updated
pupil,
yield
factors
and
that's
the
number
of
students
that
we
can
reasonably
anticipate
out
of
a
development
unit
that
the
12
room
addition
at
Hodgson
would
be
woefully
insufficient
to
accommodate
us.
And
what
would
effectively
happen
is
that
the
addition
would
be
constructed,
occupied
and
portables
would
be
added,
immediate
laughter.
S
We
don't
feel
that's
appropriate
and
right
now
we
are
taking
a
step
back
and
we're
working
on
a
much
larger
project
there
and
we're
looking
at
adding
not
twelve
rooms
but
potentially
up
to
21
or
22,
and
that
project
involves
a
significant
renovation
of
the
existing
older
facility,
as
well
as
potentially
taking
down
another
portion
of
that
facility
and
rebuilding
it,
including
a
new
gym
and
other
support
spaces
for
students.
So.
M
S
So
Davisville
funding
is
in
place
and
we
are
currently
working
through
the
site
plan
process
with
the
city.
Hodgson
funding
is
in
place,
like
I
said,
for
the
12
rooms,
but
we
have
to
go
back
to
the
province.
I
would
say
in
over
the
next
couple
months
to
seek
their
approval
to
expand
the
scope
of
the
project.
Part
of
that
discussion
will
include
options
for
funding.
It
could
be
something
they
choose
to
provide
us
funds
to
do,
or
it
could
be
something
that
they
direct
the
TDSB
de
fondo
to
their
own
resources.
S
S
M
S
So,
with
secondary
schools,
it's
a
it's
slightly
different
in
that
we
do
have
I
would
say
more
options
for
students.
One
secondary
school
in
the
area.
Northern
does
have
programs
of
choice
that
draw
in
a
significant
population
that
does
not
reside
in
Midtown.
If
we
were
ever
forced
to
engage
in
a
review,
we
could
look
at
the
distribution
of
those
programs
and
what
that
would
effectively
do
is
open
up
space
for
local
growth.
S
We're
not
at
that
point
yet,
but
we
may
be
there
in
five
10
or
15
years,
we're
going
to
be
taking
on
undertaking
a
review
of
all
of
our
secondary
schools.
Looking
at
all
programs,
distribution
of
those
programs,
and
that
may
have
an
impact
on
how
we
view
secondary
education
in
this
area.
But
at
this
point
we're
fairly
confident
that,
with
the
space
we
do
have
in
the
area
and
nearby,
we
should
be
okay.
S
Are
secondary
properties
nearby
I
would
say
to
the
west
of
the
Midtown
area
that
do
have
surplus
capacity
for
students,
how
far
west
2
to
3
kilometers
and
another
thing
is
so
not
within
walking
distance,
but
secondary
students
are
mobile.
They
will
take
public
transit
to
access
the
programs
that
they
want
and
that's
something
that
we
certainly
experience
not
only
here
but
right
across
the
city,
so
the
location
for
junior
schools
and
elementary
schools
is
certainly
important
for
a
local
community
for
a
local
neighborhood,
but
for
secondary
schools.
S
B
S
B
All
right,
so,
if
I'm
speaking
about
facilities
along
these
IOT
you're,
actually
suggesting
that
your
solution
to
the
senior
school
level
is
to
have
a
school
that's
without
far
outside
of,
what's
considered
the
walking
distance
from
an
LRT
cuz
you're,
almost
a
kilometer
north
of
1810,
a
venue
for
one
and
the
other
one.
Is
it
Keele
Street?
What.
B
S
B
S
Require
the
expansion
of
Davisville,
we
require
the
much
larger
addition
at
Hodgson.
On
top
of
those
two
things,
we
estimate
that
another
800
elementary
people
places
will
be
needed
to
serve
the
community
over
the
long
term.
That
could
be
one
extremely
large
school
or
a
series
of
smaller
schools,
satellite
missile
and.
B
B
S
B
S
Signs
will
continue
to
be
put
up
what
we've
recently
put
forward
and
what
our
trustees
have
approved
is
redirecting
or
busing
students
from
new
developments
outside
of
the
area,
and
they
will
be
accommodated,
as
you
heard
earlier,
at
a
school
south
of
here
in
Moore
Park.
It's
Whitney
public
school,
and
that
will
be
to
buy
us
some
time
until
we
can
get
a
plan.
