►
From YouTube: Planning and Growth Management Committee - April 5, 2018
Description
Planning and Growth Management Committee, meeting 28, April 5, 2018
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=13037
Meeting Navigation:
0:09:52 - Call to order
Agenda Items:
0:12:52 - PG28.1 - Second Units: Draft Official Plan Amendment (Ward All)
0:48:56 - PG28.2 - (10:00 AM) Amendment to the Sign By-law for Residential Apartment ("RA") Sign Districts (Ward All)
0:49:54 - PG28.3 - (10:00 AM) Request for an Area-Specific Amendment to the Sign By-law for One Third Party Electronic Wall Sign at 147 Queen Street East (Ward 28)
2:12:58 - PG28.4 - 2017 Toronto Employment Survey (Ward All)
0:20:22 - PG28.5 - 900 York Mills Road - Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment Applications - Preliminary Report (Ward 34)
2:34:24 - PG28.6 - Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB) Rules of Practice and Procedure Review Written Submissions (Ward All)
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
So
welcome
to
meeting
28
of
planning
and
growth
management
committee,
welcome
to
members
of
the
committee
to
the
other
members
of
counsel
and
attendance
and
to
members
of
the
public
for
those
in
the
room
with
us.
The
screen
at
the
back
of
the
room
provides
real-time
updates
concerning
where
we
are
in
the
agenda
and
what's
coming
up
next,
you
can
follow
the
agenda
and
debate
on
your
computer
tablet
or
smartphone
a
wwr
Anto
CA
for
slash
console.
B
First
of
all,
are
there
any
declarations
of
interest,
not
seeing
any
confirmation
of
the
minutes
moved
by
Councillor
perks,
all
those
in
favor
any
opposed,
that's
carried
councillor
Campbell
has
notified
me
in
advance
that
he
won't
be
able
to
attend.
The
meeting
today
believe
councillor
Fillion
is
probably
on
his
way.
I
know
it's
a
long
way
to
come
down
by
bike,
but
he'll
get
here
soon,
I'm
sure
it's
downhill.
This
way.
It's
uphill
going
home.
B
B
I'm
checking
my
list,
but
if
you'd
like
to
speak
to
it,
of
course,
I'll
hold
it
for
you
just
I.
Have
you
got
Oh
Jeff,
we'll
just
make
sure
you're
on
the
list
and
we'll
hold
it
for
you
to
hear
from
no
problem
item
number
two
amendment
to
the
sign:
bylaw
for
residential
apartments
are
a
sign
districts.
B
Twenty-Eight
point:
five:
nine
hundred
York
Mills
Road
official
plan
amendment
and
zoning
amendment
applications
preliminary
report.
There
are
some
speakers
on
that
and
28.6
local
appeal
body.
T,
lab
rules
of
practice
and
procedures,
written
submissions,
I
think
we'll
hold
that
down.
I
have
a
motion
just
to
add
to
that,
and
there
may
be
some
questions
from
my
colleagues
here
because
he
item
was
added
late
to
the
agenda.
B
B
C
Name
is
Jeff
Katella
I'm
speaking
here
today
on
behalf
of
myself
and
the
co-chair
Kevin
Macdonald
for
the
Federation
noron
of
residents,
associations
we're
looking
at
this
in
the
context
of
second
units.
It's
a
new
policy
being
introduced
and
I
understand
it's
a
preliminary
thing
and
it's
going
to
go
out
for
consultation.
That's
fine!
C
There
is
the
the
more
detailed,
more
specific
issue
around
lamely
housing.
There
was
a
consultation
last
week.
Presumably
that's
part
of
this.
It
is
sort
of
more
of
an
umbrella
policy,
and
that's
that's
fine,
but
we
suggesting
two
things.
One
is
that
there
could
be
some
more
clarification.
Sorry,
I'm
sort
of
rushing
here,
more
clarification
regarding
the
relationship
between
the
two
second
units
as
an
umbrella
concept
and
the
laneway
housing
as
a
specific
specific
instance
of
of
that
type
of
housing.
C
So
we
sort
of
wondering
why
the
city
hasn't
sort
of
clarified
this
a
little
more
and,
secondly,
a
comment
on
the
laneway
housing
which
is
coming
shortly.
We
understand
in
terms
of
legislation
that
it's
been
limited
in
scope
to
toronto
and
east
york.
We
feel
that
it's
a
planning
policy
that
has
potentially
has
application
across
the
whole
city
and
it
shouldn't
we're
not
free
amalgamation,
we're
post
amalgamation,
so
we
should
be
doing
things
in
a
consolidated
citywide
basis.
C
Secondly,
just
to
comment
on
the
on
the
on
on
the
policy
itself,
the
OPA
for
second
units-
and
that
is
that
we
will
concerned
that
on
first
blush,
it
appears
to
be
very
much
an
overall
policy
without
much
detail
or
much
constraints
on
it.
So
we've
we've,
really
an
important
aspect
for
residents
affected
by
any
of
these
new
typology
is
that
it
needs
to
fit
in
quote-unquote
with
the
neighborhood
in
which
it's
sitting
and
that's
not
been
specified
here.
So
we
would
strongly
suggest
an
amendment
to
the
policy
proposed
by
staff
where
they
say.
C
Second
units
will
be
encouraged
to
increase
the
supply
and
availability
of
rental
housing
across
the
city
and
within
neighborhoods.
Second
units
may
be
provided
with
within
or
ancillary
to
a
detached
or
semi-detached
house
or
townhouse.
We
would
suggest
adding
the
sentence.
Second
units
will
be
subject
to
policies.
Two
three
four
of
the
Official
Plan
in
similar
manner
to
that
of
the
primary
units
to
which
these
second
units
are
linked,
just
so
that
it's
clear
that
it's
part
of
that
bigger
picture.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
Not
members
of
the
committee
I,
don't
see
anyone
wishing
to
speak
committee
members
or
ask
questions.
Are
there
any
questions
of
staff
I'll
be
just
gonna
briefly
Carrie.
There
were
two
issues
brought
up
by
mr.
kettle.
This
is
going
for
public
Cattell,
public
consultation.
There's
two
issues
were
why
only
a
downtown
RTO,
the
old
city
of
Toronto
and
constraints,
so
the
laneway
housing
would
fit
in.
Can
you
tell
me
why
I
might
have
a
concern
with
that.
D
I,
don't
think
you
should
have
a
concern
with
that.
The
laneway
housing
is
specific
to
a
geographic
area
so
that
we
can
actually
test
the
application
of
the
zoning
within
that
geographic
area.
In
following
Council's
adoption
of
the
second
units
Opa
in
2019,
we
will
look
at
citywide
zoning
to
implement
the
Official
Plan
amendment
in
response
to
mr.
Koo
tells
comment
about
the
criteria.
D
That
is
a
valid
comment,
but
I
can
tell
committee
and
the
public
that
the
criteria
that
is
applicable
to
neighbourhoods,
which
is
contained
within
chapter
4,
will
still
be
applicable
to
laneway
in
2nd
units.
So
it's
not
separate.
The
plan
has
to
be
read
as
a
whole
and
those
policies
would
be
applicable.
B
D
Through
the
chair,
no
you're
not
missing
something.
Quite
simply.
The
plan
currently
permits
second
units
that
has
not
been
in
dispute,
but
when
the
province
amended
the
Planning
Act,
they
want
its
explicit
reference
to
the
terminology.
Second
units
in
the
Official
Plan,
so
we're
addressing
the
provincial
requested
conforming
with
the
with
the
Planning
Act
with
that,
but.
B
B
B
I'm
looking
is
Andrea
Henry
here,
I,
don't
see
at
the
moment
we
have
mr.
Allen
hi-c,
who
I
do
see.
So
mr.
Heisey,
please
come
forward
you've
been
here
before
you
have
five
minutes
to
speak.
The
clocks
are
up
at
the
corner.
We'll
ask
you
to
finish
within
that
and
if
there's
questions
we'll
come
back
to
you.
After
that,
we
both.
G
Been
through
the
drill,
my
name
is
Alan
hi-c
I
act
for
the
numbered
company
that
owns
900
York
Mills
Road,
where
the
Prince
West
the
Western
Prince
Hotel.
This
located.
It
is
an
a
unique
building.
It
was
designed
by
Ron,
Tom
famous
Canadian
architect,
it's
designated,
even
though
it
was
built
I,
think
in
the
70s,
and
my
client
is
proposing
what
I
like
to
call
a
parking
lot
conversion.
G
So
these
are
lands
that
are
designated
employment
and
the
proposal
is
to
put
new
a
new
employment
building,
an
office
building
and
residential
towers
on
the
parking
lots
to
fully
retain
the
hotel
and
the
unionized
jobs
that
are
located
there.
There's
I
think
300
unionized
jobs
in
the
hotel
and
to
expand
the
hotel,
which
I
think
is
an
unusual
thing
in
the
City
of
Toronto
right
now
to
get
a
hotel
to
expand.
G
So
the
building
is
desi
is
designated,
but
it
is
there's
no
heritage,
conservation,
easement
agreement
to
guarantee
its
continuance,
and
you
could
make
that
a
condition
of
an
approval.
If
that
was
something
that
was
important
to
the
city,
which
I
think
it
should
be.
So
this
property
is
quite
reminds
me
in
a
number
of
respects
to
the
Stirling
Castle
point
site,
which
I
worked
on
for
castle
point
with
councillor,
Bulow
and
I.
G
That's
having
trouble,
not
just
in
this
city
but
elsewhere
for
a
bunch
of
reasons,
Airbnb
and
a
luxury
hotel
in
a
suburban
setting
and
I
think
the
hotel
functions
as
a
community
center.
I
know
that
I
was
raised
in
Don,
Mills
and
I.
Remember
I!
Remember
going
there
for
community
events,
it
serves
as
a
focus
in
the
larger
area,
didn't
L
the
Golf
Course
community,
off
to
the
east,
etc.
I
would
one
thing
that's
special
about
this
site
as
well?
Is
that
it
is
isolated
from
the
employment
area
to
the
east.
G
It
doesn't
share
any
roads
with
any
other
employment
uses.
The
situs
would
be
serviced
entirely
off
of
York
Mills
Road,
like
it
is
currently
there'd,
be
an
internal
road
network
and
one
of
the
problems
in
some
employment
conversion
situations
is,
you
have
a
mixing
of
industrial
and
residential
traffic,
so
trucks
and
cars
this
site
doesn't
have
any
of
that.
G
All
of
the
traffic
for
this
entire
property
is
is
dealt
with
in
a
local
Road
network
that
doesn't
mix
with
the
employment
traffic
in
the
area
to
the
west,
which
I
think
makes
it
different
on
the
east
side
of
the
site.
Is
the
Don
Valley
we're
proposing
to
expand
public
ownership
of
lands
adjacent
to
the
valley?
There'll
be
a
public
park
added
in
that
location
and
the
frontage
is
the
frontage.
Pardon
me.
The
lot
boundary
on
the
rear
is
very
small
to
the
north
and
on
the
west.
G
The
westerly
property
boundary
is
the
rear
yards
of
employment
uses,
which
are
almost
entirely
offices
which
are
not
sensitive
uses
for
an
industrial
interface,
and
one
of
my
specialties
in
my
legal
practice
is
acting
for
industry
to
protect
them
from
residential
there's.
No
industry
we've
been
able
to
identify
to
the
west
of
this
site
that
would
constitute
a
class
1
or
class
2
industry
under
the
d6
guidelines.
G
G
Oh
sorry,
the
employment
area
to
the
West
has
is
a
very
successful
area,
but
it's
been
successful
in
my
respectful
submission
for
offices,
and
this
is
entirely
compatible
with
the
employment
area
to
the
west
and
I
urge
you
to
accept
the
recommendations
and
ask
staff
for
some
ideas
as
to
how
to
phase
this
development
so
that
you
get
a
guarantee
of
the
employment
as
part
of
the
rollout
of
the
residential
development.