B
In
place
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
this
comprehensively,
so
many
of
the
residents
and
parents
come
here
on
the
development
applications
and
in
particularly
on
these
and
tell
us,
we
want
local
schools
so
in
a
high-density
community
like
this-
and
this
is
much
greater
than
most
density
areas
anywhere
in
the
city,
if
not
across
the
province.
They
want
local
schools
to
walk
to.
Our
staff
have
told
us
that
you
can't
drive,
because
it
won't
work,
because
the
road
capacity
isn't
there
to
really
drive
people
out.
They
have
to
go
by
transit.
I'm.
B
Just
trying
to
understand.
Is
there
a
plan
that
you
put
in
front
of
the
school
board
that
has
the
necessary
expansion
that
is
waiting
for
provincial
funding,
or
is
it
that
you're
putting
forward
a
plan
that
supports
the
busing
and
the
movement
of
the
kids
and
doesn't
have
it?
Because
you
don't
have
the
funding
or
because
you
don't
support
the
expansion
so.
S
S
This
fall
looking
at
all
of
these
factors
and
that
review
will
culminate
in
an
accommodation
strategy
that
takes
into
account
all
of
the
information
that
we
now
know
through
the
Midtown
and
focus
exercise,
and
it
will
be
something
we
put
in
front
of
our
trustees
and
in
front
of
the
province
that
basically
requests
that
funding
be
put
in
place
for
land
and
for
buildings
to
allow
us
to
accommodate
the
growth.
That's
before
us.
So
that's
something
we're
in
barking
on
in
the
fall.
It
will
conclude
in
the
spring.
Thank.
B
O
D
M
M
B
H
Yeah,
my
hello,
my
name
is
Glenn
Robinson
I
live
young
in
Broadway
and
I've
lived
in
the
neighborhood
for
about
18
years
and
I'm.
Just
gonna
show
a
few
pictures
along
Yonge
Street.
We
have,
we
had
a
photo
tour,
a
little
bit
further
east,
a
lot
of
young,
so
the
first
picture
to
show
here
is
the
when
you
come
out
of
the
subway
after
you've
been
kind
of
squeezed
in
for
for
a
while.
H
This
is
how
crossing
the
street
crossing
Eglinton
from
cross
yeah
crossing
Eglinton
from
the
north,
south
side
to
the
north
side
case
extremely
crowded
and
a
lot
of
people
times.
People
are
just
just
about
going
into
the
cars.
No.
This
is
definitely
result
of
the
of
the
construction
of
the
LRT,
so
we'll
get
a
little
bit
better
when
that's
finished.
At
the
same
time,
when
the
LRT
is
opened,
it's
going
to
bring
in
thousands
of
people
from
the
crosstown,
so
we're
gonna
end
up
with
the
subways
gonna,
even
in
worse
shape,
but
I.
H
H
H
Okay,
there's
a
few
problems
on
the
west
side
of
Yonge
Street,
okay,
which
is
in
the
Mount
gummer
e-square
category
area.
We
have
two
walking
north
on
the
west
side,
a
young.
We
have
two
consecutive
blocks
of
construction
and
here's
a
picture
of
Hallandale,
which
is
right
in
the
middle
of
the
construction.
This
is
looking
west
on
Hallandale
Helen
Dale
has
been
closed
for
as
long
as
I
can
remember.
Now,.
H
And
oh
yeah,
one
more
point
about
this:
this
picture
here
this
is
looking
at
the
old
post
office
site.
This
used
to
be
the
only
green
space
that
we
had
in
the
area.
We
actually
had
green
grass.
We
had
people
people
there,
dogs
laying
out
the
grass
so
that
grass
has
been
taken
away.
The
this
building
has
said
that
they
had
told
us
that
they
were
going
to
build
that
do
the
construction
from
the
back,
so
that
we
would
be
able
to
enjoy
the
park
area
while
the
building
was
being
built.
H
This
is
the
site
of
the
old
building,
okay,
that
was
a
kind
of
a
historic
building
and
that's
at
Yonge
and
Rose
long.
It's
been
in
this
shape
now
since
for
a
year
now,
since
that
building
was
the
BM
always
torn
down
here's
another
picture
of
it.
My
friend
called
my
friend
from
New
York
said:
look
like
the
South
Bronx
in
the
80s,
so
it's
just
basically
a
few
piles
of
rubble
since
the
for
the
last
year
sitting,
there.
H
This
is
a
picture
of
the
subsidized
housing
building.