Thank.
B
B
D
D
D
This
redevelopment
is
students
and
requests
residential
uses
that
are
not
allowed
on
employment
lands
and
could
have
a
negative
impact
on
nearby
ravines
I'm
concerned
that
the
negative
impacts
of
the
redevelopment
may
spill
over
to
the
rest
of
the
employment
area
and
the
ravine.
Employment
lands
are
an
important
part
of
Toronto's
economy.
They
allow
for
long-term
employment
uses
to
thrive
without
having
to
deal
with
residential
redevelopment
threats.
D
Approving
residential
uses
on
this
site
may
create
negative
consequences
for
the
rest
of
the
nearby
employment
lands.
I
have
also
concerns
about
potential
negative
impacts
on
the
nearby
ravine.
It's
really
redevelopment
would
significantly
off
alter
the
site,
natural
landscape
and
dramatically
densify
the
property.
This
could
have
a
negative
impact
on
their
by
wildlife,
which
may
include
several
species
of
endangered
bats.
D
Furthermore,
the
above-ground
parking
garages
that
are
in
the
redevelopment
calls
for
what
would
not
fit
well
with
the
surrounding
natural
landscape.
I
do
like
this
project
plans
for
additional
hotel
space.
However,
I
am
concerned
that
the
hotel
expansion
may
be
dropped
at
a
later
date.
I
would
like
to
ask
the
committee
to
consider
a
motion
ensuring
that
the
current
hotel
footprint
will
be
maintained
and
that
the
hotel
employment
will
not
be
negatively
impacted
as
a
result
of
such
redevelopment.
D
D
B
You
are
there
questions
of
the
deputies,
so
I
will
briefly.
You
understand
that
what
is
in
front
of
us
is
the
beginning
of
the
process,
so
it
does
talk
about
public
consultation
and
those
invitations
and
meetings
are
open
to
anyone
of
the
public.
So
when
they're
held
you
your
workers,
anyone
else
will
be
welcome
to
come.
I
don't
know
if
you're
aware
of
that,
because
they're,
not
private
meetings
well.
D
B
B
So
definitely
you
can
and
will
be
included
and
notices
will
go
to
you
and
I
would
think
that
the
same
would
be
your
opportunity
to
work
through
the
planning
staff
and
with
a
local
counselor
if
he
was
dealing
with
it,
because
he'll
be
at
I
would
expect
the
public
consultation
meetings
and
involved
with
them.
So
your
concerns
are
one
about
the
loss
of
the
employment
areas
and
the
second
one
is
to
try
to
be
sure
that
the
hotel
is
maintained
and
expanded
as
per
the
application.
Yes,.
D
B
B
H
I
Would
constitute
through
the
chair
that
would
constitute
a
conversion
requests
and
those
requests
are
managed
through
the
municipal
comprehensive
review,
which
is
undertaken
every
five
years
by
the
municipality,
so
we're
still
working
through
the
council's
decision
on
the
last
municipal,
comprehensive
review.
It's
at
currently
at
the
Ontario
missile
board,
now
known
as
the
L
Pat,
and
that
is
working
its
way
through
a
process.
The
next
hearing,
I
believe,
is
scheduled
for
the
fall
where
we're
working
through
a
number
of
conversion
requests
that
were
made
through
that
process
and
are
being
considered
through
that
body.
H
I
H
E
And
well
I
had
those
questions,
but
cancer
progressed
and
the
question
of
the
other
question
is:
how
would
you
be
able
to
respond
to
the
concern
that
you
know
we
might
change
this
to
a
mixed
use
and
then
the
applicant
turns
around
and
there's
no
hotel
anymore
on
the
site.
How
are
you
able
to
guarantee
that
there's
some
form
of
employment
still
on
this
site.
I
Other
than
having
some
sort
of
inclusionary
power,
which
would
allow
us,
through
the
zoning
to
mandate
it
in
that
fashion,
I'd,
say:
we've
struggled
to
ensure
over
the
years
that
that
is
something
that
takes
place.
We've
attempted
various
devices
over
the
years,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
that's
a
very
difficult
difficult
outcome
to
to
achieve
through
regulation
will.
I
B
I'll
get
to
you
in
a
moment
if
I
could
mr.
Lin
turn
so
a
major
issue
here
is
the
change
of
the
land
from
the
employment
uses
in
our
official
plan
policies.
That's
currently
in
front
of
the
board.
That's
part
of
this
request
am
I,
correct,
that's
correct!
Can
you
put
up
a
map
and
show
me
the
other
areas
neighboring
this
that
have
asked
for
the
same
thing
as
the
same
changes
and
have
appealed
these
uses
because
I'm
correct
there
were
a
number
of
other
sites
in
the
area
set
up
appeal.
The
yes.
I
We'll
put
that
map
up,
we
don't
have
a
precise
map
of
the
actual
appeals,
but,
like
mr.
McCrae
can
point
to
the
areas
in
the
in
the
surrounding
area,
where
we've
had
other
appeals
of
employment
lands.
This
is
on
the
west
side
of
the
ravine.
The
site
is
outlined
in
black.
Mr.
McCrae
can
point
out
where
we've
had
other
appeals,
so.
A
A
A
B
H
H
I
B
K
My
friend
from
unifor
says
that
that
the
applicant
hasn't
met
my
understanding
from
talking
to
the
solicitors
applicant.
They
actually
have
number
one
number
two.
My
office
has
not
received
any
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
letters
that
I've
received,
asking
to
meet
with
unifor
I'd
be
happy
to
meet
with
them,
so
just
that's
factual
Corrections.
K
It
is
in
the
middle
of
of
an
industrial
commercial
industrial
area
in
employment
lands
and
if,
if
they
put
in
an
application,
they
want
to
do
mixed,
they
want
to
do
a
commercial
tower
in
residential
town,
I've
told
them
if
you
put
in
one
square
foot
of
residential
I'm,
not
going
to
support
it.
Why?
Because
once
you
do
that,
you
threaten
the
entire
area
right
and
then
you
look
at
the
selective
site
which
went
to
the
board.
It
was
also
unemployment
lands.
There
was
a
decision
to
allow
for
residential
on
it.
K
So
that's
a
different,
that's
a
second
case,
then.
The
third
case
is
this
case,
and
this
is
why
I
said
each
one
should
be
decided
on
its
merits.
This
is
an
arrangement
where
the
local
councillor
has
told
them
that
it
is
important
that
you
keep
the
Prince
Hotel,
one
would
say,
might
have.
Some
historical
value
was
opened
up
by
the
Prince
of
Japan.
It's
been
there
for
a
long
long
time.
K
Also.
The
residents
like,
like
the
hotel
in
that
area,
local
council,
wants
to
see
that
the
local
councillor
also
wants
to
see
a
way
in
which
that
there,
if
you're,
going
to
change
the
land
use
for
part
of
the
land
that
it's
isolated
to
the
extent
that
it
doesn't
threaten
the
rest
of
the
employment
lands
and
it's
pushed
off
to
the
corner.
K
From
the
local
councillor
also,
it's
important
that
if
you
want
to
talk
about
employment
lands,
this
application,
if
it
were
completed,
which
I
my
friend
from
unifor
didn't
mention,
would
create
far
more
jobs,
far
more
jobs
on
this
property
than
their
existing.
So
if
you
actually
want
to
talk
about
employment,
because
that's
what
employment
lands
are
supposed
to
do,
this
isn't
that
positive,
plus
the
fact
that
you
know
in
terms
of
hotel
space,
we
need
more
hotel
space
in
the
city
right
now,
and
this
will
provide
that.
K
So
you
know
I
think
that
we're
we're
at
a
starting
point
today,
but
just
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
visibility
on
some
of
the
issues.
I
mean
the
applicant
to
the
extent
that
they
want
to
do
everything
properly.
Is
they
filed
a
complete
application,
plus
they've
already
met
with
the
residents?
All
they
were
affected
residents,
plus
with
the
local,
Community,
Association
and
I.
Think
net-net
they're
actually
not
opposed
to
this
application.
B
E
E
Stirling
and
I
think
one
thing
that
we
were
able
to
do
on
Stirling
that
I'm
hoping
to
that
can
be
done
in
here,
is
we
protected
the
jobs
and
we
maintain
the
employment
with
employment.
Designation
and
that's
that's
the
reason
for
my
question
and
asking:
how
can
you
ensure
that
the
hotel
is
still
going
to
be
part
of
it
that
it
that
this
is
gonna
be
at
the
end
of
the
day?
We
need
to
make
sure
that
that
is
part
of
this.
This
application,
if
anything,
is
going
to
be
done.
E
H
Mindful
of
should
this
piece
get
carved
off
from
the
employment
lands
and
in
all
future
employment
land
conversations
is
the
time
horizon.
We're
thinking
on
I
heard
some
remarks
from
the
applicants
solicitor
that
I
found
quite
troubling,
which
is
that
the
current
employment
use
in
these
employment
lands
is
mostly
office
and
mixed-use
is
compatible
with
office.
So
we
should
relax.
That's
not
the
right
way
to
think
about
employment
lands.
It's
too
short
a
time
scale.
The
fact
the
matter
is
the
one
thing
we
can't
manufacture.
H
New
in
Toronto
is
land
and
we
have
to
bank
these
lands
away
for
employment
uses
not
for
five
years
or
ten
years,
but
for
25
years
and
50
in
25
or
50
years
from
now,
we
wit
may
well
find
ourselves
in
a
position
where
we
need
light
and
medium
manufacturing
take
place
within
the
City
of
Toronto
I,
actually
think
economically,
that's
healthier
than
not
having
any
of
that
done
here.
So
we
shouldn't
be
thinking
in
terms
of
what
the
current
and
short-term
employment
uses
on
this
site
might
be.
H
We
should
be
thinking
about
keeping
land
safe
for
employment,
uses
that
we're
not
currently
imagining
and
residential
may
not
be
compatible
with
those
very
long
term.
Employment
needs,
so
you
know
I.
You
know
me
I'm,
dug
in
on
protecting
these
scarce
employment
lands
and
making
sure
that
we
don't
put
residential
up
against
them
because
we
are,
we
are
for
shortening
our
ability
to
be
economically
flexible
in
the
longer
term.
B
Thank
you.
So
we
have
the
recommendations
here:
I'm
going
to
move
an
additional
recommendation
on
behalf
of
the
local
councillor
to
explain
to
expand
the
notification
area,
so
I
would
amend
to
notice
for
the
community
consultation
meeting,
be
given
to
all
landowners
or
residents
with
a
120
metres
of
the
site
and
to
all
property
owners.
Residents
and
tenants
of
iron
bell.
Crescent
Bush,
Barry,
Drive
and
civic
Silverdale
Crescent,
with
any
additional
mailing
cost
to
be
born.
I
would
just
move
with
any
additional
costs.
B
Cost
be
borne
by
the
applicant
and
with
that
I
think
we
can
go
off
to
public
consultation.
I
know
that
our
staff
will
be
very
strongly
defending
the
employment
policies
in
the
area.
This
area
has
more
than
just
offices.
This
has
many
many
small
businesses
in
their
own
units
within
the
employment
area
that
is
to
the
west
and
the
north
of
here,
as
well
as
to
the
west
of
the
south
of
here.
B
If
you
drive
through
there
and
I,
think
that
matter
of
whether
or
not
it
will
be
employment
uses
will
be
part
of
the
appeal
of
two
three
one
and
we'll
see
what
happens
after
that.
But
public
consultation
is
a
good
thing.
The
opportunity
to
talk
is
that
and
that's
we're
moving,
often
all
in
favor
of
the
amendment
and
the
oppose.
That's
carried
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
as
amended.
They
posed
that's
carried.
Thank
you.