That's
across
the
street,
from
where
the
Bank
of
Montreal
was
torn
down.
The
people
in
this
building
when
the
proposed
building
goes
up
on
the
Bank
of
Montreal
site
or
just
to
the
south
of
men
making
Montreal
site
their
view
of
the
Sun
and
the
sky
is
gonna,
be
completely
obliterated.
H
H
H
Okay,
we
please
review
and
visit
the
west
side
of
Yonge
Street
as
it
affects
our
livability.
It's
a
terrible
place,
it's
getting
worse.
It
cannot
take
more
construction.
At
least
la
crosstown
is
finished,
it's
transitioning
from
80%
of
commercial,
and
it
was
the
anchor
the
most
desirable
neighborhood
in
Toronto
to
80%
residential.
K
H
B
B
B
F
B
B
B
F
Thank
You,
mr.
chairman
and
members
of
committee,
my
name
is
Ornella
Ricci
key
and
I'm
chief
development
officer
with
the
torgan
group
we
own
24:01
and
2409
Yuen
Street,
which
are
on
the
east
side
of
Yonge
Street
and
between
Broadway
and
Erskine,
as
I've
outlined
them
here,
the
Blue
Beam
2401
and
the
red
bean
2409.
F
F
F
What
we're
looking
for
is
allowing
the
rear
half
of
2409
for
higher
density,
which
would
be
in
keeping
with
some
of
the
other
heights
in
the
block
and
provides
a
varying
height
and
built
form
for
the
rear
portion
of
the
property.
The
redevelopment
of
24:9
has
been
discussed
with
TC
HC
and
have
also
discussed
redevelopment
options,
as
well
as
the
financial
benefit
that
TC
h
will
realize,
with
the
development
of
2409.
F
This
property's
unique
lot
size
and
location
in
the
block
lends
itself
to
further
consideration
for
increased
height
on
the
rear,
half
of
the
property.
Along
with
the
relationship
we
share
with
t
HC
HC,
so
TC
HC
and
the
potential
financial
benefit
to
them.
We
believe
it
should
be
read.
Looked
at,
we
are
respectfully
requesting
that
further
consideration
for
increased
heights
should
be
given
to
2409
and
specifically
the
rear
portion
of
2409.
F
F
B
Q
F
F
The
we
had
initially
discussed
the
potential
redevelopment
of
proportion
of
TCH
seat
for
them
to
realize
further
density
as
well
for
toronto
housing.
However,
at
this
point
in
time,
that's
not
something
that's
on
their
horizon.
We
have
discussed
with
TCH,
see
an
increased
parking
underground
parking
facility
which
they
would
be
financially
compensated
for,
and
that
is
the
existing
structure
we
currently
share
with
them.
That
would
be
subject
to
a
further
expansion
of
whereby
they
would
benefit
from
that.
B
B
E
F
E
F
E
F
The
chair,
it
is,
they
are
roughly
the
same.
It's
about
1/3.
There
is
more
jobs
and
employment
that
would
get
generated
and
options
one
in
options.
Part
of
that
is
based
on
the
overall
amount
of
gross
floor
area
that
would
be
permitted
and
the
requirements
that
are
in
the
plan
for
a
certain
percentage
to
be
office,
institutional
or
cultural
uses,
but.
F
E
E
F
As
of
2000
at
the
end
of
2016,
there
was
approximately
twelve
thousand
five
hundred
units
within
the
urban
growth
center.
There
were
an
additional
ten
thousand
two
hundred
and
twenty
five
units
that
were
approved,
but
not
yet
built,
and
the
current
number
of
applications
that
are
under
reviewing
the
urban
growth
center
is
about
thirty.
Five
hundred
and.
F
E
T
Through
the
chair,
the
city,
any
miss
valley
currently
doesn't
have
that
power
under
the
planning
act,
a
pause
or
a
moratorium.
We
do
have
holding
powers
into
the
under
the
planning
act
that
we
discussed
earlier
today,
and
this
plan
does
include
prescriptive
policies
for
how
we
would
use
holding
powers
in
Yonge
and
Eglinton
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
and
there
are
interim
control
powers
that
that
get
used
in
a
situation
where
a
bylaw
currently
permits
something
that's
problematic.
So
you
put
interim
control
in
place
to
prevent
that.
T
E
M
M
M
Where
they
hold
sanitary
flows
and
then
discharge
enough
hours,
those
are
the
ones
we
we
typically
deny,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you
want
to
make
sure
that
you
have
sewer
capacity
to
deal
with
those
flows
as
otherwise
you
won't.