B
So
item
number
two
was
set
for
ten
o'clock
amendment
to
the
signed
by
law
for
residential
apartment
sign
districts:
I,
don't
have
any
speakers
registered.
Was
there
anyone
here
that
did
come
to
speak
to
it,
I
don't
number
two:
does
the
clerk
have
well
I'm
getting
these
surprises
today?
I
have
none
on
my
list.
So
item
number
two
or
item
number
three:
this
is
the
sign
bylaw
for
residential
apartments.
B
Okay,
so
you're
not
registered
for
two
you're
registered
for
three.
Yes,
so
nobody
here
for
item
number
two,
that's
fine,
we'll
come
into
committee.
Are
there
any
questions
of
staff?
Are
there
any
speakers?
The
motion
moved
by
Councillor?
Did
she
a
no
the
staff
recommendations,
all
those
in
favor
any
opposed?
That's
carried
item
number
three
request
for
an
area
specific
amendment
of
the
sign
bylaw
for
one
third
party,
electronic,
we'll
all
sign
at
1:47,
Queen,
Street
East.
L
Good
morning
Thank
You
mr.
chair
and
through
you,
what
we're
here
to
talk
about
is
the
son
bylaw
amendment
application
for
an
electronic
Wallace
on
at
1:47
Queen
Street
East,
just
the
Fred
Victor
Center,
it's
at
the
corner
of
Queen,
Street
and
Jarvis.
This
is
a
diagram
from
the
staff
report
showing
the
approximate
location
of
the
sign
and
its
relationship
to
the
moss
Park
Armory.
L
So
the
sign
will
be
right
there,
where
the
star
is
the
moss
Park
Armory
is
directly
north
and
Moss.
Park
is
to
the
north
east
of
the
Sun.
So
the
proposal
is
for
an
electronic
sign
on
the
Fred
Victor
Center.
This
is
just
a
diagram
of
showing
figure
two
showing
what
is
proposed.
This
would
be
an
electronic
sign
and
the
diagram
right
next
to
it
is
showing
what
is
permitted
in
the
sign
bylaw.
So
the
sign
bylaw
does
permit
third
party
signs
at
the
location,
but
it
doesn't
permit
electronic
wall
signs.
So
that's
that's.
L
That
is
the
impetus
for
the
application
as
well.
There
are
a
number
of
sign
removals
that
are
contemplated
and
there
have
been
some
changes
to
those
proposals,
just
in
the
past
day,
which
I'll
go
over
as
well.
So
initially
the
proposal
staff
had
a
lot
of
concerns
about
it
and
the
potential
impacts
that
it
could
have
on
surrounding
areas.
L
The
sign
was
to
be
pointed
or
directed
due
north
and
it's
in
proximity
to
Moss
park
to
a
residential
building
up
along
shooter
Street,
as
well
as
the
Salvation
Army,
the
Harbor
Light
Center,
which
also
has
residential
uses
in
it,
as
well
as
its
proximity
to
Moss,
Park
armory
itself,
so
be
very
close.
The
applicant
did
additionally
also
propose
a
number
of
sign
removals.
L
However,
its
staffs
opinion
that
these
five
signs
are
unrelated
to
the
sign
in
question
and
really
were
we're
not
of
any
benefit
to
the
application
at
1:47
Queen
Street.
They
didn't
do
anything
to
mitigate
its
impacts
or
make
the
sign
simply
a
better
sign
for
the
community
or
have
a
net
benefit
for
the
community.
L
There
are
three
signs
that
are
now
proposed
to
be
removed
in
the
immediate
area
that
our
grandfathered
signs,
none
of
them
are
permitted,
signed
types
for
the
area.
In
fact,
two
of
them
are
roof
signs
and
are
outright
prohibited,
but
are
grandfathered
and
can
remain
in
place
indefinitely.
That
would
be
these
two
signs
here
at
the
corner
of
Richmond
and
Jarvis
Street.
The
third
sign
is
also
directly
across
from
the
moss
Park
armory
and
it's
a
ground
sign
and
ground
signs
are
not
a
permitted
sign
type
in
see
our
sign
districts.
L
None
of
these
signs
are
digital.
They
are
all
static
signs,
so
that
that
is
a
key
distinction.
Why
that
is
seen
as
a
benefit,
particularly
with
the
two
roof
signs
is
where
they're
located
now
at
Queen
and
Jarvis.
Now
they
are
grandfathered,
they
can
stay
there
in
perpetuity
currently
in
perpetuity
is
that
they
are
very
close
to
residential
buildings.
One
is
approximately
30
meters
away
and
visible
from
this
residential
building.
The
other
one
is
approximately
36
meters
away
and
shining
into
this
building
desert
again.
L
This
is
just
the
intersection
of
Jarvis
Street
and
Queen
Street
there.
It
also
this
sign
because
of
its
height
its
it's
quite
high.
It
would
be
about
five
stories
above
the
street.
It's
visible
from
almost
from
Dundas
Street,
looking
south.
It
actually
has
more
visibility,
it
seems
strange,
but
it
actually
has
more
visibility
than
the
sign
proposed
at
one
forty
one,
forty
seven
Queen
Street,
so
removing
these
signs
is
a
benefit
to
the
community
as
well.
L
L
Some
other
changes
to
the
proposal
that
came
was
a
reduction
in
the
size
of
the
sign
and
a
reduction
in
the
height
of
the
sign.
Now
it's
marginal
I
apologize,
that's
a
crude
diagram,
but
that
shows
the
original
what
was
proposed
and
then
the
revised
arrived
so
and
it
includes
the
bottom-
will
be
first
party
content
as
well
to
advertise
and
identify
the
Fred
Victor
Center.
The
remainder
of
it
would
be
used
for
advertising
purposes
and
the
existing
sign
would
be
removed
there.
There's
currently
and
sign
identifying
the
Fred
Victor
Center.
L
It
would
be
removed
and
integrated
into
the
Sun.
So
having
only
one
sign
on
the
property.
These
applicant
has
also
agreed
to
angle
the
sign
so
that
it
will
be
pointed
away
from
lost
park,
reducing
its
impacts
there,
as
well
as
installing
shielding
on
the
sign.
So
I
apologize
a
diagram
here
to
show
that
it's
difficult
to
see.
L
I
do
apologize
for
that,
but
the
sign
will
be
on
a
slight
angle
now
and
we'll
have
shielding
so
that
light
from
the
sign
won't
be
visible
from
Moss
Park
and
the
impact
of
the
sign
on
the
armory
will
be
reduced.
The
applicant
has
also
agreed
to
turn
off
the
sign
on
November
11th.
Is
they
have
an
annual
Remembrance
Day
ceremonies
there
as
well?
So
that
is
the
revised
proposal.
L
The
brightness
has
also
been
proposed
to
be
reduced
by
about
30
percent
from
a
maximum
of
300
nits
right
and
it's
down
to
200
and
it's
brightness
and
the
sign
the
the
the
advertising
portion
of
the
sign
will
only
be
permitted
to
operate
from
7:00
a.m.
until
11
p.m.
at
night.
So
that
is
largely
it
and
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions.
I
apologize,
I
wasn't
we're.
M
B
Yourself
and
others
we're
just
from
are
we're
dealing
with
the
sign
bylaw,
the
appropriateness
of
the
sign
in
the
area
and
the
impacts
of
that
we're
not
dealing
with
any
revenue
sources
that
might
be
going
to,
because
that's
not
a
matter
of
our
bylaws.
So
that's
not
consideration
that
the
committee
should
be
taking
into
account
here,
although
we
are
aware
the
fact
that
it's
on
a
mission-
and
there
is
some
revenue
sharing
for
it.
Oh,
you
said.
M
N
N
We
and
I
and
Justin
we're
very
excited
and
proud
actually
of
the
partnership
with
the
Fred
Victor
and
the
benefit
that
the
sign
can
provide.
My
colleague
Justin
will
speak
to
more
of
the
specifics
I
at
this
time,
we'd
like
to
speak
to
some
adjustments
made
yesterday
and
at
the
behest
of
the
mayor's
office,
we
worked
with
the
sign
bylaw
staff
to
modify
the
project.
N
I
will
go
through
this
quickly.
It
was
discovered
by
staff,
but
to
improve
their
project.
We
agreed
to
remove
two
roof
signs
in
a
ground
side
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
Fred
Victor,
to
reduce
the
height,
to
reduce
the
size
by
the
13%
to
add
a
locking
shield
to
substantially
eliminate
the
light
trespassed
in
moss
park
to
adjust
the
maximun
it
at
night
to
two
hundred
versus
the
bylaw
per
minute
of
300
and
then
on
Remembrance
Day,
recognizing
our
neighbor
at
Moss
park.
N
We
will
either
turn
it
off
or
we
can
dedicate
it
to
appropriate
messaging
for
the
day
recognizing
our
and
honoring
our
veterans
in
preparation.
For
today
we
reached
out
to
the
community-
and
here
you
can
see
some
letters
of
support
from
local
Ward
28
residents,
Denise
Cooney,
positive
partnerships
with
private
enterprises
like
this
help
and
sherrod
Victor,
is
able
to
generate
and
have
access
to
resources
required.
N
Q
I
L
G
B
M
My
name
is
Justin
Dempsey
and
I
represent
OUTFRONT
media
I'm
here
to
ask
for
your
support
for
the
proposed
application
for
the
digital
signage
had
Fred
Victor's
facility
at
145,
Greene
Street
East.
This
project
has
taken
place
as
a
partnership
between
a
front
median
fred
victor,
which
is
leading,
which
is
a
leading
private,
not-for-profit
whose
mission
it
is
to
battle
and
end
homelessness.
M
Poverty
in
the
city
of
toronto
heard
victor
operates,
18
different
sites
across
the
GTA
GTA,
providing
affordable
housing,
transitional
housing,
emergency
shelter,
food
access,
job
training
and
counseling,
and
community
mental
health,
outreach
and
health
information
to
those
experiencing
homelessness.
These
programs
and
services
are
utilized
by
over
2,000
people
every
day,
making
fred
victor
an
integral
part
of
the
toronto
community.
M
The
digital
signage
being
proposed
would
be
located
on
the
southeast
corner
of
the
Queen
Street
East
and
drivers,
the
intersection
the
sign
itself
would
face
north
toward
traffic
traveling
southbound
on
Jarvis.
There
are
not
a
lot
of
residential
buildings
in
the
area
that
would
have
exposure
directly
towards
the
signage.
Thus,
there
would
be
minimal
opportunity
for
any
light,
trespass
into
units
of
local
residents.
In
fact,
the
local
or
the
sign
itself
faces
onto
Millett
our
military
armory
facility,
which
has
Nova,
said
our
residential
use
whatsoever.
M
Regarding
illumination,
the
sign
will
be
turned
off
between
the
hours
of
11:00
p.m.
and
7:00
a.m.
in
line
with
the
sign
by
law.
Moreover,
the
illumination
will
be
dimmed
at
sunset
to
be
no
more
than
200
minutes.
This
would
be
comparable
to
the
third-party
signage
that
the
city
operates
on
its
public
bus
transit
shelters
located
throughout
numerous
neighborhoods
within
the
GTA.
As
you
know,
the
sign
faces
only
north
onto
Jarvis
Street
residential
units
lying
north
of
the
sign
really
only
begins
north
of
shooter.
M
Street
above
is
a
picture
of
the
prospective
location
on
the
signage
of
the
of
the
signage
denoted
by
or
denote
it
the
green
arrow
taken
from
the
Java
Street
and
shooter
Street
intersection.
As
you
can
see,
the
wall
space
where
the
sign
would
be
located
is
about
as
a
relatively
small
dot
in
the
distant
background.
We
strongly
believe
that,
because
of
the
significant
distance,
there
would
be
little
to
no
impact
on
the
residential
units
in
the
area,
especially
with
the
military
armories
and
her
retreat.
M
Our
heavy
tree
scape,
acting
as
a
physical
barrier
you
can
see
here,
is
a
picture
of
what
the
proposed
digital
signage
will
look
like
once
installed.
The
dimensions
of
the
sign
are
adjusted,
as
my
colleague
Vishal
has
pointed
out.
The
signage
will
have
both
the
first
party
and
third
party
content
component.
The
top
portion
of
the
signage
seen
here
in
blue
will
rotate
between
six
different
static
images
or
advertising
positions,
each
lasting
ten
seconds
and
duration,
which
is
in
accordance
with
the
sign
by
law.
M
Five
of
the
six
advertising
positions
will
be
designated
for
third-party
advertising.
Well,
one
of
the
six
positions
will
be
permanently
designated
for
use
by
Fred
Victor.
A
large
portion
of
the
revenue
derived
from
the
third
party
advertising
will
be
funneled
directly
back.
In
effect,
our
friend
Victor,
in
the
form
of
rent
through
the
revenue
share
agreement
held
between
Fred
Victor
and
their
media
partner,
a
front
media.
This
this
agreement
allows
for
approximately
a
50/50
sheriff
and
net
proceeds.
M
Moreover,
a
front
media
has
agreed
to
operate.
The
signage
has
Fred
Victor's
media
partner
for
the
next
15
year
period,
which
means
that
this
will
be
a
sustainable
and
long
lasting
revenue
tool
for
Fred
Victor
for
many
years
to
come.
This
will
translate
into
over
a
hundred
and
ten
thousand
meals
over
thirty
six
thousand
days
that
combined
shelter
and
counseling
services
for
those
in
need.
M
Moreover,
with
great
Victor's
allocated
time
on
the
digital
display,
they
will
be
able
to
show
community
at
reach
messaging
for
every
minute
of
every
day
during
operational
hours
of
the
science
to
ten
seconds
every
minute.
This
will
act
as
an
extremely
important
communications
messaging
tool
in
supporting
the
mission
to
battle
to
battling
homelessness
and
poverty
in
the
neighborhood.
M
Firstly,
they
will
be
able
to
utilize
the
content
space
to
help
with
their
numerous
fundraising
activities,
which
will
translate
into
more
funding
for
the
federal
organization
and,
secondly,
Fred
Victor
will
be
able
to
use
the
content
to
garner
more
volunteer
support
from
the
neighborhood.
This
will
encourage
people
to
come
together
as
a
community
and
a
tackle
the
issue,
the
shew
of
homelessness
as
a
collective.
Finally,
Fred
Victor
will
be
able
to
display
content,
to
spread
awareness
about
the
topic
of
homelessness
and
to
break
down
stereotypes
and
misconceptions
surrounding
issue.
M
Finally,
the
bottom
four
feet
of
the
sign
will
be
permanently
used
as
a
digital
nameplate,
certainly
for
Victor
branding.
This
would
allow
for
Victor
to
landmark
the
facility
that
will
guide
those
in
need,
who
seek
the
essential
and
sometimes
emergency
services
that
fit
Victor,
provides
it
to
the
neighborhood.
Unlike
the
upper
portion
of
the
board,
we're
asking
at
that
bottom.
Smaller
digital
nameplate
be
allowed
to
have
24
hours
of
illumination,
as
people
seek
for
Victor
services
both
during
day
and
night
are.
M
B
B
B
M
B
B
B
B
B
Next.
We
have
Murray
the
Cormac
from
red
victor
mission.
Are
we
here
I'm
sorry,
I
have
markcaswell
on
my
list.
Mark
can
come
up
and
speak
to
us
mark.
You
are
next
Murray
you're,
not
gonna,
be
speaking.
Okay,
then,
after
that
I
have
Carol
mark
Marcus
little
and
Dennis
Glasgow
mark
you
have
your
five
minutes
hear
from
you
great.
A
Well,
thank
you
good
morning.
Just
noting
the
the
chairs
comments
earlier
and
given
what
Justin
has
just
outlined
to
the
committee,
my
deputation
fact
is
gonna
be
quite
short:
you're,
not
considering
revenue,
so
I'll
I'll.
Leave.
That
aside,
I
will
just
note
briefly
that
you
know
these
aren't
easy
days
for
not-for-profit
organizations.
Governments
are
fiscally
constrained
and
we're
looking
for
opportunities
to
sort
of
boost
our
fiscal
independence
and
and
be
a
little
entrepreneurial.
A
So
I
would
say
that
fits
in
this
in
that
vein
and
the
revenues
aren't
inconsequential
and
could
be
used
to
support
services
in
Moss
park,
as
well
as
upkeep
of
the
building
and
some
sort
of
enhancement
or
beautification
projects.
So
that's
the
first
point
I'd
make
you
know.
The
second
is
just
as
a
media
and
communications
tool.
A
I
think
it's
something
that
could
be
used
to
really
good
effect,
not
just
for
Fred
Victor
services
and
to
promote
the
work
we
do,
but
more
so
just
to
promote
the
issue
of
homelessness
and
related
issues
in
Toronto,
and
particularly
the
work
of
the
sector,
the
Toronto
Alliance
to
End,
Homelessness
and
indeed
the
City
of
Toronto.
In
terms
of
the
alignment,
that's
developing
around
trying
to
end
homelessness
in
this
city,
so
I
think
there's
there's
a
real
pup,
there's
a
public
value
there.
A
B
You
mark
I,
don't
know
if
there's
any
questions
from
my
colleagues
I
don't
see,
we
are
aware
of
the
revenue
sharing.
We
know
that
we
know
that
of
the
good
work
that
you
do
and
how
important
fundraising
is,
but
we're
here
to
also
look
at
what
is
permitted
and
not
permitted
under
the
regulations
that
councils
adopted
absolutely.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming.
Thank
You
Carol
mark.
B
B
O
O
I
did
humanitarian
aid
work
I
moved
back
into
the
area
on
to
the
residence
I
actually
had
no
objections
to
Fred
Victor,
putting
up
a
sign
because
they
are
our
neighbors
I've
reached
out
to
mark
10
years
ago
and
quite
recently,
never
returned
my
phone
calls,
but
despite
that,
I
was
actually
shocked
to
find
out
that
it
was
going
to
be
an
electronic
sign,
and
one
of
the
issues
with
that
is
is
that
it
is
a
distraction.
I
know
that
the
city
has
been
working
on
vision,
zero.
O
We
have
had
lot
of
fatalities
in
the
city.
There
was
a
young
woman
that
was
killed
by
a
dump
truck
on
that
very
corner.
Now
we're
gonna
have
an
electronic
sign
that
is
actually
going
to
be
driver.
Distraction
I,
don't
know
if
you've
been
driving
down
Jarvis,
but
it
is
very
busy
at
times,
probably
due
to
the
construction
that's
happening.
We
have
the
closure
of
King
Street
with
the
pilot
project,
and
so
a
lot
of
the
traffic
has
gone
onto
Queen
Street.
We
also
have
the
st.
O
Lawrence
Market,
the
new
North
Market,
which
is
a
farmers
market
which
is
going
to
be
starting
construction.
That
is
also
going
to
be
tying
up,
Jarvis
Street
and
also
causing
issues
with
traffic
going
south.
So
what
happens
is
that
you
have
people
that
are
crossing
that
major
street,
which
is
at
Jarvis
and
Queen.
I
am
an
able-bodied
person
and
I
could
hardly
make
it
across
the
street.
At
the
beginning
of
the
sign
is
change
without
narrowly
missing
the
light
being
changed.
There
are
people
with
wheelchairs
and
there
are
now
people
with
walkers.
O
The
other
addition
that's
come
on
is
now
that
we
have
an
unsupervised
injection
site
at
Moss
Park,
which
has
brought
in
new
amounts
of
people
that
are
dealing
and
actually
using
the
site
and
also
a
supervised
one
inside
Fred
Victor.
So,
according
to
public
knowledge,
which
was
March
the
9th
in
the
Waterloo
record,
it
basically
mentioned
that
within
that
period
of
six
months
they
treated
five
thousand
four
hundred
and
thirty
one
people
alone
just
coming
into
the
unsupervised
injection
site.
O
These
are
people
that
are
using
drugs,
I,
don't
know
whether
they're
hanging
around
the
street
I
have
find
people
in
the
back
of
our
alley.
So
what
happens?
Is
you
have
people
that
are
mentally
ill
people
that
need
support
and
they're
wandering
around
the
streets?
They're,
not
obeying
traffic
signs
and
they're
crossing
illegally?
So
now,
you're
gonna
have
a
huge
distraction
with
an
electronic
sign
and
that
actually
poses
pedestrian
safety.
So
that's
one
of
the
issues
I
noticed
that
they
had
a
video
and
they
said
that
they
had
actually
approached.
O
I
have
lived
in
that
neighborhood
for
15
years.
I
actually
was
on
the
prior
executive
of
our
BIA.
I
did
not
recognize
anybody,
except
for
one
business
owner,
and
that
happened
to
be
my
tenant,
which
I
spoke
to
they
owned
the
skateboard
shop
I
mentioned
into
the
other
day
that
I
would
was
going
to
be
here
and
that
it
was
an
electronic
sign.
I
think
that
the
numbers
of
the
letters
that
were
submitted
to
the
letter
that
went
out
initially
was
that
neighbors
did
not
realize
it
was
an
electronic
advertising
sign.
O
There
was
no
objection
to
having
a
sign
that
it
was
to
identify
Fred,
Victor
I,
think
the
issue
is
that
it
was
a
moving
electronic
sign
that
poses
a
danger
to
people
that
are
living
there,
whether
they're
walking
through
or
were
there
residents
or
whether
that
people
are
using
the
facilities
there,
so
that
they
are
actually
would
be
maybe
hit
by
a
car
people
that
are
distracted.
There
is
also
no
bicycle
lane
on
that
street
on
Queen
Street.
O
So
if
there
was
a
driver
that
actually
got
distracted
by
the
sign,
that
was
ever-changing,
what
would
happen
is
that
they
would
veer
into
the
traffic
hitting
people
that
are
biking
or
else
people
that
are
actually
trying
to
get
out
of
the
way
of
a
truck
so
base.
So
basically
I
want
people
to
think
that
it.
You
know
we
have
to
be
mindful
for
the
future,
because
it's
going
to
change
the
aesthetic
look
of
the
street
there's
a
lot
of
buildings
that
are
happening
and
being
planned
in
the
area.
O
So
a
huge
sign
like
that
that
is
electronic
and
moving,
could
set
the
precedent
for
that
whole
whole
area
of
downtown
to
be
changed.
It's
much
cheaper
to
put
up
that
sign
there
than
at
Yonge
and
Dundas,
but
how
does
it
affect
our
neighborhood,
our
neighbors,
our
businesses
and
tourists
that
come
in
where
we
actually
are
filtered
with
a
lot
of
electronic
signs?
So
thank
you
for
your
time
and
I
want
you
to
consider
that,
basically,
that
the
residents
that
have
written
in
and
that
I
made
their
concerns.
They
do
not
want
this
sign
there.
B
O
Sense
that
there
might
have
been
because
I
one
of
the
neighbors,
who
is
a
physician,
sent
me
a
link
to
say
that
there
was
some
information
about
a
newspaper
article.
But
I
said
you
know
what
I
read
the
article.
It
doesn't
tell
everything
and
no
I
did
not
was
aware
of
that
article
or
of
the
petition
initially
and
I'm,
actually
not
surprised
that
nobody
in
the
area
signed
that
petition,
because,
as
with
the
video,
only
one
business
owner-
and
that
was
my
tenant
was
on
there.
That
I
could
actually
verify.
Oh.
B
If
I
read
you
part
of
the
survey
but
I'm
gonna
change
the
name
from
vet
Fred
Victor
to
something
else,
we
the
undersigned
support,
OUTFRONT
media
partnering
with
Eva's
initiatives
you
shelter
to
build
a
digital
advertising
display
and
I
put
the
dimensions
on
it
and
I
go.