Can
you
you
really
can't
control
when
they
release
those
flows,
so
we
typically
deny
any
sanitary
holding
tanks.
Okay,.
A
E
E
K
T
T
The
growth
plan
also,
however,
refers
to
complete
communities
and
and
as
a
principle
tenant
of
good
planning,
and
so
wherever
those
families
in
that
and
and
and
those
children
end
up,
should
be
responsibly
accommodated
for
through
the
planning
that
the
school
boards
undertake
in
their
various
accommodation
and
their
long,
their
long-range
planning
for
for
growth,
whether
that
growth
be
demographic
growth
in
neighborhoods
or
through
new
populations
that
come
to
growth
areas.
However,.
T
We've
certainly,
we
have
this
kind
of
separate
but
connected
planning
regimes,
and
we
certainly
coordinate
as
much
as
possible
with
the
school
board
and
provide
them
with
our
growth
estimates
and
and
and
do
planning
exercises,
as
we
have
with
them
in
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
But
at
the
end
of
the
day,
they've
got
to
approve
accommodation
plans
and
then
they've
got
to
develop
strategies
to
secure
funding
from
there
from
from
the
province
to
build
new
school
infrastructure.
Should
the
accommodation
plan
require
new
infrastructure
so.
M
M
T
The
chair,
the
the
city,
often
advocates
for
legislative
change
with
the
province.
We
did
that
for
over
ten
or
fifteen
years
with
the
intera
municipal
board
and
that's
a
recent
experience,
and
certainly
when
the
province
changes
the
Planning
Act
every
five
or
10
years,
the
city
or
is
in
and
comes
forward
with
its
opinions
about
how
the
planning
process
is
working
and
what
needs
to
be
changed.
So
there
are
regular
occasions
and
special
occasions
when
the
city
advances
requests
to
the
province
for
legislative
change.
It's
not
unheard
of
ya
know,
but
specifically.
T
No,
not
in
my
experience,
is
certainly
the
unprecedented
level
of
development
that
we're
seeing
in
some
areas
of
Toronto,
which
is
a
new
experience
for
a
lot
of
us
and
you've
heard
from
the
community
today
about
what
they're
experiencing
so
it's
it
may
be
time
for
some
new
thinking,
but
to
date
there
has
not
been
that
kind
of
thinking
right.
Thank
you.
I.
C
Just
trying
to
make
sure
I've
got
my
head
around
all
of
this.
In
the
supplementary
report,
you
brought
us
some
options
and
you
developed
those
options
in
response
to
the
direction
from
Council
or
this
committee.
At
the
last
meeting
you
were
told
to
go.
Do
this,
so
this
is
what
you
brought
us
is
that
that's.
T
C
T
The
what
what
you
have
in
front
of
you
is
the
original
staff
report,
which
was
result
of
the
cities.
City,
LED,
initiated
official
plan,
amendment
review,
the
secondary
plan
for
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
with
our
draft
Official,
Plan
Amendment
and
our
analysis
comprehensive
advice.
The
committee
asked
to
consider
or
have
us
consider,
other
options
which
we've
done
and
presented
to
you,
and
the
committee
also
asked
us
to
provide
advice
as
to
whether
or
not
those
options
conform
with
the
growth
plan,
and
we
provided
that
to
you.
T
C
T
K
M
Like
counselor
perks,
to
hear
what
I
have
to
say
so,
I
I
don't
disagree
with
going
in
camera
to
discuss
the
issue,
but
if
we're
going
to
do
it,
I
think
we
should
have
do
it
counsel
and
flush
it
out
at
counsel.
If
it's
a
big
issue
rather
than
just
doing
it
here,
because
your
concerns
are
gonna,
be
the
same
at
counsel
as
they
are
here.
I.
B
Counselor
perks,
the
reason
I'm
just
a
question
on
your
motion,
all
recognize
you
counselor,
Fillion
I,
think
my
colleagues
are
trying
to
be
able
to
deal
with
this
in
an
efficient
manner
without
losing
quorum.
Are
your
questions
going
to
be
long
in
camera,
or
can
we
do
it
within
the
five
minutes
at
you?
So.
C
I
was
I
was
just
told
in
response
to
a
question.