This
project
will
provide
much
needed
revenue
to
support
the
essential
services
of
Eva's
initiatives.
You
shelter
as
it
battles
to
provide
homelessness
in
the
community
and
will
be
pivotal
communication
tool
for
them.
Would
you
sign
that
No.
O
B
O
Worked
in
humanitarian
aid
around
the
world,
opening
the
first
rose
library
in
Afghanistan
building
homes
in
native
reserves,
so
I'm
quite
aware
of
homelessness
in
Toronto
and
I
have
been
doing
things
on
a
grassroots
level.
So
it
is
important,
but
also
you
have
to
think
of
the
bigger
impact
on
the
residents
that
live
in
the
area
and
people
that
frequent
the
area
and
also
the
face
of
Toronto
and
how
that
changes,
because
if
that
by
law
was
changed,
it
would
set
a
precedent.
O
S
Thank
you
good
morning,
I'm
Marcus
little
I'm
on
the
board
of
the
st.
Lawrence
Neighborhood
Association.
We
are
Queen
Street
down
to
the
railway
tracks,
Yonge
Street
to
Parliament,
so
this
is
on
our
northern
edge.
I
have
had
to
adjust
my
talk
as
a
result
of
some
of
the
proposed
changes,
but
basically
our
neighborhood
is
not
supportive
of
third
party
signs
in
our
neighborhood
and,
as
we've
had
a
transition
from
a
warehouse
light
industry
to
a
mixed
neighborhood.
We've
had
the
pleasure
to
see
the
billboards
of
the
50s
and
60s
disappear.
S
S
Now,
normally
I
come
and
talk
about
billboards
to
the
sign,
billboard.
Sorry,
the
billboard,
bylaw
variance
group,
how
many
to
speak
to
you.
People
is
abnormal,
and
the
reason
is
that
if
you
look
at
appendix
I
think
it's
Appendix
B
provided
by
staff,
there
are
like
seven
variances
to
the
bylaws
and
those
aren't
minor
variances.
Those
are
major.
My
notes
for
the
size
of
that
was
that
it's
a
that
sign
is
14
times
larger
than
proposed.
S
Now,
they've
shrunk,
it
down
so
I'm,
guessing
it's
only
10
times
larger
than
what
is
allowed,
so
you've
got
a
real
issue
there
and
down
the
road.
If
you
approve
this,
it
opens
up
for
future
changes,
but
it's
just
like
our
zoning
bylaws.
It
just
opens
them
up
to
perpetual
change
and
I
think
that
would
be
very
detrimental
to
the
community.
Now,
who
are
they?
It
was
the
audience
of
this
sign.
S
This
large
sign
the
apartment
building
across
just
north
of
the
Armory's,
and
now
that
they've
shifted
the
sign
to
face
more
to
the
north
west,
the
Salvation
Army
building,
half
a
block
up
is
going
to
be
further
impacted,
plus
anything
developed
on
the
northwest
corner
of
that
building.
The
story
of
that
site
will
be
probably
residential
and
they
will
have
a
sign
very
close
to
future
development.
S
S
S
Think
the
st.
Lawrence
neighborhood
is
one
of
the
the
tourist
destinations
along
with
the
distillery
in
the
south
south
part
of
the
city,
and
this
this
is
a
sorry,
Queen
and
Jarvis
is
gateway
into
our
neighborhood
and
putting
a
great
big
electronic
sign.
It's
been
a
switch
every
10
seconds.
Every
10
sec
when
bling-bling
we're
gonna
get,
is
not
a
good
way
to
enter
our
neighborhood.
So
I
would
appreciate
it
if
you
would
turn
this
one
down.
Thank
you
any
questions.
B
I
Thank
You
mr.
chairman
and
committee
members
for
listening
to
us
today,
I
just
I,
wanted
to
also
thank
the
the
staff
roto
staff
report.
Turning
this
application
down,
it
was
it's.
They
recognized
that
it
exceeded
the
bylaw
requirements
by
a
lot
and
it
didn't
fit
into
the
neighborhood
when
I,
when
I
I
haven't
reviewed
the
new
bylaws
sizes
and
the
the
signs
that
are
being
taken
down.
But
as
Marcus
said,
the
whole
area
is
changing
and
the
signs
that
are
on
these
rooftops
right
now
may
not
be
there
in
a
few
years
anyway.
I
So
we're
talking
about
a
sign,
that's
going
to
be
there
at
least
15
years
or
longer,
and
it's
electronic
and
it's
a
third
party
sign
and
I
wrote
an
email
to
Consulate
oisi,
with
a
copy
to
the
community
secretary
and
I,
laid
out
basically
three
reasons
that
I
felt
I
felt
that
the
sign
was
inconsistent
with
the
involving
mixed-use
downtown
area.
Many
new
residential
units
are
under
construction.
I
The
building
is
modest
and
architecture
and
small
in
scale
which
it's
going
to
be
overwhelmed
by
the
proposed
illuminated
sign
now
I'm.
Looking
at
the
original
sign
this
one's
a
bit
smaller,
the
sign
will
cover
three
to
five
floors
immediately
adjacent
to
Jireh
Street.
The
lighting
and
messaging
from
the
sign
is
also
potentially
a
distraction
to
drivers
in
the
area
already
difficult
for
pedestrians,
as
Carol
mentioned.
Actually,
my
third
point:
when
I
wrote
this
email
to
counselor
Troi's
II
Shawn
Micallef
had
an
opinion
column
in
the
star
on
February
18th.
I
Regarding
a
new
downtown
homeless,
shelter
referenced,
he
referenced
a
letter
written
by
members
of
Toronto's
interfaith
coalition
to
fight
homelessness.
Mr.
Micallef
quoted
the
faith
members
in
support
of
the
homeless
shelter.
This
new
approach
will
see
many
more
shelters
like
this
one
at
3:48
Davenport
in
every
Ward
throughout
Toronto.
They
will
be
part
of
the
community.
They
were
built
in
not
apart
from
them,
and
I
feel
that
this
sign
sets
this
building
apart
from
our
community,
it
doesn't
fit
in.
I
So
I
I
just
wanted
to
really
everybody
has
Carol
and
and
Marcus
were
articulated
a
lot
of
our
concerns,
but
I
I
really
wanted
to
tell
you
how
we
do
support
homeless
facilities
in
our
neighborhood.
My
building
is
a
condominium
and
we
donate
money.
We
make
from
film
shoots
to
Dickson
Hall
in
the
thousands
of
dollars,
I
used
to
run
marathons.
We
donated
thousands
of
dollars
to
breakfast
programs,
and
so
we
are
compassionate
community.
I
B
B
I
I
L
I
Seconds
at
her
intersection
and
throughout
the
city,
but
that
would
be
a
reasonable
proposal,
but
beyond
that
it
would
strictly
be
about
the
application,
the
strict
application
of
the
law.
The
police
would
have
to
stop
people
from
riding
their
bikes
on
sidewalks,
because
that's
also
against
the
law,
but
the
compassionate
application
of
the
law
is
what
should
exist.
I'm
saying
it's
survival
of
the
fittest
in
this
city
is
very
difficult
for
the
poor
to
get
by
I'm
saying
so
many
people
begging
for
change
on
the
street.
I
B
B
Q
L
The
bylaw
does
have
requirements
3
3
mr.
chair,
the
bylaw
does
have
requirements
that
signs
be
sent
back
a
certain
distance
from
intersections.
In
this
case
it
wouldn't
meet
that
requirement.
The
purpose
behind
that
requirement
is
so
that
the
sign
doesn't
interfere
with
the
traffic
light
so
that
it's
not
behind
or
obstructing
a
view
of
the
traffic
light.
In
this
case,
because
of
the
height
of
the
sign
at
the
intersection,
it
will
clear
the
traffic
lights.
L
Q
L
Q
In
terms
of
the
digital
sign,
there
is
the
lower
Cabbagetown
residents,
as
well
as
the
st.
Lawrence
residents.
Is
there
any
impact
on
those
residents
and
I'm
just
wondering
why
some
of
our
local
residents
didn't
sign
the
petition?
Is
that
because
they
may
not
be
impacted
by
the
signs
or
is
there
an
impact
to
those
residents
on
both
sides?
North
and
south.
L
So
to
the
South
the
sign
is:
is
directed
north,
so
it
shouldn't
have
any
impact
on
any
residences
to
the
south
and
again
there
should
be
a
net
benefit,
because
the
removal
of
the
new
signs,
the
the
roof
signs,
are
shining
into
the
windows
of
condominium
buildings.
So
that
will
be
in
that
benefit
immediately.
Those
signs
would
have
to
be
removed
prior
to
any
permits
being
issued
for
the
digital
sign,
the
height
of
the
digital
sign.
Well,
it
is
tall
enough
to
clear
the
stop
lights.
L
It's
not
tall
enough
to
clear
the
armory
building,
so
any
residents
that
are
fronting
on
Shooter
Street
to
the
north.
The
sign
wouldn't
be
visible
to
certainly
the
low-rise.
Some
of
the
high-rise
residents
may
be
able
to
see
it,
but
there
will
be
a
reduction
in
the
illumination
by
about
a
third
and
the
high-rise
residential
is
also
it's
over
200
meters
away.
So
we
would
think
that
any
impacts
on
those
residents
would
be
negligible
or
very
small.
Also,
the
sign
would
shut
off
and
is
required
to
shut
off
at
11
p.m.
L
L
They
are
two
of
them.
Two
of
them
are
directly
impacting
residential
buildings.
I
might
put
a
graphic
up
that
one
of
them
is
facing
shining
into
I,
think
it's
the
French
Quarter
condos
and
at
the
south
east
sorry,
the
southwest
corner
of
Jarvis
in
Richmond,
it's
about
30
meters,
away
from
those
windows
and
it
it
is
on
24
hours
a
day
and
you
know
permitted
to
to
be
on
24.
L
Q
L
B
H
H
The
issue
of
whether
those
signs
persist
is
up
to
us
not
up
to
a
developer.
That
is
that
is
true.
Okay,
so,
and
that's
actually
kind
of
new
it
used
to
be
the
only
way
we
could
get
rid
of
legal
non-conforming
signs
was
by
making
deals
like
the
one
proposed
here.
Yes,
but
now
we
don't
operate
in
that
world
anymore.
It's
literally
us
who
are
choosing
to
allow
those
signs
to
stay
there
by
not
exercising
our
rights
under
bill
68.
That's.
H
L
H
Okay,
okay,
but
the
principle:
the
principle
is
the
same,
which
is
we're
supposed
to
think
about
things
like
safety
impact
on
residents
and
so
on,
because
that's
that's.
The
purpose
of
the
bylaw
to
you
know,
make
sure
that
there
aren't
impacts
on
local
residents,
that
there
aren't
interference
with
local
safety.
That
kind
of
thing,
that's
what
we're
supposed
to
think
about
those
would
be
the
overall
objectives
of
the
bylaw
is
right.
Is
there
anything
in
the
bylaw
that
says
we
should
we
manage
our
signs
based
on
thinking
about
where
the
money
goes?
No.
H
A
policy
consideration
in
the
in
the
bylaw:
it's
not
a
policy
consideration
in
consideration
of
variances.
It's
not
one
of
the
things
that
we
legally
are
supposed
to
be
mindful
of
when
we
control
signs
we're
not
actually
supposed
to
play
in
the
market
and
say
who
makes
money
and
who
doesn't?
That's.
That's
correct!
Thank
you.
Those
are
my
questions.
L
E
L
Think
the
proposal
that's
come
in
recently.
We
do
think
there's
a
net
benefit
to
the
community
where
there's
a
50%
reduction
in
the
total
amount
of
advertising
space.
There's
a
reduction
in
the
brightness
reduction
in
sign
clutter
there
are.
There
are
a
number
of
signed,
bylaw
objectives
that
this
revised
proposal
does
achieve.
So.
E
E
B
L
B
L
B
If
we
felt
that
those
signs
weren't
appropriate
where
they
are,
which
is
what
you've
now
told
us
that's
said,
the
signs
aren't
appropriate
they're,
an
encumbrance
on
the
neighbors.
It's
a
good
thing
to
get
them
out.
Yes,
that
would
be
what
you're
saying
if
we
went
to
legal
and
said
we'd
like
them
to
comply
to
have
them
removed.
If
those
signs
were
then
removed.
That
way,
would
you
report
that
the
sign
should
go
up
the
electronic
sign
if
you
didn't
have
the
benefit
of
the
three
removals
we'd.
B
Then,
if
we
went
up
the
road
to
the
Salvation
Army,
where
they
need
money
just
up
the
street
and
they
wish
to
put
the
same
sign
up
and
they
did
the
same
mitigating
factors,
would
you
recommend
a
sign
on
their
building
if
they
had
no
science
to
take
down?
But
they
had
the
same
mitigating
factors,
the
same
hours
of
operation,
the
same
dealing
with
the
angles
of
the
sign?
B
A
B
Simply
going
back,
there's
three
signs
that
you've
now
identified
as
being
troublesome
signs.
So
my
question
now
was
the
Salvation
Army,
who
is
also
always
in
desperate
need
of
funds.
Does
some
other
good
work
if
they
brought
an
application
in
for
the
same
sign
without
the
removal
of
the
three
signs
that
are
here,
because
that
might
be
able
to
be
removed
of
their
bill
68
and
did
the
same
mitigating
factor?
B
G
B
L
L
B
L
B
R
Through
your
chair
just
answer
bill
68,
causing
a
change
to
section
110
of
the
City
of
Toronto
Act.
There
used
to
be
a
very
strict
legal
non-conforming
provision
that
has
been
removed,
but
remains
for
by
laws
that
were
enacted
with
respect
to
by
laws
that
were
enacted
prior
to
the
bill.
68
change.
So
if
the
City
Council
enacts
a
new
bylaw
engages
in
that
process,
you'll
be
able
to
make
bylaws
that
will
have
issues
to
bring
signs
into
compliance
with
new
standards
and
you
know
cause
other
signs
to
be
removed.
R
But
it
is
the
sort
of
thing
that
would
have
to
be
used
with
all
of
our
like
legislative
powers
in
an
appropriate,
appropriate
way
to
balance
expressive
rights,
and
things
like
that.
So
it
is
conceivable
that
what
you're
describing
could
be
in
the
content
of
a
new
bylaw.
It
may
have
some
factors
that
would
have
to
be
once
that
was
looked
at
more
closely
examined
to
say
no,
but
it
is
possible
that
could
happen.
F
Does
bill
68
have
any
bill?
68
allows
us
to
take
down
signs
that
don't
comply
with
the
bylaw,
my
general
understanding
are
there
timelines
that
are
attached
to
that
or
can
at
any
time
can
a
council
decide
to
take
down
all
sides
following
a
process
of
course
and
subject
to
all
of
that
sort
of
thing?
Can
a
council
at
some
point
in
the
future
decide
to
remove
any
signs
that
don't
comply
with
the
bylaw,
even
if
they
were
approved
year
earlier?
That's
my
question.
R
I
R
The
exercise
of
the
new
powers
of
that
what
bill
68
gives
the
city
has
to
be
in
operated
in
an
appropriate
fashion.
It
may
be
appropriate
to
enact
bylaws
that
had
a
limited
scope.
It
may
be
more
appropriate
for
legal
non-conforming
signs.
It
may
be
more
appropriate
to
do
on
a
citywide
basis
or
phase
basis,
and
that
previous
council
reports
have
asked
staff
to
commence
a
review
process
and
consult
with
the
industry
and
instated
interested
stakeholders
on
developing
exactly
that
sort
of
transition
provision
and
how
the
new
powers
would
be
used.
I
So
if,
tomorrow,
one
of
the
signs
that
were
identified
today
that
are
problem
signs
that
are
being
removed
as
part
of
this
this
package,
if
a
local
councillor
tomorrow
said
you
know
what
that
sign
in
the
corner,
is
legal
non-conforming
I
want
it
gone
and
I'm
gonna
use
bill
68
to
make
it
happen
at
the
next
council
session,
our
community
council?
Can
they
do
that?
It.
I
R
What
is
required
is
that
for
the
City
Council
to
enact
a
new
bylaw
that
would
have
provisions
that
addressed
legal
non-conforming
signs
with
any
by
law
that
is
enacted.
You
can
enact
it
in
a
way
that
you
know
it
could
be
done
in
a
way
that
would
withstand
judicial
scrutiny.
It
could
be
done
in
a
way
that
may
not
so
I
don't
want
to
give
a
simple
answer
that
you
simple
matter,
but
it
is
a
possible
matter.
Okay,.
I
So
what
you
are
saying,
then,
is:
if,
irrespective
of
this
package
that's
been
proposed
today,
it's
not
a
simple
tomorrow,
refusing
it
today
and
then
the
local
council
are
going
out
tomorrow
and
saying
and
take
those
signs
out
using
bill
68.
There
is
a
substantial
process
ahead
of
us
to
make
that
happen.
I.
I
Q
Thank
You
chair,
you
know
our
bylaws
are
our
bylaws
and
I'll
certainly
support
what
this
committee
arrives
at
because
there
are
our
bylaws
and
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
impacts
that
could
happen
if
we
just
continue
looking
at
things
on
a
one-off.
Having
said
that,
especially
when
our
resident
groups
are
here
and
our
businesses
who
are
not
in
support
of
the
Fred
Victor
sign,
having
said
that,
you
know
we
need
to
begin
thinking
a
little
bit
out
of
the
box
in
terms
of
how
we
support
agencies
and
organizations
that
deal
with
our
homeless
populations.
Q
Q
So
I
will,
just
you
know,
have
to
support
what
our
residents
groups
have
to
say
today
and
and
hope
that
at
some
point
we
could
reconvene
and
think
about
ways
in
which
organizations
like
Fred,
Victor
and
Salvation
Army
and
many
more
agencies
have
an
opportunity
to
do
other
fundraising
that
is
permitted.
Thank
you.
H
H
It's
been
suggested
that,
as
we
used
to
behave
that
we
treat
this
as
a
trade,
getting
rid
of
some
signs
that
cause
a
problem
and
allowing
a
sign
that
doesn't
cause,
you
know
an
allowing
a
sign
that
also
causes
a
problem
as
long
as
what
we're
getting
rid
of
caused
a
bigger
problem
than
the
new
thing.
That's
how
we
used
to
do
it
right
and
so
the
principal
used
to
be
get
the
maximum
benefit,
and
that
was
because
we
couldn't
get
rid
of
those
signs
any
other
way.
H
H
Similarly,
in
councilor
choices
remarks
she
said
that
council
can't
provide
enough
help
to
social
agencies
that
are
working
on
homelessness
and
I
would
take
issue
with
that.
Council
has
chosen
not
to
provide
more
funding
in
fighting
homelessness.
That's
a
choice
we
made
as
a
council.
We
have
other
priorities
for
our
money,
and
also
many
people
on
council
seem
to
believe
that
keeping
property
taxes
low
for
people
who
are
quite
wealthy
in
our
society
is
more
important
than
providing
funding
for
dealing
with
the
problems
of
homelessness.
That's
a
choice.
Council
mate.
H
H
H
You
know,
ignore
the
fact
that
we've
deliberately
created
these
two
problems
as
an
elected
body
and
say
well
cuz.
We
created
these
because
these
problems
exist
we'll
give
fred
victor
a
special
permission,
because,
quite
frankly,
I
don't
want
to
be
in
the
position
ever
of
thinking
that
the
only
way
I
can
provide
relief
to
people
who
are
struggling
to
get
into
housing
is
by
making
our
public
spaces
cluttered
with
advertising,
because
the
next
next
thing
that's
gonna
come
is
there's
going
to
be
a
daycare
that
needs
money
and
they're
gonna
come
forward.
H
I've
had
churches
that
are
having
trouble,
providing
resources
in
the
local
community
say
we'd,
like
a
sign.
I
can
remember
seven
or
eight
years
ago,
Toronto
Community
Housing
was
looking
for
funding
by
putting
signs
on
the
sides
of
some
of
their
buildings.
I
will
not
be
part
of
a
government
that
says
we
will
make
this
an
awful
City
to
walk
around
and
because
we're
too
cheap
to
provide
the
social
services
that
we're
choosing
not
to
fund
that's
a
terrible
way
to
govern.
I
want
no
part
of
it.
H
The
work
that
Fred
Victor
does
is
really
important,
and
that's
why?
Every
year,
when
our
budget
comes
to
us,
I
propose
that
we
increase
property
taxes
so
that
we're
in
a
better
position
of
dealing
with
the
problems
that
were
elected
to
deal
with.
That's
the
right
way
to
do
it.
That's
the
principled
way
to
do
it
and
that's
the
way
that
gets
the
best
outcomes
for
the
people
of
Toronto.
E
Thank
You
mr.
chair,
I
I
will
move
the
package
that
staff
have
worked
with
the
applicant
and
and
Fred
Victor
and
I
start
by
saying
that
we
have
a
process
and
a
sign
industry
that
has
rules
and
regulations
and
variances
and
asks
for
exemptions
and
there's
a
process
that
was
was
followed
and
it
got
us
here
today
and
I.
Don't
think
that
any
cause
should
be
used
as
an
excuse
to
approve
something
that
is
not
a
benefit,
a
public
benefit
for
the
city
and
it's
not
a
good
benefit
for
the
city.
E
So
the
reality
is
if
this
package
was
not
in
front
of
us,
even
with
the
money
going
to
Fred,
Victor
I
would
not
be
able
to
support
it
because
I
don't
believe
the
same
way
that
you
know
just
because
it's
affordable
housing
we
can
build
anything
and
everything
in
the
city
if
it's
a
sign.
That
is
not
a
public
benefit.
Just
because
you
know
the
money
is
going
to
have
very,
very
much
dear
cause.
It
cannot.
It
should
not
be
authorized,
but
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
is
something
that
staff
said
is
supported.
E
Staffs
said
that
there's
a
five-year
sign,
there's
fight.
This
is
a
five-year
sign
that
is
supported
and,
yes,
we
could,
according
to
bill
68,
remove
the
signs,
but
we
have
to
do
bylaw
change,
I
mean
by
the
time.
All
that
happens
is
probably
the
five
years.
That's
the
reality
of
the
sign
that
we're
going
be
awarded.
So
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
is
a
professional
advice
of
staff
that
should
not
take
any
consideration
of
who
the
applicant
and
where
the
money
is
going
and
they've.
E
Given
us
that
advice,
and
they
said
that
it
is
a
net
benefit
for
the
City
of
Toronto
and
for
the
industry
and
for
the
community
to
have
this
going
through.
We,
as
as
a
political
body,
I,
think,
need
and
half
and
should
have
the
responsibility
to
balance
the
other
interests
and
do
I.
Look
now
that
I
have
a
positive
staff
report.
Do
I,
say:
wow
I
have
a
positive
report
in
front
of
me
and
on
top
of
it,
on
top
of
it,
the
money
is
going
for
this
worthwhile
organization.
E
We
as
a
political
body,
need
to
make
that
balance
and
take
that
professional
advice
and
and
put
the
the
the
the
facts.
The
data
with
with
the
the
need
and
bring
those
different
needs
together
and
that's
why
I'm
putting
this
motion
forward,
and
that
is
why
I
will
be
supporting
this
package
because,
independently
of
where
the
money
is
going,
staff
is
telling
me
that
there's
a
net
benefit
for
the
City
of
Toronto.