I
asked
the
chief
planner
that,
if
I
want
to
understand
what
the
consequences
of
selecting
what's
in
the
supplementary,
as
opposed
to
the
original
advice,
are
that
I
need
to
get
in
camera
advice
from
the
city
solicitor.
In
other
words,
I've,
been
told
in
order
to
understand
what
I'm
about
to
vote
on
I
need
his
advice.
How
quickly
he
can
give
me
his
advice.
I,
don't
know:
okay,.
M
B
So
there
is
a
motion
to
go
in
camera.
All
in
favor,
I
have
to
read
it
up
properly.
I
have
to
do
my
job,
as
the
clerk
tells
me
to
there's
a
motion
to
go
in
camera
to
consider
matter
relating
to
litigation
of
potential
litigation,
including
matters
before
administrative
tribunals
affecting
the
musicality
or
local
board.
All
those
in
favor
opposed
that
carries
two
members
of
the
public.
B
We
have
to
get
a
little
bit
of
advice
without
you
hearing
it
because
it
may
have
to
do
with
legal
matters,
which
is
what
I
read
out
or
other
challenges
to
our
decision.
So
we
are
going
to
do
that
in
private,
and
then
we
will
come
back
to
public
session.
To
finish.
Deliberating
on
this,
so
I
could
ask
everybody,
except
for
the
staff
involved
to
please
leave
the
room
and
we
will
get
you
back
and
hopefully,
as
shortly
as
possible,.
B
B
E
Think
will
be
so.
Okay,
I'll
be
very
brief,
because
I
understand
you're
having
corn
challenges
so
I
just
firstly
want
to
thank
all
the
residents
who
wrote,
letters
and
I
think
there's
well
over
a
hundred,
if
not
more
and
all
the
residents
that
came
out
to
speak
today,
they
did
a
better
job
than
I
could
ever
do
at
articulating.
The
experience
of
living
in
this
neighborhood
I
also
want
to
thank
city
staff,
particularly
Cassidy
and
and
Paul,
and
also
I
call
our
renamed
her
Elsi,
but
she
knows
who
she
is.
E
E
Originally,
it
was
about
public
realm,
I
encouraged
the
planners
and
through
a
motion
to
expand
the
scope
to
include
the
infrastructure
piece
and
unfortunately,
as
you've
heard
today
repeatedly
this
area,
it's
gone
unchecked
by
both
the
city
and
the
province
for
many
years,
and
what
we've
seen
is
a
bit
of
a
Wild
West
in
environment
for
developers.
So,
as
you
heard
again,
the
young
Edgington
Center
exceeds
the
provincial
minimum
density
targets
of
400
residents
and
jobs
combined
per
hectare
prior
to
the
growth
plan,
even
coming
into
effect
in
twin
2006
and,
of
course,
in
1991.
E
There
was
already
450
residents
per
hectare
today
over
600
residents
and
jobs
combined
per
hectare,
so
it
far
exceeds
the
growth
minimum
targets
for
the
for
a
transit
station
area
and
I
think
that's
very
important
of
those
those
of
you
who
are
proponents
of
density
around
transit
station
nodes.
It
far
exceeds
all
of
that
over
and
over
again.
In
fact,
it's
the
most
densely
populated
urban
growth
center
in
the
Greater
Golden
Horseshoe
and
ranks
among
the
densest
communities
in
Canada.
E
So
I'm
going
to
cut
out
a
lot
of
what
I
was
going
to
say
because
it's
all
been
said,
as
I
said
very
eloquently,
I
want
to
tell
the
committee
about
our
meeting
on
June
21st.
It
was
packed
standing
room
only
and
80%
of
those
people
who
attended,
voted
for
option,
3
or
lower.
A
lot
of
people
wanted
lower
than
option
3,
and
there
was
a
lot
of
compromise.
As
I
said
earlier
between
the
planners
and
the
working
group
that
developed
option
4
that
became
option.
3
the
the
planners
went
up
to
20.
E
It
went
up
to
24
26
27
29.
So
this
is
not
exactly
what
the
neighborhood
wants
option
3,
but
it's
it's
the
compromise
and
it
was
influenced
by
both
the
planners
and
the
residents
we
want.
We
want
Yonge
Street
to
be
a
Main
Street.
We
want
to
feel
like
we're
in
Boston
and
we
don't
want
to
be
a
really
a
neighborhood
of
skyscrapers
and
wall-to-wall
towers,
and
that
is
not
our
community
that
we
want
to
live
in.