E
E
You
know
we
very
often
say
in
this
case
you
know
the
bylaw
is
the
by
law
and
the
law
is
the
law
and
and
we're
here
to
implement
it
and
the
other
day
I
was
in
a
car
and
a
fire
truck
passed
by
me
and
I
said.
Imagine
if
there
wasn't
any
variances
to
any
laws
and
any
bylaws.
How
would
fire
truck
and
ambulances
run
through
red
lights?
Go
over
the
speed
limit
to
save
somebody's
life?
That
is
that
balance.
E
F
Amended
advice
we
got
today,
I
mean
I
I,
think
it
became
it's
very
clear
if,
with
the
the
and
I
hope,
we
don't
hear
this
any
more
about.
Oh,
if
we
give
them
this
side
and
they'll
take
these
other
illegal
ones
down.
We
should
just
take
the
illegal
ones
down,
and
those
of
us
who
are
offended
by
such
sides,
maybe
should
compile
a
list
and
make
a
motion
and
and
start
doing
it.
You
know
that'll
that'll,
remove
them
as
a
bargaining
chip
so
that
we
get
pure
advice.
F
You
know
no
matter
how
cynical
I
get
each
year
I
find
out
I'm,
not
nearly
cynical
enough
in
this
place
and
I'll
be
very
interested
in
the
lobbying
on
this
one.
I
know.
With
the
last
time
we
dealt
with
some
controversial
signs.
There
were
two
signs
and
I
did
an
analysis.
Both
were
not
recommended
by
staff.
One
got
turned
down
by
Council,
virtually
no
lobbying
the
other,
tired
I
think
for
different
lobbyists
and
used.
If
you
were
left-wing
counselor,
you
got
a
left-wing
lobbyist.
I
I
This
proposal
guarantees
the
removal
of
a
few
signs
and,
and
that's
the
realities
we
live
in
today,
and
it's
going
to
evidently
help
out
with
some
social
service
agencies
in
our
city,
so
I
think
we
take
what's
guaranteed
and
not
play
the
card
of
what's
not
and
for
the
record,
never
talk
to
anybody
about
this
item
until
this
morning.
Thank
you
very
much.
B
That
has
gone
down
that
way.
Yet
when
you
looked
at
it,
it's
not
even
people
that
live
in
the
area.
There
is
no
petition
from
local
area
residents
or
businesses
that
actually
say
support.
This
I
asked
staff
about
a
sign
right
down
here
at
Bayon
queenside,
the
TD
Bank
building
that
must
be
similar
in
size
and
they
said
I'd
love
to
get
that
sign
out
of
there,
because
it's
an
electronic
digital
sign
that
faces
Bay
Street,
it's
a
Main,
Street
and
shouldn't
be
there,
but
it's
behind
the
glass
with
a
pole
in
the
middle.
B
So
we
can't
take
it
out,
but
I
would
do
everything
I
could
to
take
it
out.
What's
different
with
this
sign
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
going
to
Fred
Victor
Mission.
If
you
need
the
money,
so
much
I'd
be
more
than
happy
to
support
them
with
the
additional
funding
that
they
might
need,
because
four
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
the
area
roomed.
B
That's
really
what
a
lot
of
this
comes
down
to
up
the
street
Salvation
Army
I,
give
it
to
Freight
Victor
Mission
I
may
as
well,
give
it
to
the
Salvation
Army
and
about
the
signs
coming
out.
That
area
is
along
the
relief
line.
There
are
old
buildings
that
are
most
likely
going
to
come
down.
It's
a
heavy
and
new
redevelopment
area.
B
Even
if
we
don't
act
under
bill,
68,
which
we
might
have
the
opportunity
to
do,
I
would
lay
odds
with
any
of
you
now
that
those
signs
won't
be
there
in
four
or
five
years,
because
those
old
buildings
will
be
coming
down
and
they'll
be
redevelopment
sites
as
much
of
the
area
is
around
there.
So
there
is
no
great
package
or
deal
here
and
I
have
never
seen.
B
B
It's
not,
let's
make
a
deal
if
it's
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
and
put
forward
a
motion
through
the
mayor's
office
for
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
more
to
support,
Fred
Victor
Mission
will
all
support
it.
A
council
that'll
be
the
end
of
the
sign.
You
don't
do
signs
based
on
the
fact
that
our
not-for-profit
can
get
some
funding
and
really
that's
what
we
have
here,
because
we
don't
have
a
positive
staff
report.
B
We
have
positive
staff
comments
here,
looking
at
it
as
a
package,
subject
to
questioning
from
some
of
my
colleagues
not
looking
at
the
ability
to
get
the
signs
out
anyways.
If
the
science
could
come
out,
there
wouldn't
be
a
package,
and
nobody
said
I'd
do
the
same
thing
for
Salvation
Army,
because
they
don't
have
any
other
signs
to
get
rid
of.
So
why
not
help
them?
Are
there
not-for-profits?
B
So
I
can't
not
support
the
recommendation
to
this
huge,
huge
30
by
15
sign
facing
the
Main
Street
and
a
redevelopment
area.
That's
so
bad
that
they
don't
want
it
facing
the
park
and
they
don't
want
it
facing
the
other
buildings
that
you
got
to
angle
it
to
the
corner.
That's
going
to
be
subject
to
redevelopment!
It's
just
not
right!
It's
not
the
way
that
the
city
should
be
doing
business,
so
I
am
very
supportive
of
as
I
said,
not-for-profits.
Those
who
that
know
my
history
know
that
I've
served
on
them.
I've
helped
them
I've.
B
I've
worked
with
all
of
you
to
give
them
funding
and
I
would
work
with
the
same
thing
here.
If
it's
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
in
the
local
councillor
wants
to
find
a
way
to
get
that
through
our
grant
process,
I
would
support
I.
Think
every
member
of
this
committee
wouldn't
I.
Think
council
would,
if
you
show
us
the
project
and
tell
us
what's
the
money,
for
we
support
those
all
the
time
but
I'm,
not
trading.
B
This
isn't
a
horse
trade
where
you
trade
off
one
big
electronic
sign
that
no
one
else
would
get
the
end.
I
have
some
real
disappointment
and
OUTFRONT
media
for
the
way
that
they've
gone
about
trying
to
get
electronic
sign
by
finding
a
not-for-profits
wall
and
using
that
as
the
focus
of
what
it
is
and
making
this
a
contentious
issue
in
the
area
for
the
local
councillor
who's
new,
serving
as
a
local
councillor,
although
experienced
serving
with
council
and
staff
for
her
many
years.
That's
totally
unfair.
It's
not
right!
That's
unjust
and
that's
something.
B
So
we
have
a
motion
which
one
is.
First,
we
have
the
amendment
by
Councillor
by
tho
all
those
in
favor
of
councillor
Barlow's
motion
I
have
to
go
by
what
the
clerk
tells
me.
She
tells
me
the
right
rules,
so
the
amendment
goes
first
councillor
Barlow's
motion,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
that
does
not
carry
counts
or
Perks
motion
all
those
in
favor
the
staff
recommendations,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
all
that
carries.
B
Councilor
bylaw,
they
were
not
staff
report
or
recommendations.
We
have
no
written
recommendations
from
them
here.
We
only
have
a
presentation
that
is
not
a
staff
recommendation
when
they
make
some
comments
sub
it
to
questioning
when
they
said
they
might
not
recommend
it.
If
the
other
signs
were
out,
we
don't
have
a
staff
report,
that's
not
a
staff
report.
That's
your
motion.
K
B
The
next
item
is,
we
have
the
in
Toronto
Employment
Survey,
where
we
have
a
presentation
and
we
have
the
local
Appeals
Toronto
local
Appeals
party
rules
and
practices,
and
we
have
staff
sitting
at
a
table
to
give
us
a
presentation.
So
I
know
what
we're
doing
next,
so
you
have
a
present.
Can
I
just
get
the
people
in
the
room
that
want
to
discuss
the
matter
further?
Could
you
discuss
it
outside?
Okay,.
B
P
Gerrae
remembers
the
committee,
ladies
and
gentlemen
good
morning,
I'm
Michael
Wright,
the
manager
of
research
and
information
of
the
City
Planning
Division,
my
colleague,
Sarah
Callen
and
Karen
neck
lucky
will
go
through
a
review
of
the
results:
the
2017
Toronto
Employment
Survey,
which
shows
strong
growth
in
the
city's
employment.
Over
the
previous
year,
the
City
Planning
Division
collects
current,
accurate
and
comprehensive
data
on
employment
by
contacting
all
75,000
600
business
establishments
across
the
city
through
a
face-to-face
survey.
At
the
point
of
employment,
we
follow
up
with
emails
and
telephone
calls.
P
We
collect
the
number
of
full
and
part-time
jobs
in
each
location
and
unique
to
the
employment
survey
is
that
we
also
classify
the
employment
in
terms
of
land
use
that
is
really
late.
The
employment
activity,
the
use
of
the
land
that
it
occupies
since
2011
we've
also
undertaken
to
classify
employment
by
a
detailed
national
economic
classification
system,
which
gives
us
a
rich
data
set
for
time.
Series
analysis
in
2017,
the
city's
employment
reached
1.5
million
jobs
for
the
first
time,
a
total
of
1
million
five
hundred
nineteen
thousand
five
hundred
and
sixty
jobs
in
2017.
P
An
increase
of
three
point:
nine
percent.
Over
the
previous
year
over
the
past
35
years,
total
employment
in
the
city
on
a
net
basis
has
increased
by
over
400,000
jobs
and
due
to
the
pattern
of
booms,
busts
and
recoveries
in
the
city's
history,
much
of
the
net
growth
about
half
of
it
has
occurred
within
the
last
decade.
In
particular,
the
last
five
years
for
the
city
has
added
almost
one
hundred
and
eighty-seven
jobs
in
order
to
benchmark
the
Employment
Survey,
be
compared
to
the
national
census
in
census
years.
P
In
the
previous
years
of
1996,
2001
and
2006,
the
census
counted
more
jobs
in
that
the
Employment
Survey
in
2011,
the
voluntary
National
Household
Survey
significantly
under
counted
the
city's
employment.
In
November
of
last
year,
statistics
Canada
released
the
results
of
the
reinstituted
long-form
census
in
respect
of
employment
information
and
by
comparison,
the
2016
employment
survey
counted
1%
more
jobs
than
employed
people
by
place
of
work
reported
by
the
census.
Now,
whereas
the
census
counts,
the
primary
employment
of
each
worker
of
my
place
of
work,
the
Employment
Survey
counts
all
full
and
part-time
jobs.
P
Therefore,
it
gives
us
a
fuller
spectrum
in
terms
of
the
the
total
employment
outside
the
home
is
captured
by
that
process.
So
this
gives
us
some
confidence
in
the
overall
comprehensiveness
of
the
Employment
Survey
and
that
enables
us
use
the
Employment
Survey
results
in
order
to
attract
the
city's
progress
with
respect
to
provincial
forecasts.
The
growth
plan
for
the
Greater
Golden
Horseshoe
anticipates
that
the
city's
total
employment
will
reach
1
million
seven
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
jobs
by
twenty
forty
one.
This
is
an
average
rate
of
growth
after
2001
of
about
0.45
percent
per
annum.
P
By
comparison,
the
results
from
the
employment
survey
show
that
over
the
last
five
years,
the
city
has
averaged
about
2.7
percent
per
year.
So
if
the
current
economic
conditions
were
to
prevail
and
continue
for
another
five
years
and
the
city's
employment
grew
at
the
same
rate,
then
the
city
would
achieve
the
growth
plan
forecast
before
2026.
P
If,
on
the
other
hand,
we
chose
a
more
moderate
rate
of
growth
going
back
to
2001,
and
that
period
includes
a
couple
of
recessionary
periods
that
represents
about
one
percent
growth
per
year
on
average
and
at
13
years
of
that
growth,
we
would
achieve
the
growth
plan
forecast
by
2031
still
a
full
decade
before
the
girlfriend
forecast
horizons.
So,
consequently,
the
city's
employment
is
on
track.
P
With
the
forecasts
supporting
the
growth
plan,
the
provincial
prices
to
go
out
requires
the
province
to
review
the
growth
plan,
forecasts
that
we
five
years
and
the
next
review
is
scheduled
to
begin
later
this
year
and
will
likely
include
a
review
of
Toronto's
forecasted
employment.
Returning
to
the
2017
survey
results.
This
map
shows
the
distribution
of
jobs
across
the
city.
The
circles
are
proportionate
to
the
number
of
jobs
at
each
of
the
75,000
620
establishments.
P
J
J
So
all
categories
add
jobs
in
2017,
2017,
strong
employment
growth
also
helped
all
six
land-use
categories
return
to
positive
five-year
growth,
even
showing
manufacturing
and
retail
returning
to
growth,
indicating
the
breadth
of
the
economic
expansion
since
2012
now,
in
addition
to
employment
by
land
use
activity,
the
survey
also
measures
employment
by
economic
activity,
when
this
allows
for
a
more
detailed
portrait
of
the
diversity
of
the
city's
economy
and
the
strength
and
growth
across
many
sectors.
In
2017,
the
top
five
sectors
accounted
for
half
of
the
city's
jobs.
J
Now
the
survey
also
counts
business
establishments,
in
addition
to
employment
and
in
2017
we
added
4,500
new
establishments,
accounting
for
2,000
jobs
in
2017.
This
also
includes
the
addition
of
220
manufacturing
establishments,
and
the
survey
also
noted
that
newest
death,
the
new
establishments
in
2017,
are
increasingly
choosing
to
locate
in
the
city's
employment
areas,
showing
the
white
showing
the
continued
vitality
of
employment
areas
and
the
importance
to
the
city's
economy
of
these
areas,
a
key
reason
for
monitoring
employment
and
is
to
evaluate
the
success
of
official
planned
policies.
J
J
2017,
the
city's
growth
management
areas
so
above
average
growth
job
growth,
noting
that
in
2017,
the
center's
also
experienced
especially
experienced
strong
net
employment
growth,
with
the
exception
of
North
York,
which
declined
slightly
with
412
thousand
jobs.
Toronto's
employment
areas
contained
three
of
every
ten
jobs
in
the
city,
completely
almost
90
percent,
over
90
percent
of
all
manufacturing
jobs
and
in
order
to
manya,
monitor
these
employment
change.
J
F
I
hope
I'm
wrong.
I
hope
this
got
corrected
before,
but
I
recall
that
there
were
some
employees
of
the
North
York
Board
of
Education,
who
were
just
arbitrarily
assigned
to
their
head
office,
even
though
they
didn't
work
there
and
that
that
produced
a
big
bump
that
year
is
that
is
that,
and
that
was
subsequently
corrected.
P
The
chair,
the
numbers,
still
reflect
those
Footloose
employees
at
that
location.
That's
are
they
do
or
they
don't,
they
do
reflecting
the
the
input
from
the
school
board
as
to
a
way
of
accounting
for
those
jobs
that
occur
within
the
North
District.
We
did
submit
a
supplementary
report
at
the
committee's
request
last
year.
That
explained
the
differences
in
the
total
composition
of
employment
in
North,
York
Center.
F
Right,
but
it's
a
completely
misleading
number
I'm,
looking
over
across
the
room
here,
I
thought
that
had
been
corrected.
We
have
a
completely
misleading
number
that
continues
to
be
in
here
and
is
extremely
misleading.
It's
the
the
workers
at
the
North
Carroll
Court
of
Ag
they're,
not
workers
at
the
North.
They
worked
for
the
North
York
Board
of
Education.
They
were
arbitrarily
a
fifty-fifty
youngstreet,
even
though
they
don't
work
there.
We
had
subsequently
corrected
that
I
thought
and
they're
back
in
here
and
I
assume.
That
should
not
be
the
case.
P
The
chair,
the
numbers,
are
still
accounted
here
as
similar
to
the
recording
of
employment
for
other
business
establishments,
which
have
a
similar
condition
where
there's
a
number
of
employees
who
are
not
physically
at
the
head
office,
but
in
order
to
be
accounted
somewhere
when
they
can't
be
tied
to
a
specific
location
are
recorded.
There
is.
F
F
You
know
we
are
I,
think
in
other
forums
trying
to
make
the
case
that
we
desperately
need
employment
in
the
North
York
Center
and
employment
is
in
fact
dropping
in
the
North
York
Center,
whether
you
do
a
short
term
or
long
term,
but
we
present
these
completely
incorrect
misleading
statistics
that
show
6000
people
work
there
who
don't?
Why
do
we
keep
doing
this
through.
I
The
chair,
I,
would
bring
a
less
informed
view,
perhaps
and
then
yourself
because
I'm
new
to
this,
but
my
observation
would
be
that
we
have
to
figure
out
a
way
of
telling
that
story,
because
in
the
workplace
today
you've
got
employees
floating
around
all
over
the
city,
that's
a
new
normal.
So
we
have
to
account
for
that.
Although
I
take
your
point,
that
we
have
some
significant
policy
implications
around
what's
happening,
especially
in
local
areas,
so
there's
a
tension
there.
I
We've
got
to
figure
out
a
better
way
of
telling
that
story:
I,
don't
I
sorry,
but
through
the
chair,
I
wouldn't
say
that
we've
been
trying
to
deliberately
mislead
anyone
or
are
factually
incorrect.
We
just
have
not
perhaps
presented
the
story
in
a
way
that
sufficiently
addresses
the
issue
that
you
you
have
raised.
Perhaps.
D
I
can,
through
the
chair,
also
add
to
that
to
the
point
we're
looking
at
the
place
of
employment
and
how
employers
record
and
advise
us
in
terms
of
the
employees
I
appreciate
your
concern,
particularly
when
we
have
hearings
coming
up.
But
when
we
start
preparing
for
those
hearings,
we
do
delve
into
a
finer
grain
of
detail
with
respect
to
where
the
employment
is
and
who's
actually
in
the
center.
F
F
I'll
talk
to
our
flight
about
this,
but
I
do
believe
it
was
corrected
last
time
and
then
it's
back
in
here
and
and
obviously
these
employees
need
to
be
in
the
overall
employment
numbers,
but
why
they
would
you
know
when
you
apply
them
to
a
specific
center?
They
that's
you
know,
that's
it
6,000
more
than
6,000
out
of
40,000,
that's
a
very
significant
number
and
the
false
inclusion
of
that
really
presents
a
very
distorted
picture
of
what's
actually
going
on
there
through.
B
So
I
didn't
tie.
My
colleague
was
a
little
more
than
five
minutes,
but
I
think
that
they
have
the
point
and
I
want
to
find
out
how
to
do
that
in
the
city
center
in
North,
York
and
as
I
said,
it
might
be
in
other
areas
across
the
city
as
well,
where
they
statistics
that
are
used
here
might
be
somewhat
different
than
what's
on
the
ground
because
of
the
way
that
the
businesses
actually
report
on
their
employees.
Counselor
perks.
Did
you
have
questions
to
staff.
B
H
P
Through
the
chair
in
part,
it's
the
the
strength
of
the
local
economy
and
the
diversity
of
the
growth
that's
been
occurring.
The
decline
in
past
years
has
been
slowing
down.
Okay,
the
growth
of
the
current
economic
activity
over
the
last
several
years,
the
length
of
our
long
range
expansion
that
in
the
city's
economy,
this
is
one
of
those
factors
that
has
contributed
we'd.
I
Also
add
to
the
chair
that
from
a
sector
point
to
being
in
particular
part
of
that
is
food
and
beverage.
Mr.
producers
is
here
from
economic
development,
but
that's
one
of
the
key
areas
where
we've
been
seeing
actual
manufacturing,
whether
it's
the
beer,
business
or
whatever,
there's
actual
manufacturing
coming
back
to
some
of
these
areas
on
a
sector
basis,
I
think
that's
really
significant
food
and
beverages,
some
of
it
and
Peter
is
here.
He
can
maybe
identify
other
sectors
that,
where
we've
seen
pickup.
H
I'm
just
I'm
curious
about
I'm
delighted.
We're
attracting
manufacturing
I
just
want
to
understand
where
it
is
I'm
are
there
and
I
think
that's
important,
because
I
want
to
understand
if
our
hands
are
on
the
right
levers
to
keep
that
growth
going
or
if
they're
things
that
we've
done,
that
it
worked
or
you're.
P
The
chair
there's
a
couple
of
factors:
a
number
of
different
sectors
that
the
process
good
sector
in
the
food
and
government
sectors
as
an
example,
but
some
of
the
the
changes
are
due
to
things
that
are
beyond
the
city's
control
prevailing
nationally
economic
conditions,
positive
tax
climate,
strong
competition
in
terms
of
the
the
city
as
a
whole
without
the
North
American
city
regions.
So
it's
a
number
of
national
factors
as
well
as
local
factors
and
specific
sectoral
outcomes
that
have
happened.
Okay,.
B
B
Don't
think
that
they
can
do
that
I
think
you
have
to
work
with
them
offline
because
they're
shaking
their
heads,
they
don't
have
that
citywide,
so
it
would
affect
the
Scarborough
Civic
Center.
It
would
affect
North
York.
It
would
affect
some
of
the
downtown's
because
I
believe,
as
they
said,
they
can
correct
me.
If
it's
a
large
corporation
like
a
life
insurance
corporation,
they
could
say
they
have
so
many
employees
at
that
head
office,
but
they
could
be
in
multiple
locations
across
the
city.
So
I
think
you.
D
D
B
Okay,
thank
you.
So
the
recommendation
is
to
receive
the
report.
All
those
in
favor
any
opposed.
Fat's
carry
the
last
item
that
we,
by
the
way
you
should
have
known
that
the
York
900
York
Mills
Road
was
right
in
one
of
the
biggest
blobs
in
North
York
for
employment
and
the
map
that
we
saw.
Interestingly
enough.
So
it
is
a
popular
employment
area.
B
B
It
is
to
consider
a
mediation
pilot
project
to
encourage
early
dispute
resolution.
It's
been
drafted
for
me
by
the
City
solicitor's
office.
It's
because,
as
I
understand
that
the
current
process
as
a
little
owner
rest,
documentation
and
arguments
have
to
be
in
writing
ninety
days
in
advance.
It's
not
really
helping
people
sit
down
to
find
ways
to
do
mediation
and
mediations.
Sometimes
people
talking
about
it
might
be
helpful
as
the
solicitor's
office
would
like
to
encourage
it
as
well.
B
So
this
motion
is
to
see
if
there's
a
way
to
do
that
better
and
not
have
to
have
as
formal
of
a
process,
because
the
current
process,
as
I
understand
for
the
report
and
speaking
to
staff,
is
a
very
cumbersome
process.
But
this
is
the
time
for
the
Commons
to
go
back
in
and
this
will
be
going
on
to
Council
as
well
like
Christ.
B
This
will
be
going
to
council
if
anyone
wants
to
add
anything
to
it
there,
but
which
we're
accepting
what
we've
had
for
the
first
year
and
trying
to
make
up
more
people-friendly
the
second
year
there
any
questions
of
staff.
Are
there
any
speakers
all
those
in
favor
of
the
amendment
and
the
oppose
that's
carried?
The
item
is
amended
all
those
in
favor.
Anyone
in
favor
can
I
get
a
hand
or
two
okay
great
any
opposed,
not
seeing
any
carry.
We
are
finished
the
meeting,
but
thank
you
very
much.
This
was
the
first
meeting
with
mr.