E
E
It
clearly
says
that
option
3
conforms
to
the
growth
plan,
consistent
with
the
provincial
policy
statement
and
has
regard
to
the
matters
of
provincial
interest.
In
section
2
of
the
Planning
Act
I
can't
say
that
enough.
It
is
estimated
this
growth
center
will
exceed
a
thousand
residents
and
jobs
per
hectare
for
all
options.
Page
14
is
the
page.
If
you
want
to
look
at
it,
so
in
wrapping
up
I
would
say:
option.
3
is
a
fair
and
reasonable
plan.
E
It's
supported
by
the
neighborhood,
although,
like
I
said
it's
not
their
ideal
plan,
they
would
love
to
actually
not
see
another
unit
go
in
this
area
till
we
can
play
catch-up
and
I'm
a
big
proponent
of
a
moratorium,
any
pause
that
can
happen
I'm
behind
fist-pumping.
Having
said
that,
we've
been
told,
that's
not
in
the
cards
and
that's
not
expected.
So
the
best
we
can
do
is
come
up
with
a
option.
The
Greg
Len
turn
our
chief
planner
said
to
me:
Jay
I
need
an
option.
E
I
need
a
plan
and
I
respect
that
and
carry
like
I
said
Kerry
and
her
group
I
call
her
Elsie,
but
Kerry
is
her
real
name,
I
think
she's
tired
of
my
phone
calls
and
meetings,
but
they
have
been
so
professional
and
so
helpful
in
this
process.
I
can't
say
enough
about
their
their
commitment
to
this,
so
I
will
wrap
up
by
saying
thank
you
to
the
members
of
this
committee
for
your
patience
and
your
ongoing
support
and
I
hope.
You
will
support
the
livability
of
this
very
dynamic
neighborhood.
B
Thank
you,
I'm,
going
to
start
it
off
because
I'm
gonna
place
the
motion
that
I
have,
which
is
from
the
previous
meeting
along
with
house
option
three
in
it.
It's
dealing
with
quite
a
number
of
the
issues
that
are
here.
I
circulated
it
to
my
colleagues.
It's
on
their
desk
it'll
be
something
you
can
pick
up
in
the
public
after
the
meeting.
B
Many
of
the
buildings
that
are
approved
and
not
yet
built
will
continue
to
change
it
substantially
and
there
has
not
been
a
plan
that
has
been
followed
in
the
area
to
this
date
and
the
problem
that
many
of
us
have
had
here
on
council
and
helping
the
community
is
the
fact
that
so
many
of
the
applications
that
were
approved
in
the
area
are
subject
to
OMB
Appeals.
While
the
OMB
is
gone.
B
B
C
On
behalf
of
councillor
Matt
Lowe
I'm
moving
this
motion,
which
effectively
asks
staff
to
put
their
thinking
caps
on
and
see
if
there's
a
plan
B,
which
is
to
get
the
provincial
government
to
put
a
stop
to
what's
going
on
there
until
we
can
get
our
infrastructure
in
place.
That
may
sound
like
a
Hail
Mary.
But
frankly,
everything
in
front
of
us
is
kind
of
a
Hail.
Mary
were
worse
effectively
using
a
tool
that
we
almost
never
use,
which
is
the
section
26
application
with
planning
advice.
That's
on
the
nature!
C
You
know
that
this
is
what
we
are
seeing
us
doing.
Here
is
essentially
saying
to
the
the
new
minister
municipal
affairs.
There's
this
mess
here.
You
have
to
step
up
and
fix
it
and
I'm
not
completely
confident
about
that.
I.
Don't
think
that
this
government
is
putting
the
issues
of
Midtown
Toronto
front
and
center
on
its
agenda,
but
you
can
make
that
happen.
It's
up
to
you.
Do
it.
B
S
M
B
M
Q
B
2
Eastern
Avenue
there
is
a.
There
is
a
motion
here
that
my
colleague
councillor
Fletcher,
has
worked
with
on
staff.
That's
in
front
of
us
I,
don't
even
know
she
has
to
speak.
I
will
move
it
on
her
behalf.
I
just
have
to
make
sure
the
question
is
I'm.
Moving
the
motion
on
my
colleagues
behalf
all
those
in
favor
opposed.
The
item
is
amended
all
those
in
favor
opposed
and
then
we
had
31.8
the
study
work
program.
There's
a
motion
that
I
had
staff
draft
with
me.